Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron


    
      
        Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
        (https://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi)
      

        the Gridiron >> the Sidelines >>  New out of bounds rule
        
(Message started by: DB on Oct 1^st, 2003, 5:47pm)

Title: New out of bounds rule
Post by DB on Oct 1^st, 2003, 5:47pm

Did anyone see the end of the Redskins-Pats game. It ended well but there was a play where they called Coles catch incomplete because the ball came out after hitting the ground out of bounds even though both feet were in and he had possession. The rule seems odd. Chris Mortensen said the following on an ESPN chat this week.

"To make this simple, the rule was changed that a receiver must maintained control through the continuation of the ccatch, even if he goes out of bounds...and if the receiver should lose control of the ball even when he hits the ground (out of bounds), it is not a catch. I don't necessarily like the rule, especially on the example you use with Coles on Sunday. But the strict interpretation of the rules was applied and correct. "

Title: Re: New out of bounds rule
Post by Walker Boh on Oct 2^nd, 2003, 8:21am

I saw that play, and in my mind, it was a catch, no doubt about it. This "complete the catch" rule reminds me a lot of the "tuck" rule... Everyone knows that Brady fumbled that ball, but due to "strick interpretation", it was ruled an incomplete pass. Cole had possession of the ball and 2 feet down. Even the ref thought it was a catch, that's why it took him 5 friggin' minutes to review the play! He had to convince himself to forget everything he's ever learned about what a catch actually is and call the play incomplete!

Title: Re: New out of bounds rule
Post by Noey21 on Oct 2^nd, 2003, 9:08am

I did not see that exact play but have seen others.

I guess the rule is a ground can't cause a fumble so pretend the same play happened in the field of play. The receiver dives and hits the ground and loses control it would have to be incomplete. So I think they are trying to say there is no difference. Getting tackled and hitting the ground didn't make it come out. So he must not have had complete control.

I agree that it is a dumb rule. But from some perspectives it makes sense.