Week 1 GC: Detroit @ Chicago

[Pats4four]

Oh and interesting thing from the Denver Jacksonville match, look at the first catch in the video below by Brandon Lloyd and decide if it's a catch or not (it was ruled a catch).

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-top-5-cat ... _headlines

Seems to me like he went to ground in the process of catching the ball then never got back up before throwing the ball in celebration.

[Metroid]

Oh and interesting thing from the Denver Jacksonville match, look at the first catch in the video below by Brandon Lloyd and decide if it's a catch or not (it was ruled a catch).

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-top-5-cat ... _headlines

Seems to me like he went to ground in the process of catching the ball then never got back up before throwing the ball in celebration.

The difference between that catch and CJ's is that Lloyd tucked the ball away, slid on his back, was touched by a defender, and stood up before tossing the ball. CJ caught the ball, rolled, and put the ball on the ground causing him to lose possession.

As far as how to change the rule. I'm not sure. As I've been saying throughout the thread, maybe just allow for the ref to use common sense. Yes "by rule" it was an incomplete pass to CJ, but it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that he did in fact catch the ball and lost it trying to hurry to get up. It's not as if he bobbled the ball the entire time.

[Pats4four]

Ok so in effect Lloyd was 'down by contact' and the play was over?

I think the problem with the common sense change is that it puts the onus on the officials to sort of interpret the manner in which players lose control of the football if you see what I mean. They have to decide whether in their minds the player lost control of the ball due to them not being to control the ball or whether it's because they forgot to keep control of it all the way through.

I think with CJ, not many Bears fans would have been arguing for a incomplete pass call had the catch been ruled a TD whereas everyone's complaining about it. Who'd be an official.

[Metroid]

Ok so in effect Lloyd was 'down by contact' and the play was over?

I think the problem with the common sense change is that it puts the onus on the officials to sort of interpret the manner in which players lose control of the football if you see what I mean. They have to decide whether in their minds the player lost control of the ball due to them not being to control the ball or whether it's because they forgot to keep control of it all the way through.

I think with CJ, not many Bears fans would have been arguing for a incomplete pass call had the catch been ruled a TD whereas everyone's complaining about it. Who'd be an official.

I'm not saying that the "down by contact" part with the Lloyd catch had anything to do with it being possession. I just noted that he was down by contact and therefore it wasn't a fumble. It was a completed catch because he maintained possession while on the ground, tucked the ball away, and never let the ball touch the ground. He even got to his feet prior to releasing the ball. CJ literally put the ball on the ground before standing up.

I agree that a common sense change to the rule could cause more problems than it solves, I do see what you mean. Like I said, I'm not sure how to fix it, but I do know that it needs to be fixed.

[Pats4four]

By 'down by contact' I meant the player in effect touch Lloyd and ended the play. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

I'd say keep the rule and just hope all WRs learn from this and keep a hold of the ball until you get to your feet.

[Metroid]

By 'down by contact' I meant the player in effect touch Lloyd and ended the play. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

I'd say keep the rule and just hope all WRs learn from this and keep a hold of the ball until you get to your feet.

I see. Yeah, in effect the Lloyd play was ended once he was touched...well sort of. Had he bobbled the ball while sliding on his back and then lost it, it would have been an incomplete pass, whether he was touched or not. The fact that he was touched just made the play dead once possession was maintained.

The more I think about it, the less I think there is a way to change the rule for the better. I agree, hopefully receivers will indeed use this as a learning experience. However, it seems like when things like this happen, they continue to happen for some reason. I wouldn't be surprised to see something like this every couple weeks or more.

[moochman]

the more I think about it, the more I think I'd tell my D to destroy without mercey anyone catching a pass in the endzone. Jar a ball loose and what was a catch can be over turned. Very inappropriate use of that terrible rule.

[CBMGreatOne]

the more I think about it, the more I think I'd tell my D to destroy without mercey anyone catching a pass in the endzone. Jar a ball loose and what was a catch can be over turned. Very inappropriate use of that terrible rule.

Do you honestly think coaches and players aren't already doing this? I'm being serious.

[moochman]

the more I think about it, the more I think I'd tell my D to destroy without mercey anyone catching a pass in the endzone. Jar a ball loose and what was a catch can be over turned. Very inappropriate use of that terrible rule.

Do you honestly think coaches and players aren't already doing this? I'm being serious.

No, they don't generally drill a receiver who has caught a ball, two feet, one hip, and a hand down. They tend to pass on that hit for fear of late hit penalty, but now they can insist the play wasn't dead yet.