- 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 6:14 pm to ChiefCornerstone
Posted on 9/1/25 at 6:14 pm to ChiefCornerstone
He didn’t make a football move.
0
Posted on 9/1/25 at 6:15 pm to Bayou
quote:
He possessed the ball breaking the plane of the goal with foot down
Literally does not matter unfortunately
Posted on 9/1/25 at 6:17 pm to Chicken
Posted on 9/1/25 at 6:18 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
He didn’t. He took 1 in bounds step while falling
The rule states having control long enough to make a move common to football. It’s about length of time, not whether the moves in question were in bounds. That’s completely irrelevant to the requirements of the rule. He had control long enough to take two steps and put a knee down before finally going to ground. It doesn’t matter where those steps or knee were since he had already established control in bounds.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 6:23 pm to Chicken
quote:
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the ground with any part of his body, or if there is doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch. 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.
And this here is the part we are worried about. Brown maintained control of the ball with his left arm under and cradling the ball. As the player is falling and cradling the ball, the tip of the football hits the ground causing some movement. IT DOES NOT, however, come out of possession of the receiver. In fact, the left arm stays under the ball, cradling the ball, and you can see the movement stop quickly on one of the angles with his left arm still cradling the ball and maintaining control. You then also see the right arm wraps the football up. So the player maintains possession even with the ball hitting the ground and moving slightly. Therefore, the rule states that this "should not be considered loss of possession," and that the player must "lose control of the ball for this to be considered loss of possession."
Read it and weep Fun Bunch.
This post was edited on 9/3/25 at 2:58 am
Posted on 9/1/25 at 6:28 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
What if he had taken 4 steps before going to ground? 5 steps? 20 yards? At what point does it cease being “in the act of making the catch”? There is no interpretation of the rules that would make going to ground relevant once a player has maintained control of the catch long enough to make a move common to the game. It’s a misinterpretation of the rule to think otherwise because then you would have to apply it even if the receiver went to ground 99 yards down field after catching the ball. It was a TD by rule unless you don’t think the time he had to take 2 steps after the catch was long enough to make a move common to the game.
I have seen several booth official types explaining the possible sequences involved in making a catch. One criterion usually mentioned is that if the receiver, after securing the ball (no bobbles) takes 3 steps in the field of play then the catch is ruled successful. It says somewhere in the rule books that it doesn't matter if the steps are in or out of bounds (as long as the first one is in bounds).
In a case like this, a good DB coach would teach his DB's to stay on the receiver and try to knock it out of his hands or cause a bobble even if the receiver is already out of bounds after the first step.
This post was edited on 9/1/25 at 6:44 pm
Posted on 9/1/25 at 7:31 pm to Pikes Peak Tiger
Yea if that wasn’t a catch then any receiver that dives to the end zone and reaches out better never let the ball move because it will be incomplete, doesn’t matter if they caught it at the 10 and dove in.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 7:47 pm to Chicken
quote:
If he loses control of the ball which then touches the ground before he regains control, it is not a catch.
This part was added by some retard with coke bottle glasses who never played a down of football in his life.
Posted on 9/1/25 at 9:26 pm to Chicken
iMO, in our context, the catch was completed when a football move was made with a few steps and a dive. The ground contact, the ball moving, and all that crap is moot when he crossed the plane. Touchdown!!!
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:46 am to That One
I would have counted it as a TD.
Ref on the field who said out at the one;
He did his job. Saw the ball secured, saw 1 foot in at the one, weird angle, saw second foot out as the player was right at the angle.
He called it a catch where the foot was in, I dont think he saw ball cross goal for sure. So to him, it's a catch and let the booth decide where.
Booth overthought it
Ref on the field who said out at the one;
He did his job. Saw the ball secured, saw 1 foot in at the one, weird angle, saw second foot out as the player was right at the angle.
He called it a catch where the foot was in, I dont think he saw ball cross goal for sure. So to him, it's a catch and let the booth decide where.
Booth overthought it
Posted on 9/3/25 at 9:57 am to Chicken
Looking back on it with less emotion, I have to agree it was the correct call. The overturning part is a bit more difficult to reconcile.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 10:02 am to Scoob
A young man's first touchdown on his new team was taken from him and it was spectacular!
Posted on 9/3/25 at 1:08 pm to Chicken
Well either way, if that wasn't a catch, then the first fumble should have also been incomplete
Posted on 9/3/25 at 1:40 pm to TeygerFan
quote:
He wasn't in the act. He had completed the catch and scored by crossing the goal/touching the pylon. Then fell down.
Was the play not dead once he crossed the goal line, or when he stepped out? He maintained control of the ball the entire time he was inbounds.
By their logic any pass where the player steps out of bounds, the clock should run until we make sure he isn’t going to drop it out of bounds.
Posted on 9/3/25 at 2:15 pm to Chicken
Why was it ruled out at the 1 yd line? It wasn't even close. He was in bounds by at least a foot and the official was literally looking at Browns feet.
Also, I missed who called for the review? It wasn't ruled a TD at first so it wasn't reviewed for that, we were lining up to run a play at the one so we didn't call for a review? I may have missed why it was reviewed
Also, I missed who called for the review? It wasn't ruled a TD at first so it wasn't reviewed for that, we were lining up to run a play at the one so we didn't call for a review? I may have missed why it was reviewed
Posted on 9/4/25 at 2:24 pm to liquid rabbit
Correct-a-mundo !!
Posted on 9/4/25 at 2:26 pm to SofaKingTrill
quote:
Read it and weep Fun Bunch.
Brian Kelly CONFIRMED the call was correct.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 2:28 pm to Chicken
So it was an LSU touchdown. A catch was made and he crossed the goaline.
Posted on 9/4/25 at 2:34 pm to paulb52
quote:
So it was an LSU touchdown. A catch was made and he crossed the goaline.
Your Head Football Coach disagrees
Posted on 9/5/25 at 1:59 am to Chicken
It's 2 AM and refs are still stupid.
Page 7 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News