Please explain the touchdown pass catching rules

[simpleman]

In yesterday's game there was a pass that clearly was in control of the receiver, he had both feet in-bounds. The defender then hit the receiver again a 2nd time and knocked the ball loose out of the back of the end-zone.

Are there different rules for the end-zone and the rest of the field? Wouldn't such a play result in the receiver's team retaining possession at the point where the ball went out of bounds after the catch if the receiver advanced a few feet due to his momentum after the catch, and wouldn't it be ruled a completion if it happened on the rest of the field? Would it have mattered if the ball had went out of the field at the end-zone sideline rather than the back of it? Why is there such an exception in the end-zone vs the rest of the field ?

In a case like this, then does that it mean there is no such thing as a receiver making a catch and fumbling the ball in the end zone that can be recovered by the other team after it hits the ground? There can only be interceptions and not recoverable fumbles on pass plays that take place completely in the end zone? If it isn't a catch, then it can't be a fumble that could be recovered, it can only be an in-completed pass? No turnovers?

If the same play happened in your end-zone, and you fumbled it after the catch and it was recovered by the other team in the end-zone after hitting the turf would the same logic apply, and it would not ruled be a safety, since the receiver was never deemed to have control of the ball the whole time he was in the end-zone? The rules don't seem logical to me. Someone who is up on the rules please explain.

Thank you

[26CornerBlitz]

Mensa members would have trouble with this.

[ExWNYer]

The fact that a play is over the second a runner breaks the plane of the end zone versus a receiver who has to "make a football move", pop-up with the ball cleanly in his hands, do the worm, bounce into the stands, take a bow and curtsy before a catch is ruled a catch is blatantly and utterly ridiculous. The inconsistencies throughout the NFL rule book are maddening.

[Kelly the Dog]

People make too big a deal out of this rule when it really doesn't need to be. Listening to NFL guys or tv guys trying to explain it is futile. But it's really very simple if you just look at it like this: If it looks like a catch, it's not. If it doesn't look like a catch, it is. Done.

[26CornerBlitz]

People make too big a deal out of this rule when it really doesn't need to be. Listening to NFL guys or tv guys trying to explain it is futile. But it's really very simple if you just look at it like this: If it looks like a catch, it's not. If it doesn't look like a catch, it is. Done.

 

Thanks for clearing this up.

[The Wiz]

The player must maintain control of the football until one of the refs comes and requests the ball be given to them. At which point the receiver has the option to decline request but must reply to the ref "good day sir!" followed by placing the ball in a hand woven wicker basket of their choice.

Edited August 21, 2016 by The Wiz

[jr1]

whatever the refs need for their fantasy football leagues

[KRT88]

The rule is simple

 

Catch the ball and NEVER put in down or let go of it again ... EVER

[26CornerBlitz]

The rule is simple

 

Catch the ball and NEVER put in down or let go of it again ... EVER

 

The feet! What about the feet man?

[fansince88]

Ok, this isnt as easy for the refs as you realize. Im so sick of fans making such a big deal over catches or not catches. You people on here that think you know it all have no clue. Catches are not as cu and dry as his feet are down or he controlled it all the way to the ground. More importantly then this is did Tom Brady throw the ball or are the Pats going to win or lose the game on this one call. Look at the fine print people! That said if that was Edleman he would have shown on that play how great he was because he held the ball all the way out of bounds and made a great football move.

[LeGOATski]

Don't let go until the whistle blows.

[reddogblitz]

The ridiculous part of this one to me was that that even after Little got 2 or 3 steps in EZ and was on the ground out of bounds the DB continued to fight for the football and pried it loose. Is there a time limit on how long a defender can fight for the footbal! OUT OF BOUNDS? Little was clearly out of bounds when the football was pried loose.

[Freddie's Dead]

The ridiculous part of this one to me was that that even after Little got 2 or 3 steps in EZ and was on the ground out of bounds the DB continued to fight for the football and pried it loose. Is there a time limit on how long a defender can fight for the footbal! OUT OF BOUNDS? Little was clearly out of bounds when the football was pried loose.

This ^^^^. He was not going to ground as part of the catch. He had the ball in the EZ with three feet in, took two more steps out of bounds, then the DB knocked him down and ripped the ball out. That play was worse than Megatron. If that play had happened on the field, it would have been a catch and a fumble. He made a football move when he took 3 steps.

[chris heff]

The player must maintain control until he is able to spike the ball and perform a brief but tasteful dance.

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

I'm still waiting for a DB to come into the shower and knock the ball the loose.

Edited August 21, 2016 by The Thurmanator

[3rdand12]

Little should have just punched the defender in the face.

 

On review i thought Greg never had control while in the end zone.

I was pretty impressed when Bill went right back at him, same play call.

 

But when he did have control he was out of the endzone. landed on his back and then lost the ball.

Strong defensive play to keep fighting.

this season is going to be tough, but i dont think its all muddled a some make it out to be.

[What a Tuel]

Little should have just punched the defender in the face.

 

On review i thought Greg never had control while in the end zone.

I was pretty impressed when Bill went right back at him, same play call.

 

But when he did have control he was out of the endzone. landed on his back and then lost the ball.

Strong defensive play to keep fighting.

this season is going to be tough, but i dont think its all muddled a some make it out to be.

 

Do you have a link to a video? I have been itching to see it. To me and the various instant replays it looked like he had control of the ball when he caught it. No bobbling other than re-positioning the ball to tuck it away.

[3rdand12]

 

Do you have a link to a video? I have been itching to see it. To me and the various instant replays it looked like he had control of the ball when he caught it. No bobbling other than re-positioning the ball to tuck it away.

Nope, just watched it 3-4 times while Tasker told us why it was a good call.

The defender hand his hands on it the whole time. Did Little still have control? I am not sure. But if i was a ref i would have to say no.

And when Greg landed on his back he lost the ball.

 

Is that what the Refs were basing it on.

Little did have enough feet down, i just did not feel he had full control.

Tasker said players will need to pretty much pop back up with the ball in their hands to prove control.

Going to be harder to prove the catch this year i guess.

Also i read that the call on the field is going to be harder to overturn.

 

We shall see how this plays out during the season when it matters though.

 

Can anyone bring up a link to the play !?

[Original Byrd Man]

The real tragedy of this whole situation is the fact that the NFL looked into this in the off season.

[Big Turk]

Basically if you hit the ground and go out of bounds, you have to come up with the ball...no moving around, no double clutching, no bobbling it, etc...you'd almost be better served simply staying on the ground and waiting for the official to come over and rule it a catch than get up and take a chance you might bobble the ball and have it ruled no catch...