Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Can the "catch rule" be fixed?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BrokenArrow" data-source="post: 761398" data-attributes="member: 12225"><p>And I never said mine was the best by any means. Obviously, it would need refinement and was really only intended as a starting point for ideas. But the status quo is just too subjective, too ambiguous and open to interpretation. While no definition can be perfect, it stands to reason that the simpler the rule can be made, the less room there is for debate. Maybe the answer is as easy as limiting reviews on catches to whether or not the player had two feet in bounds and making the question of whether or not the ball moved in a players arms/hands 1/8" after contacting the ground nonrenewable. That would allow the "eye test" and common sense be a more prevalent part of the rule rather than slow-mo, microscopic analysis and minute technicality being the ultimate deciding factor. It the movement isn't enough to see in real time, is it worth fussing over? Would they get it wrong from time to time? Sure. But they get lots of nonrenewable things wrong at times, like most penalties.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BrokenArrow, post: 761398, member: 12225"] And I never said mine was the best by any means. Obviously, it would need refinement and was really only intended as a starting point for ideas. But the status quo is just too subjective, too ambiguous and open to interpretation. While no definition can be perfect, it stands to reason that the simpler the rule can be made, the less room there is for debate. Maybe the answer is as easy as limiting reviews on catches to whether or not the player had two feet in bounds and making the question of whether or not the ball moved in a players arms/hands 1/8" after contacting the ground nonrenewable. That would allow the "eye test" and common sense be a more prevalent part of the rule rather than slow-mo, microscopic analysis and minute technicality being the ultimate deciding factor. It the movement isn't enough to see in real time, is it worth fussing over? Would they get it wrong from time to time? Sure. But they get lots of nonrenewable things wrong at times, like most penalties. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
DoURant
Emur
PackerDNA
Latest posts
The 11th Annual Amish Draft Contest 2024
Latest: Voyageur
8 minutes ago
Draft Talk
R
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: RicFlairoftheNFL
22 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 3rd Rd #91 Ty’Ron Hopper LB
Latest: PikeBadger
51 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Most hated teams outside of the division
Latest: Guacamole
53 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Assessing the Draft Class (2024)
Latest: Krabs
Today at 9:37 AM
Draft Talk
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Can the "catch rule" be fixed?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top