The Catch Rule

[Cheesehead Craig]

Just allow Stick-um back and the vast majority of these catch issues go away.

[gbgary]

i don't have a problem with the rule as it is but if they want to take away the survive the ground part i'd be ok with that too.

[QBME]

Just allow Stick-um back and the vast majority of these catch issues go away.

Zactly - hello Lester Hayse!!

[ThunderDan]

Just allow Stick-um back and the vast majority of these catch issues go away.

The gloves that the WR wear now a days are almost like using stick-um. We were getting a pair for my son and I tried a pair on. My son was throwing the ball and I could easily 1 hand catch the ball away from my body.

I told my son he could only wear the gloves during his games and not during practice. He needs to learn how to catch the ball without that much of an advantage.

[red]

The gloves that the WR wear now a days are almost like using stick-um. We were getting a pair for my son and I tried a pair on. My son was throwing the ball and I could easily 1 hand catch the ball away from my body.

I told my son he could only wear the gloves during his games and not during practice. He needs to learn how to catch the ball without that much of an advantage.

I’ll second this, I tried on a pair at dicks in Green Bay 2 or 3 years ago and was shocked

How anyone wearing these could not catch a ball that hits them in the hands if just ridiculous

[pbmax]

1. This is the essential difference between baseball and football, not picayune rules. Is the ball in the glove before the runner hits the bag? What does 'in the glove' imply Simple - that the ball was in the glove and didn't come out. Not hard to see because six guys aren't piled on top blocking your view. It's the nature of the sports to be different in this way.

This is true for catches versus foul balls.

However, baseball doesn't use instant replay for balls and strikes. And balls and strikes suffer from some of the same problems as the catch rule:

1. Is the black part of the strike zone?
2. How much of the ball must cover the edge of the plate?
3. Where, exactly, is the midpoint between your waist and your armpit?
4. What about a crouching batter?

[pbmax]

Catch: Your revised rule would result in a far higher rate of drops - any touching of the ground? But only when the receiver is 'going to the ground' right? Not certainly after the receiver had caught the ball, made a 'football move' and then went to the ground and had the nose of the ball touch the ground as he rolled before being touched? LOL, I don't think there are perfectly simple answers for some of these conundrums. Making rules understandable, calls easier to make and consistent is the best you can hope for.

In my world, if the ball touches the ground at all during a catch is no catch. Once you secure the ball (tuck it, two hands, hold it over your head) if it touches the ground its a fumble.

Bobble during catch, before secure, then touch ground? Incomplete.

Bobble after a catch, after secure, then touch ground? Fumble.

[pbmax]

I would be fine with stick 'um and gloves.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I’ll second this, I tried on a pair of dicks in Green Bay 2 or 3 years ago and was shocked

FIFY

[woodbuck27]

In my world, if the ball touches the ground at all during a catch is no catch. Once you secure the ball (tuck it, two hands, hold it over your head) if it touches the ground its a fumble.

Bobble during catch, before secure, then touch ground? Incomplete.

Bobble after a catch, after secure, then touch ground? Fumble.

Yes this with the exception of considering the catch and 'reaching the ball' to the Goal Line.

If after a catch the ball crosses the plane of the Goal Line it's a TD (not natta natta natta and the ground came into the play and caused a fumble).

Call it 'The Einstein Rule'.

“The definition of genius is taking the complex and making it simple.”

― Albert Einstein