Let's Play Catch/Not a Catch

[pbmax]

Which game was it that Jennings caught a TD, took three steps in the endzone, was knocked down across the backline, lost the ball and was ruled not a catch?

Because I would like that crew to explain Burleson's catch.

[Upnorth]

You could not be implying inconsistency in officiating?? These are unbiased officals all held to the same high standards.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Are you talking about this?

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/tag/_/name/greg-jennings/count/91

[mraynrand]

Definitely a catch:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SqJz0NgnnE

[Guiness]

Didn't see the Burleson catch.

Hopefully the NFL is returning to a more sane definition of a catch in the end zone. As referenced in the article, the 'time stops' element. On a running play, time stops as soon as the ball 'creases' the plane. With a reception, control of the ball and two feet down should equal 'time stops'.

Nah. Too logical.

[pbmax]

Are you talking about this?

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/tag/_/name/greg-jennings/count/91

Yes. At least now I know its the Bears.

[pbmax]

Here is the Burleson catch in question. http://www.nfl.com/videos/auto/09000d5d8232f045/QB-Stafford-to-WR-Burleson-5-yd-pass-TD

There are two distinctions here between Burleson and Jennings. One, is that while NB was touched, he didn't go down as a result of a tackle by the DB. Two, its hard to be sure, but his knee might never have hit the ground, which would take this play out of consideration for "going to the ground" rules.

[swede]

Absolutely, PB. That was a catch and you rightly noted the rule in question. I am not sure I even see the controversy.

And that san fran D back had the ball right in front of him. Every youth football player knows that you attack the "catching basket" as the ball arrives.

[red]

there was absolutely no difference between the burleson catch and the calvin johnson catch from last year that was ruled incomplete. exact same thing

and what really gets me is that the refs ruled it incomplete and it was ruled a catch after the review.

also the petigrew catch was pretty questionable too

[smuggler]

I saw the Jennings catch in question when it happened a few years back. It was definitely a TD. Tillman tackled him after he caught the ball for a TD in the endzone. It was an incorrect interpretation of the rules.

[Patler]

There are other distinctions, too.
Calvin Johnson went down in the end zone and left the ball in the end zone as part of the act of catching it.
Jennings began losing control while still in the end zone and while going down.
Burleson caught the ball and maintained control as he came down in the endzone, stepped in the endzone and for a couple steps yet outside the endline. Had he not run into the net on the ground he may not have even left the ball there.

I don't like the rule, but I can reconcile the differences in my own mind that ruled Johnson and Jennings incomplete, and Burleson complete.

[woodbuck27]

You could not be implying inconsistency in officiating?? These are unbiased officals all held to the same high standards.

Really can you believe the officiating in the best PRO league in all of sports. How would I describe this bunch of Sunday School Teacher wanna be's. The word starts with 'S' and ends with 'S'.

[pbmax]

I can find no official word, but PFT implies that the NFL has begun to emphasize a "time" aspect to the catch and going to the ground rule in the endzone this year. So the question asked at the time of Jennings and Johnson, "how long does it take for a TD to be declared?", has been met with an attempt at an answer, but the terms of that answer are pretty vague so far.


4. League finally gets it right with Burleson call.

Too many times over the past few years, catches in the end zone that appeared to be touchdowns ultimately were ruled not to be catches due to application of a rule that initially was intended to include within the definition of a catch those situations in which the ball touches the ground. Setting aside for now the wisdom of ever treating a catch as a catch when the ball makes contact with anything other than the player, the officials and the league office have had a hard time with this rule when the catch is made — or not made — in the end zone.

From plays involving Louis Murphy to Dante Rosario to Mike Sims-Walker to Lance Moore in Super Bowl XLV to Calvin Johnson to various other examples, the application of the rule has at times defied common sense and/or the language of the rulebook. The problem arises when the receiver is going to the ground. In such situations, the receiver must maintain possession through the act of falling. But when the act of falling includes breaking the plane of the goal line, the NFL has ruled at times (mistakenly, in our view) that the play ended as soon as the ball passed into the front of the end zone.

This year, the league has emphasized the element of time, treating such plays as valid receptions if the receiver who, while going to the ground, had enough time to make a football move, regardless of whether a football move is actually made. Fittingly, the NFL got it right not once but twice for the Lions on Sunday, via touchdown receptions made by tight end Brandon Pettigrew, who lost the ball only after clearly being on the ground, and by receiver Nate Burleson, who caught the ball and stumbled toward the turf and, in eerie similarity to the Calvin Johnson play from a year ago, lost possession of the ball when the ball struck the ground while in his hand.

During Football Night in America, the Johnson play from 2010 and the Burleson play from 2011 were shown side by side. Both looked like touchdowns. The fact that the more recent one was correctly ruled to be a touchdown shows that there’s hope that the league has finally figured out how to make the ruling mesh with the expectations of the average fan watching a game.

emphasis mine

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/10/17/week-six-monday-10-pack-2/

[pbmax]

Here are the game highlights which include Carey's explanation that there is a time element involved in avoiding the going to the ground rules. But outside of a precise interval, his explanation, at face value, would have meant Jennings catch was a TD. Carey's explanation starts at the 2:28 mark.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/auto/09000d5d82331aa5/Gameday-49ers-vs-Lions-highlights

[Upnorth]

Definitely a catch:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SqJz0NgnnE

THat has to be fake. Wow just wow.