- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Here is the NCAA Catch Rule...interpret it as you will...
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:12 pm to MikeTheTiger71
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:12 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
I don’t believe those two sets of conditions have to be satisfied in conjunction. I think an OR seems more correct. That’s why I want to see the original wording.
The original wording reads just as conjunctive. It's a bit convoluted to use conjunctive language to introduce what amount to an exception (going to the ground such that you don't have the opportunity to make the "football move" referenced in the earlier language), but I think it's technically correct. Regardless, though, the "goes to the ground" language is an alternative consideration to the "football move" language; meaning you are correct that once the football move has occurred the catch is completed and the "goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass" does not come into play.
0
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:13 pm to Mobiletiggah
absolutely agree - rule is too subjective in interpretation as well as in the order of occurrence
ARTICLE 1. A touchdown shall be scored when:
a A ball carrier advancing from the field of play has possession of a live ball
when it penetrates the plane of the opponent’s goal line. This plane extends
beyond the pylons only for a player who touches the ground in the end
zone or a pylon. (A.R. 2-23-1-I and A.R. 8-2-1-I-IX).
there is no doubt he had possession of the ball when he penetrated the plane of the goal line. it was only after he hit the ground after he crossed the goal line when possession was overruled
ARTICLE 1. A touchdown shall be scored when:
a A ball carrier advancing from the field of play has possession of a live ball
when it penetrates the plane of the opponent’s goal line. This plane extends
beyond the pylons only for a player who touches the ground in the end
zone or a pylon. (A.R. 2-23-1-I and A.R. 8-2-1-I-IX).
there is no doubt he had possession of the ball when he penetrated the plane of the goal line. it was only after he hit the ground after he crossed the goal line when possession was overruled
This post was edited on 9/1/25 at 2:15 pm
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:16 pm to killercoconut
quote:
He didn’t take two steps. Once he caught the ball the second step came down out of bounds on the white line. Still think it’s a touchdown but he did not have two steps in
The inbounds vs out of bounds is a different consideration. That was satisfied with the first foot inbounds. The steps out of bounds are still relevant to the question of completing the act of catching the pass vs being "in the act of catching a pass" when he went to the ground.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:16 pm to SludgeFactory
quote:
Tell me I'm wrong (I'm not)
Sludge...or anyone supporting the "this was anti-LSU bias from the SEC"...please explain how screwing LSU in favor of Clemson benefits Bama or any team in the SEC.
If you can't, don't you see how you come across as irrational? We're just discussing a rule interpretation. I might be wrong, but it's certainly not because how I WANT the rule interpreted.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:20 pm to IvoryBillMatt
If this was not a catch, how was the Texas TD a catch?
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:26 pm to King Joey
quote:
The going to the ground rule is in place to account for the fact that it is impossible for receivers diving for a catch to satisfy the "football move" requirement they invented, but are still clearly making what has always been considered a valid catch (and they clearly wanted those to continue to be catches). So in lieu of the "football move", a diving catch -- where the receiver is going to ground "in the act of catching a pass" -- can be satisfied by maintaining control through contact with the ground.
I agree. Brown seemed to have completed the process of making the catch. I have never seen this scenario called that way though. Unfortunately, I'm just having to guess at the rationale.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:31 pm to supatigah
quote:
Please explain to me how the SEC benefits by fricking over LSU?
The "SEC" didn't make the determination; a person did. That person could have done it for any number of motives: money on the game, money on a side bet, personal bias against LSU, personal bias against transfer portal WRs, personal bias against non-transfer QBs, a Seahawks fan who's still pissed at Doug for not doing enough to lose that '97 Saints game, marching orders from Bama-fan bosses that didn't want LSU showing up Bama, or any of the billions of other possible motivations real human beings -- like football refs and officials -- have. Or it could be for the direct financial gain the SEC could receive (or think they will receive) by making the game closer through the convoluted nature of TV contracts, marketing narratives, viewer engagement, etc.
The bottom line is that just because you personally don't recognize an obvious financial motive for the SEC to actively screw LSU on that particular play does not show whether or not the call was wrong or even that it was intentionally so. We see people do things all the time for reasons that are a mystery to us but are very real in their heads.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:32 pm to Chicken
simple clarification regarding a touchdown should be made.
A running play ends when a player is considered down and has control of the ball except a touchdown it ends when he breaks the goal line plane.
A scoring pass play should end when plane is broken and player has control, NOT when he is out of endzone and then loses control
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:35 pm to graychef
quote:
If this was not a catch, how was the Texas TD a catch?
Livingstone seemed to have possession the whole way in the end zone. Did the ball touch the ground at any point?
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:35 pm to liquid rabbit
quote:
He wasn't in the act. He had completed the catch and scored by crossing the goal/touching the pylon. Then fell down.
This is it. Over. Done. Termino.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 2:38 pm to Chicken
It was a catch and a touchdown. I can’t define it but I know it when I see it.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:22 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
however, I have never seen it ruled a catch when the receiver was falling to the ground as a result of making the catch and let the ball move
The TX/Ohio St game had this exact scenario we are discussing and it was called a TD. 100% the same.
I told my son it was a TD based on the rule applied in the game, but alas here we are
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:30 pm to Chicken
Our guy took two steps before going to the ground. What if he had taken three? Four?
There has got to be some kind of time frame, right?
There has got to be some kind of time frame, right?
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:36 pm to Chicken
quote:
If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; he must lose control of the ball in order for there to be a loss of possession.
According to this, it was a catch. At the very least, call stands.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:36 pm to doubleb
quote:
Our guy took two steps before going to the ground. What if he had taken three? Four?
There has got to be some kind of time frame, right?
This is why I disagree with Fun Bunch's interpretation of the rule. You cannot be falling/going to the ground AND advancing the ball by taking steps. Because he took 2+ steps before hitting the ground, he is by definition advancing the ball and therefore making a football move. Once he breaks the plane it's a touchdown because he has possession. It doesn't matter what happened once he hit the ground.
This post was edited on 9/1/25 at 3:38 pm
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:39 pm to King Joey
That "person" is usually someone from Birmingham who has interest in Alabama winning every game. You cannot find many natives of there who are not biased, which is why you have to move the SEC office.
Their motive is frick all teams who are not their dear Tide. If a call comes down to judgement, then you stay with the judgement of the official in the field, period.
Their motive is frick all teams who are not their dear Tide. If a call comes down to judgement, then you stay with the judgement of the official in the field, period.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:40 pm to tgrgrd00
quote:
The TX/Ohio St game had this exact scenario we are discussing and it was called a TD. 100% the same.
I told my son it was a TD based on the rule applied in the game, but alas here we are
In the Texas game, the ball never hit the ground out of bounds. The Texas receiver was in the end zone the whole time.
ETA: I don't mean to be the arbiter of all things on this. It's a bad and confusing rule. Would be helpful to get an explanation from the SEC.
This post was edited on 9/1/25 at 3:45 pm
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:46 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
In the Texas game, the ball never hit the ground out of bounds. The Texas receiver was in the end zone the whole time.
So what? In bounds or out of bounds the rule is the same. In bounds or out of bounds isn't even up for debate.
Jeeez. Nevermind, this is futile.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:51 pm to Chicken
Soooo hand the same play happened, except say he dove to cross the goal with arms/ball extended as opposed to out of bounds.... then that would have been a TD in the review committees eyes?
Posted on 9/1/25 at 3:59 pm to Chicken
you people are straight clueless if you think that was a td by the rule. stupid rule but stop being dumb.
Page 5 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News