The catch rule doesn't need reviewing until the Patriots benefit

[Ring 6]

The Pats benefited - the rule must suck. See it over and over.

I will bet 10,000,000 that if we go to OT in the SB, win the toss and go right down and score a TD the OT rules will get changed but if we lose that way they won’t.

 

[TommyD4207]

I will bet 10,000,000 that if we go to OT in the SB, win the toss and go right down and score a TD the OT rules will get changed but if we lose that way they won’t.

Yep. They were talking about doing it last year.

 

[maineman209]

This is not some anti-Patriots conspiracy, the very notion makes no logical sense. It isn't like New England has some inherent advantage to the "survive the ground" rule. Any rule change is as likely to benefit us as hurt us.

OTOH, the majority of the NFL fan base likely believes that only the hated Pats have consistently benefited from the rule and that the rule has only helped the Pats, never hurt them.

 

[Sicilian]

I would be in favor of changing the rule (or any rule from my upcoming angle), if the result allows the excitement of the game to not get unceremoniously interrupted. For example, the game winning touchdown in Super Bowl 51, there were a few moments where you were incredibly excited, then had to sober up for a few more to make sure they weren't going to review it for ten minutes, then we got excited again. If there was a way to make it clear cut enough to avoid those kinds of situations, then I don't care what the rule is, as long as it's officiated consistently.

As is though, I think that's a pipe dream. I think the current definition is the most black and white it can get, and it still results in gray areas and close calls. I think refs need to stop using automatic TD/turnover replays as a crutch (which IMO is exactly what happens), and start trying to make those calls correctly as they happen. If they didn't have replay in their back pocket, I'm guessing they call the James play an incompletion in real time.

 

[maineman209]

I like the rule the way it is now. Catch should be hard. Also I think they should change the goalline rules. I don't like this crap when you can dive out of bounds and cross the plane of the end zone with your out stretched arm and the ball.

IDK how they should change that but I just think you should need to get into the end zone to score. Also this thing of catching the ball outside the end zone but your feet in bounds being a TD needs to get change as well.

What about just get the hell in the end zone?

Well, that much is at least consistent with "line to gain" rules on the rest of the field.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

They changed the Tuck Rule.

They are changing the catch rule.

They care about air in balls

They care about where teams place cameras.

They care about how much a receiver is harassed while running their route.

Ridiculous

They changed the ineligible receiver rule.

They care about OPI (note the OPI calls on the Colts in the mid-late 2000's, versus what's happened since Gronk came into the league).

Seriously, the Patriots are in the NFL's head, and the common clay thinks that if a rule benefitted the Patriots once, we must change it because it benefits no one else and it'll stop the Patriots from winning again.

 

[RobertWeathers]

They changed the ineligible receiver rule.

Seriously, the Patriots are in the NFL's head, and the common clay thinks that if a rule benefitted the Patriots once, we must change it because it benefits no one else and it'll stop the Patriots from winning again.

I knew I forgot one.

Its absurd.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

I knew I forgot one.

Its absurd.

You don't know how much I was hoping Gostkowski would be allowed to attempt a fair catch kick at the end of regulation in Super Bowl 51. If he hit that kick, there is a 0.0% chance that play would still be in the rulebook today.

 

[PhillySteaks]

Welcome aboard @PhillySteaks . I've been impressed with the Eagles this year and I'm looking forward to a great game. It will be interesting to see how we handle the run-pass option and how you guys handle Gronk.

I seem to remember a time many moons ago when a pass wasn't considered a pass if it was thrown underhand, even if it was thrown forward. I think it was called a lateral in the 50's and 60's. You old enough to remember that?

Ty... I don't go quite that back but human error is part of the game...
Gronk is a beast..tough matchup


It's too bad wentz is out..that would have been a game..rookie or not

Im not a foles fan...

To me the qb position is critical..most important position in sports....imho


Qb/HC wins games...

I'm really surprised how many people think Philly will win this game

I don't see it... especially giving belichick 2 weeks to prepare

Eagles pass rush is not jville...brady will pick em apart

 

[XLIX]

That’s true. Always strikes me odd when a rule bothers everyone and nothing’s done. Then a few games go the pats way over the rule and the outrage causes that rule to be changed. I don’t view it as conspiracy so much but it is real strange

Yes but if we are being fair, the very premise of this thread is highly flawed. The title stating “the catch rule doesn’t need reviewing until the Patriots benefit” is false. This is a rule that has been reviewed time and time again over the past decade-plus. It all started with a play that benefit the Rams over Tampa. Prominent controversies ensued from Calvin Johnson and Dez Bryant that got people all riled up as well.

 

[brdmaverick]

I was thinking some more about the catch rule as well and the 'catch rule' has been tweeked over the years but it got me thinking..........why does it seem like only recently is it a big controversy over what a catch is?

I think the reason is instant replay.

I think that historically calls that 'felt' like a catch like the J.James play or D.Bryant play would have been ruled a catch on the field and no one think to complain about it.

And just for the record, this is just a proposed explanation. I'm not saying I hate instant replay. In fact, I love having instant replay.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

There is no “football move” in the current rule. When you fall to the ground, you have not CAUGHT the ball until you hit the ground and do not lose possession. James did not run 3 steps - he turned and fell and dropped the ball. Ref said it was an easy call. The point is, James never caught the ball - end of story.

Yes -- that's the thing that people don't seem to understand. When going to the ground the incomplete/complete determination becomes retroactive back to the moment the ball first touched the player trying to catch it. If the receiver doesn't survive the ground than nothing that happened since the receiver touched the ball matters at all (other than penalties).

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I like the rule the way it is now. Catch should be hard. Also I think they should change the goalline rules. I don't like this crap when you can dive out of bounds and cross the plane of the end zone with your out stretched arm and the ball.

They changed that rule at least 10 years ago. It now depends on whether or not the runner is airborne when the ball crosses the plane.

If you run it in without going airborne the ball does not have to cross the plane between the pylons.

But if the runner dives for the TD (or otherwise goes airborne) the ball must cross the plane between the pylons (though the runner's body does not have to).

 

[BradyFTW!]

I will bet 10,000,000 that if we go to OT in the SB, win the toss and go right down and score a TD the OT rules will get changed but if we lose that way they won’t.

For your sake I sure hope you didn't make that bet last year.

 

[BradyFTW!]

They changed the ineligible receiver rule.

They care about OPI (note the OPI calls on the Colts in the mid-late 2000's, versus what's happened since Gronk came into the league).

Seriously, the Patriots are in the NFL's head, and the common clay thinks that if a rule benefitted the Patriots once, we must change it because it benefits no one else and it'll stop the Patriots from winning again.

The funny thing is all this ends up accomplishing is that after the Pats benefit from it nobody else can. The ineligible receiver thing could/should have led to some interesting playbook wrinkles that other teams could introduce and other defenses would have to account for. In time, every defense in the league would know exactly how to handle it and it would fizzle out naturally, coming back only occasionally to punish lazy DCs and stupid defenders.

Imagine if, after Miami kicked our asses in 2008, the NFL just came down and made it illegal to run the wildcat on the grounds that it was 'clearly deceptive'? The long term impact would have been minimal, but we would have got here in a much less interesting way and there would be even less room for teams to innovate and try interesting things.

Not really sure where I was going with this, except that if the NFL wants to continue to make things illegal immediately after we benefit from them then I guess I'm fine with that. Because the Pats will always have the next wrinkle up their sleeves, and they won't have to plan for all the old **** they already did

 

[XLIX]

I think what people fail to realize is that rules tend to get "revisited" when something happens in an important game which makes a large majority of people want to look at the rule. NE plays a disproportionate amount of important games compared to, say, Detroit.

The OT rule change implemented 5 years happened after NO-Minny in the NFCCG. The original "going to the ground" catch rule change happened after StL-TB in the NFCCG. Heck, almost 4 decades ago, the major impetus to give instant reply in the first place was because of a play that took place in the AFCCG between the Oilers and Steelers.

 

[1960Pats]

Ty... I don't go quite that back but human error is part of the game...
Gronk is a beast..tough matchup


It's too bad wentz is out..that would have been a game..rookie or not

Im not a foles fan...

To me the qb position is critical..most important position in sports....imho


Qb/HC wins games...

I'm really surprised how many people think Philly will win this game

I don't see it... especially giving belichick 2 weeks to prepare

Eagles pass rush is not jville...brady will pick em apart

I hope you're correct.