10
Started By
Message
Miami V Notre Dame - Catch or no?
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:30 am
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:30 am
I saw two feet down and ball stripped after he went out of bounds. TD in my book.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:33 am to CaptainCrash
If it's a catch, Notre Dame might not make the playoffs. If it's not a catch, both Miami and Notre Dame both make the playoffs.
Easy decision
Easy decision
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:35 am to CaptainCrash
No catch.
And for the record, ND losing helps my team.
And for the record, ND losing helps my team.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:35 am to CaptainCrash
He didn’t have it long enough IMO.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:36 am to BZ504
I hate Notre dame. That was no catch.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:37 am to CaptainCrash
I’ve seen that ruled not a catch more often than not. He caught with both hands but didn’t sustain possession as he was bringing it to his body and by a fraction of a second was already losing (not loosing) it when his foot hit out of bounds.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:40 am to CaptainCrash
It looks like a catch in slow motion, but not in real time to me. I’ve seen that ruled no catch, for not completing the catch, many times.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 9:43 am to CaptainCrash
I thought it was different in the end zone (remember TN vs Florida)? I say it’s a catch.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 10:04 am to CaptainCrash
I honestly don’t care. It’s probably a TD but they would have 2 loses now if the refs hadn’t bailed them out 2 weeks in a row.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 10:08 am to Bamafan428
Catch.
Makes no sense to me that wasn't a TD, but if a ball carrier barely gets the ball to the goal line by the nose and it's then slapped away it's still a TD.
Makes no sense to me that wasn't a TD, but if a ball carrier barely gets the ball to the goal line by the nose and it's then slapped away it's still a TD.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 10:11 am to CaptainCrash
I saw the replay on that this morning. The receiver did not complete the catch by definition. Good call!
For the record I don't like either team.
For the record I don't like either team.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 10:11 am to CaptainCrash
He had possession even if the ball was not secured against his chest; the ball was held in both hands extended out with two feet in bounds before it came loose while OOB. It’s a catch all day.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 10:41 am to CaptainCrash
A reception vs. Running play are two different scenarios. With a running play, the ball just has to break the plane, with a catch you have to control the ball and make a "football" move.
Running play is easy, as the RB has the ball behind the LOS, firm possession is established prior to breaking plane.
Reception you have to catch it and make some move. You can bring it into your body or take a step with firm possession. Neither of those happened. Since he jumped in the air to get the ball he had to come down and show complete catch and not lose ball.
If he did not jump, would actually probably been a TD. Once your feet leave the ground, new rules apply.
Running play is easy, as the RB has the ball behind the LOS, firm possession is established prior to breaking plane.
Reception you have to catch it and make some move. You can bring it into your body or take a step with firm possession. Neither of those happened. Since he jumped in the air to get the ball he had to come down and show complete catch and not lose ball.
If he did not jump, would actually probably been a TD. Once your feet leave the ground, new rules apply.
Posted on 11/8/26 at 10:53 am to bunkerhill
quote:
I saw the replay on that this morning. The receiver did not complete the catch by definition. Good call!
This. Not a catch. The receiver must maintain control. You don't have to like the rule, but it is what it is. Here's the maintaining control clause of the catch rule.
"Maintain Control: The receiver must keep possession long enough to complete an act common to football, such as tucking the ball or turning upfield."
Same with the roughing the passer on OM last night. The rule is you cant drive the QB to the ground and land on top of him. Dumb rule, but it was a textbook roughing call. Here's the clause:
"Driving the passer into the ground or landing on them in a punishing manner."
Posted on 11/8/26 at 11:25 am to PGJ
The body language by the receiver was pretty telling, he knew it wasn't a catch.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News