BradyManny

Here's something I've never fully understood, I remember it happening to Deion Branch in a regular season game against Denver in 05. Deion caught the ball, came down hard on his back and the ball popped out.

This is essentially what happened to Moss against the Cowboys on his would-be highlight reel grab.

My question is this:

If "the ground causing a fumble" negates said fumble, why doesn't the ground causing an incompletion negate said incompletion and result in a catch. If Moss catching that ball and getting two feet in bounds = possession and a catch, doesn't his landing on the ground and having the ball pop out as a result of the ground essentially = "ground causing a fumble"? I know that it's not the case, I guess I'm questioning why it's not the case.

FrontSeven

I think that that he didn't have possession before he landed. So the ground didn't cause a fumble, it caused the play to be whistled dead before he got possession.

If that's not the case, then I'm confused too because that would mean that there is a different interpretation for out-of-bounds catches, which just doesn't make sense to me. Basically, as soon as you touch the ground that ends the play, so if you have possession (and Randy did not) then kapoof - no catch.

sieglo

When the "ground can't cause a fumble" rule, the player already has possession before the ball comes out.

In the Moss situation, possession never happened. The receiver has to retain control of the ball through the end of the play.

BradyManny

Look at the Gay play from last week on Winslow, Winslow got two feet down and Gay knocked him. Ball squirts out, ruled a fumble. So couldn't you argue that Moss having two feet down and with control of the ball is possession?

PatsSteve1

On a catch in the field of play a guy has to catch it and make a football move. It's less of getting 2 feet down than taking 2 steps. On a play where the guy is going out of bounds he has to keep possesion even after he hits the ground and after he gets 2 feet in. He can't really make a football move. He doesn't have room or the time. His only football move is to hold onto the ball.

ALP

yea, im pissed the incompletion didnt count too, cuz it looked like a catch for the ages

PatsFaninAZ

Very misunderstood rule. I've posted about it frequently. The rule is that if the receiver (or, in the case of an interception, a defender) is engaged by a defender simultaneously with the catch, he must maintain possession "through the ground." But if he is in the clear when he touches it, he only needs to make a football move.

In Arizona this year, player caught the ball momentarily, and was thereafter drilled, dislodging the ball. Ruling: TD. In this case, I guess, Carey ruled he was engaged by the defender so had to maintain through the ground.

Or, it was ruled a juggle the whole way.

There can't ever be a fumble in the end zone by a receiver, by the way. Only two possible rulings: Catch or no catch. A fumble in the end zone by the receiver is a touchdown, because in order to be a fumble there must be possession and once there's possession, the play is over. A defender can fumble an interception in the end zone, though, since the play is still live.

emoney_33

I asked the exact same thing to my brother during the game. It doesn't make any sense to me either. I understand the bobbling, maintaining possession AS you hit the ground, but the ground causing the ball to come loose making it an incomplete makes 0 sense to me.

reflexblue

To me moss didn't look like he was bobbling it when he first grabbed it. So why isn't that the same as a running back breaking the PLANE of the goal line.
In that instant when moss had the ball both feet in bounds it shpould be the same as a RB breaking the plane of the GL.

__________________
S.H.E.S.
I Likes Spikes.

FreakGoDeep

If a reciever is jumping or diving or stretching out to get a ball and while catching it he is falling he has to maintain control of the ball all the way to the ground and after hitting the ground.

The ground can't cause a fumble but it can cause an incomplete pass.
It's not considered a catch till he lands and still has the ball. I'm surprised the ref called it touch down considering the ball was clearly loose.