Can the "catch rule" be fixed?

[Mondio]

more eyes, more interpretations, more problems. Just call the play and move on

 

[McKnowledge]

You are assuming that these 5+ guys know more than the officials currently reviewing plays, I doubt they do. It really isn't a problem with who makes the final call, the problem is the interpretation and the rule itself.

Hey why not do it like they do on reality TV shows, put it to a fan vote. Fans have 1 minute to vote and the running results are shown on the screen.

Fan vote....(buzzer sounds)...no!!! HOF pass catchers do know more than officials when it comes to determining a catch. Plus, the fan vote would be entertaining. Official replay is boring and 50/50 (at best) most of the time.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Fan vote....(buzzer sounds)...no!!! HOF pass catchers do know more than officials when it comes to determining a catch. Plus, the fan vote would be entertaining. Official replay is boring and 50/50 (at best) most of the time.

So it's about entertainment, more than getting the call correct?

 

[Half Empty]

Uh, ya. If not the entertainment factor, we (and millions of others) wouldn't be talking about it, or obscene sports contracts.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Uh, ya. If not the entertainment factor, we (and millions of others) wouldn't be talking about it, or obscene sports contracts.

and how entertained would you be if the Packers got screwed out of going to the Super Bowl because of an "entertaining way of doing instant replay"?

I understand Football is a game of entertainment, but so is Professional Wrestling. What level they want to have it at, is up to the NFL and the owners.

 

[Mondio]

The game of football is entertaining enough, if it isn't, you're following the wrong sport. Maybe America idol or something is more up to speed. Or WWF E whatever it is these days. Manufactured BS is what I call it. Football was made great off the game and the players, the rest of this stuff will be its downfall.

 

[swhitset]

You are assuming that these 5+ guys know more than the officials currently reviewing plays, I doubt they do. It really isn't a problem with who makes the final call, the problem is the interpretation and the rule itself.

Hey why not do it like they do on reality TV shows, put it to a fan vote. Fans have 1 minute to vote and the running results are shown on the screen.

"agree" for the first paragraph .... "funny" got the second.

 

[Zartan]

The rule is fine its the idiot announcers that have no clue what they are talking about. The key example is Collinsworth saying that Zach Ertz TD was not a TD even though he took few steps and made a football move and then was considered a runner as he crossed the goal line.

Maybe have a few small tweaks and classifications but not overhauling the rule.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Defensive pass interference always results in the ball being marked at the spot of the infraction (except endzone), it assumes possession would have been made, yet we never know if the play ever would have been completed. Just because it appears offensive pass interference rarely prevents an interception, it shouldn't cancel out the fact that it can and probably at times does. Same penalty on opposite sides of the ball, different results.

If people don't like the way it's done in college (15 yd PI penalty), would they be open to "on passes greater than 30 yds, where PI is called, the penalty equals 1/2 the distance between the line of scrimmage and the spot of the foul."?

I agree the pass interference rule isn't perfect by any means but defensive backs would still take the foul on deep throws when getting beat instead of allowing the receiver possibly catching the ball under your proposal.

Just remember the pick plays the Packers ran two years ago on which they were called for OPI occasionally. Do you really believe the defense should have been awarded the ball on those???

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree the pass interference rule isn't perfect by any means but defensive backs would still take the foul on deep throws when getting beat instead of allowing the receiver possibly catching the ball under your proposal.

Just remember the pick plays the Packers ran two years ago on which they were called for OPI occasionally. Do you really believe the defense should have been awarded the ball on those???

I found this to be a pretty decent article on the subject of Defensive Pass interference in the NFL VS. College.

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/2/28/17059120/nfl-pass-interference-15-yards-rule

As far as offensive pass interference, were the pick calls on the Packer receivers called while the ball was in the air on its way to the defender that was interfered with? If the rule were ever changed (awarding the defense the ball), which it won't be, I would assume it would be in a situation where the defensive player interfered with would have had a clear shot at intercepting the ball. Again though, this is really no different than the offense being awarded 60 yards for a WR getting slightly grabbed on a deep pass that may or may not have been caught.

 

[McKnowledge]

So it's about entertainment, more than getting the call correct?

Why not both? Who's "voice" would be more respected?...NFL legends? Or some Suits and Zebras?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Why not both? Who's "voice" would be more respected?...NFL legends? Or some Suits and Zebras?

Your post actually brings up a good discussion point about the whole situation. Instant replay has now become a focal point of "excitement" for some TV viewers. People have alluded to announcers going frame by frame, looking at multiple camera angles, accompanied by colorful commentary and yet they still get the calls wrong sometimes. The Networks have even brought in former officials to chime in during the 1-3 minutes of the drama all this creates. Controversy and drama is entertaining for many people and this ends up just being good ratings for TV.

 

[Poppa San]

Hey why not do it like they do on reality TV shows, put it to a fan vote. Fans have 1 minute to vote and the running results are shown on the screen.

You need to protect this idea and sell it to the network suits. Not to affect the game as such but as a fan poll during the interminable delay. Text your vote to 75NFL if a catch and to 74NFL if no catch. $.99 per call (funds go to NFL players retirement fund after "network costs" are deducted of course.) With a live poll graph on the screen.

 

[rmontro]

Your post actually brings up a good discussion point about the whole situation. Instant replay has now become a focal point of "excitement" for some TV viewers. People have alluded to announcers going frame by frame, looking at multiple camera angles, accompanied by colorful commentary and yet they still get the calls wrong sometimes. The Networks have even brought in former officials to chime in during the 1-3 minutes of the drama all this creates. Controversy and drama is entertaining for many people and this ends up just being good ratings for TV.

Not just during the game either. If it's a controversial or key call the TV and radio sports talk shows will debate whether or not it was a catch for the entire week. In the case of the Dez Bryant catch, it still gets discussed at times.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

As far as offensive pass interference, were the pick calls on the Packer receivers called while the ball was in the air on its way to the defender that was interfered with? If the rule were ever changed (awarding the defense the ball), which it won't be, I would assume it would be in a situation where the defensive player interfered with would have had a clear shot at intercepting the ball. Again though, this is really no different than the offense being awarded 60 yards for a WR getting slightly grabbed on a deep pass that may or may not have been caught.

If I remember correctly the Packers receivers were called for offensive pass interference because the referees believed they blocked downfield before the ball was caught. There wasn't a single defensive back in close vicinity to the ball. In my opinion it would be a horrible rule to award the defense the ball because of an infraction like that.

In general I'm opposed to change the rule the way you're advocating for as that would result in even more judgement calls by the officials.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

In general I'm opposed to change the rule the way you're advocating for as that would result in even more judgement calls by the officials.

I was never advocating to change the rules to give the defense the ball on an offensive PI penalty. I was merely stating that the 2 penalties for the same infraction (interference) can have dramatically different consequences. When people claim that it "wouldn't be fair that a DB could pull down a receiver 60 yards down the field and only receive a 15 yard penalty for it". I would ask "How fair is it that an offensive player can prevent an interception by taking an interference penalty and only receive a 10 yard penalty for it".

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I was never advocating to change the rules to give the defense the ball on an offensive PI penalty. I was merely stating that the 2 penalties for the same infraction (interference) can have dramatically different consequences. When people claim that it "wouldn't be fair that a DB could pull down a receiver 60 yards down the field and only receive a 15 yard penalty for it". I would ask "How fair is it that an offensive player can prevent an interception by taking an interference penalty and only receive a 10 yard penalty for it".

I would really like to know how many offensive pass interference calls truly prevent a defender from intercepting the ball. I believe it's an extremely small number.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I would really like to know how many offensive pass interference calls truly prevent a defender from intercepting the ball. I believe it's an extremely small number.

Under the current rules, offensive PI can be called from the moment the ball is snapped until the play is over and often involves picks or shoving before the ball is even in the air, so it would be very difficult to determine how many of those actually prevented an interception. I was talking about offensive PI when the defender has a clear shot at catching the ball, but is interfered with, thus preventing the pic k and only resulting in a 10 yard penalty. Whether this happens a lot or infrequently, IMO it is still a major slant of the rules in favor of the offense. It is interpreted as a catch would have been made when its defensive PI, but not when it is offensive PI.

 

[swhitset]

Under the current rules, offensive PI can be called from the moment the ball is snapped until the play is over and often involves picks or shoving before the ball is even in the air, so it would be very difficult to determine how many of those actually prevented an interception. I was talking about offensive PI when the defender has a clear shot at catching the ball, but is interfered with, thus preventing the pic k and only resulting in a 10 yard penalty. Whether this happens a lot or infrequently, IMO it is still a major slant of the rules in favor of the offense. It is interpreted as a catch would have been made when its defensive PI, but not when it is offensive PI.

I agree with your assessment... and I am fine with it the way it is lol.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I would really like to know how many offensive pass interference calls truly prevent a defender from intercepting the ball. I believe it's an extremely small number.

I agree with your assessment... and I am fine with it the way it is lol.

Again, I am not advocating for offensive PI to result in the ball being turned over to the defense, what I was attempting to do was to show the discrepancy in the way the penalty is enforced against the offense VS the defense in the NFL. Currently, the penalty can result in the offense gaining as many yards as a QB can throw the ball, yet they can never be penalized more than 10 yards and get to replay the down.

 

[HardRightEdge]

more eyes, more interpretations, more problems. Just call the play and move on

"Just call the play and move on" doesn't work so long as networks show replays. It's why replay review was introduced in the first place.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

"Just call the play and move on" doesn't work so long as networks show replays. It's why replay review was introduced in the first place.

It's become the "reality TV" part of the NFL, fans can feel involved and can debate back and forth on what the correct call should be, even after the call is made. Rarely have I been watching a game and the Network decides to go to commercial break during a replay process, makes for too good of TV. But if a guy is laying on his back, withering in pain, time to sell those cars and insurance policies!

 

[Mondio]

"Just call the play and move on" doesn't work so long as networks show replays. It's why replay review was introduced in the first place.

Sure it can. Why can't it? Replay fixed it right? Lol. They reply and then move on and they still replaybit on networks for weeks on end to discuss the controversy of if they got it right or not or talk about all the plays they missed.

2 things are true. The more eyes and interpretations and levels of review or replay you add, eventually you will reach a point of diminishing returns. Fans don't like over officiated games either.

And the 2nd is, they will never get them all right. Ever. Make the call and move on works. It's basically what we have now, with one more level before someone makes a call and moves on.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Fans don't like over officiated games either.

Fans like less an obvious blown call revealed upon replay. I guess they forgot that.

Frankly, as illustrated above, I don't have much of a problem with the Bryant/James/Ertz replay determinations. The problem is with the "establishing as a runner" element of the rules. If the TV commentators and the fans don't understand it's consistent interpretation and application upon replay, that's no reason for complaint.

The initial call on the James catch was a TD. Had that stood, it would have been the wrong call. You might be happy letting the wrong call determine a season. I am not.

 

[HardRightEdge]

and how entertained would you be if the Packers got screwed out of going to the Super Bowl because of an "entertaining way of doing instant replay"?

How entertained would be if the Jesse James no-catch was made against the Packers and was incorrectly ruled a TD because of lack of replay. Not very, I suppose.

The only way that would work is if the technology was rolled back. The "instant replay" camera was first introduced in 1963. Perhaps the NFL could roll back the clock and mandate the networks not show replays at all.