Can we talk about that weird catch and fumble incomplete pass?

TL1961

Well-known member
18,047
6,095
85
Really not that completed. The catch and fumble are two separate things. The rule should be whether there was a catch. If there was then it is a catch. If there is no clear recovery then like any other situation, the ball stays with the offense. Pretty simple really.
That's what I say. If nobody recovers, it doesn't change hands, and stays with the offense. Same as if nobody gets it before it goes out of bounds.

I agree with this logic - why does the catch go away due to nobody recovering a fumble after the catch?
 

Spartan

The Truth
Donator
28,495
10,703
105
This is why players are coached to pick up that ball regardless of whistles and what not. Had a Bears player picked it up, it’s their ball at that spot.
 

Pegger

President Stoopid
4,873
2,971
70
Really not that completed. The catch and fumble are two separate things. The rule should be whether there was a catch. If there was then it is a catch. If there is no clear recovery then like any other situation, the ball stays with the offense. Pretty simple really.
Well it's not that easy for this specific situation. If the defenders are all around the ball and the ref is blowing the play dead are the defenders supposed to ignore the whistle? What if they jump on a ball and start a scrum for the recovery? Are they risking an unnecessary roughness or delay of game type penalty by ignoring the whistle and making the play go on beyond when the ref said it was over?

The refs don't want to determine the outcome of a game, but based on the evolution of the rule book/replay they are being put in spots where they can materially mess things up while trying to make the right call. My guess is the ref close was just judging the reception based on last year's definition, so called it incomplete.

Personally I think they created the rule on some weird Madden glitch.

 

TL1961

Well-known member
18,047
6,095
85
You guys are missing the actual rule here for when no one recovers the ball.

If they call it a catch on the field and down by contact (and looking at the replay it's really a fumble) then the catch stands and the team that fumbled keeps the ball there.

A catch that really happened is only called incomplete if it was called incomplete on the field so they stay with the call. So it's not about magically turning it into incomplete. It's about not OVERTURNING the call.
Who is missing what?

You are explaining the same way many others have. Nobody is saying they "magically turned it into incomplete". They called it incomplete and can't correct the determination of a CATCH, based on whether anyone recovered a FUMBLE that occurred AFTER the catch.

It's nonsensical, and Dungy, a member of the rules committee, said as much.
 

TL1961

Well-known member
18,047
6,095
85
I don't get not going after every loose ball. That's one of the things I respected about Lovie's players...they'd always try to pick it up and score. What's the downside to hustling after it, just in case? You don't look cool?

It was like that free TD they gave GB in the 2013 finale (which sent them to the playoffs and left us home). Their guy only picked it up b/c the ball happened to fall near their sideline, so their sideline was yelling at their guy to pick it up and try to score. It was the BEARS first year after Lovie, with Tucker running the D. How in the F did all those guys who played for Lovie (Briggs, etc...) just stop scooping up the loose football b/c he was gone? He'd only been gone for months at that point. You forgot to not "loaf" on a loose ball? Ugh.
Briggs stopped doing anything the day Lovie was fired.
 

Pegger

President Stoopid
4,873
2,971
70
Who is missing what?

You are explaining the same way many others have. Nobody is saying they "magically turned it into incomplete". They called it incomplete and can't correct the determination of a CATCH, based on whether anyone recovered a FUMBLE that occurred AFTER the catch.

It's nonsensical, and Dungy, a member of the rules committee, said as much.
This is the problem we are in where most of the rule book was written before reply captured as many items as it does. I could imagine when a game day ref gets on the phone and he's being quoted 'subsection 12 of addendum G linked to part 2 of paragraph 6...' then he's asked to explain that to a blood hungry home crowd in an extremely important part of the game.

It's like when they tried to remove the 'grey' area of what a catch is and isn't. People lost their minds, so they changed it back. The problem is we want the grey area on some of those calls, but when you can review it and slow it down in high def from multiple angles the underlying call materially changes.
 

gallagher

Well-known member
3,179
1,502
70
I don't like this rule because it isn't logical. You are penalizing a team because the refs screwed up. Imagine the scenario: a QB threw an "incomplete pass" during contact on 3d down and nobody picks up the ball off the ground at the whistle, it's now 4th in field goal range. The defensive team challenges for the strip sack. It becomes clear that the throwing motion hadn't started when the ball came loose, and should be rules a strip sack.

Should the refs (a) maintain that the ball was incomplete because nobody recovered the football when the play was blown dead, despite review proving that there was never a pass attempt (b) march the team on offense back to the point of the review-reversed strip and the ball remain with the offense or (c) the ball awarded to the defensive team for forcing a fumble. The answer seems obvious to me, you go with choice B.

I'm equally annoyed by this as I am about the fumble in the opponent's endzone is a turnover, instead of spotting the ball at the point of the fumble. It is like the rules have exceptions carved out specifically to throw in aggravating wrinkles and give fans something to complain about besides how much money ownership gets on the labor of the players.
 

Gud Brant

New member
12
0
0
From where I was sitting, Seattle was in a much better position to recover the fumble. We actually caught a break.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
31,358
8,835
135
Well it's not that easy for this specific situation. If the defenders are all around the ball and the ref is blowing the play dead are the defenders supposed to ignore the whistle? What if they jump on a ball and start a scrum for the recovery? Are they risking an unnecessary roughness or delay of game type penalty by ignoring the whistle and making the play go on beyond when the ref said it was over?

The refs don't want to determine the outcome of a game, but based on the evolution of the rule book/replay they are being put in spots where they can materially mess things up while trying to make the right call. My guess is the ref close was just judging the reception based on last year's definition, so called it incomplete.

Personally I think they created the rule on some weird Madden glitch.

After his Int Roquan ran it all the way back the whistle. Players do that all the time. You should always get the ball. No excuses.

And again if no clear recovery then ball goes back to O. Really not an issue.
 

TL1961

Well-known member
18,047
6,095
85
I'm equally annoyed by this as I am about the fumble in the opponent's endzone is a turnover, instead of spotting the ball at the point of the fumble. It is like the rules have exceptions carved out specifically to throw in aggravating wrinkles and give fans something to complain about besides how much money ownership gets on the labor of the players.
I would guess that the rule at the endzone is to avoid a team from being able to pitch the ball forward through the endzone and be awarded with a TD. So it seems there was some reason for it. But I agree it is not the best solution.

They later somewhat addressed this for balls into, not through, the endzone by saying only the player who fumbled can recover it, or else it comes back to the point of the fumble.

Your suggestion to do the same if it goes out of bounds in the endzone or out the back, makes very good sense. Everywhere else on the field the ball reverts to the offense if OB before recovered.

They may have at least had a reason for the rule, but it's not the best solution. The one yesterday seems to have never had a good reason, and Dungy seemed to say as much.
 

TL1961

Well-known member
18,047
6,095
85
After his Int Roquan ran it all the way back the whistle. Players do that all the time. You should always get the ball. No excuses.

And again if no clear recovery then ball goes back to O. Really not an issue.
You're only going to make us feel worse. I'm not sure that Roquan and the intended receiver made contact after Roquan had possession.
 

ikkoikki

Well-known member
8,218
3,457
70
This is why players are coached to pick up that ball regardless of whistles and what not. Had a Bears player picked it up, it’s their ball at that spot.
Yeah but in this case the ref stepped right in front of Anthony Miller, and was waving his hands signaling an incomplete pass. Why would a reasonable person, given that signal, run up to the ball to pick it up? I understand if there was some doubt or lack of certainty but the ref was like 2 feet away from him whistling and waving the pass off.
 

Spartan

The Truth
Donator
28,495
10,703
105
Yeah but in this case the ref stepped right in front of Anthony Miller, and was waving his hands signaling an incomplete pass. Why would a reasonable person, given that signal, run up to the ball to pick it up? I understand if there was some doubt or lack of certainty but the ref was like 2 feet away from him whistling and waving the pass off.
Just pick the ball up and hand it to the ref saying he’s wrong. No need to try to advance it, the whistle means the play is dead right there. Just need to possess it. It’s a good habit to get your players into anyway, kinda like running hard to first base, in baseball, on a ground ball that’s fielded even though you know you’ll be out 99 out of 100 times.
 

Pegger

President Stoopid
4,873
2,971
70
For those caught up on the stupidity of the rule can anyone make sense why a fumble at the 1 inch line stays with the offense, but if it's on the goaline or in the endzone it's a change of possession (touchback)?

Or how can you have an offside on the defense (5 yard penalty), hold by the OL (10 yard penalty) and a pass interference by the D back (could be long yardage) and when it all happens at the same time we pretend nothing happened?

There are many rules that don't make any sense. We've accepted them and work around them just because we've been exposed to them. This will be no different.
 
Top