College Football FBS/FCS discussion thread

[Professor Chaos]

It wasn't ruled incomplete. It was ruled a fumble in real time.

I think what he's saying is that it would've been ruled incomplete if the officials knew they didn't have the benefit of replay to correct a mistake. Seems like in those situations where it's close they'll rule it a fumble more often than not to let the action play out and then rely on replay to overturn it if necessary.

[EC8CH]

I think what he's saying is that it would've been ruled incomplete if the officials knew they didn't have the benefit of replay to correct a mistake. Seems like in those situations where it's close they'll rule it a fumble more often than not to let the action play out and then rely on replay to overturn it if necessary.

So then reply confirms he had clear control of the ball for 4 steps, but it's not a catch why? Because he didn't tuck it away after the second step before getting stripped? Just dumb. How many steps does it take with control of the ball to be considered a catch?

If both teams have a valid complaint about the call how can there be enough evidence to overturn the original call then?

[Professor Chaos]

So then reply confirms he had clear control of the ball for 4 steps, but it's not a catch why? Because he didn't tuck it away after the second step before getting stripped? Just dumb. How many steps does it take with control of the ball to be considered a catch?

I don't think they count steps at all. They wait for him to tuck it away and turn up field before they call the catch process complete. I guess they ruled he hadn't done that yet. If you watch it in real-time the ball does come out pretty quickly but at some point you have to punish a receiver who doesn't try to tuck the ball away.

[EC8CH]

I don't think they count steps at all. They wait for him to tuck it away and turn up field before they call the catch process complete. I guess they ruled he hadn't done that yet. If you watch it in real-time the ball does come out pretty quickly but at some point you have to punish a receiver who doesn't try to tuck the ball away.

Why? So if he catches it and runs it in for a TD without ever tucking it away and spikes it, that's a fumble? Dumb.

[IndyBison]

I don't think they count steps at all. They wait for him to tuck it away and turn up field before they call the catch process complete. I guess they ruled he hadn't done that yet. If you watch it in real-time the ball does come out pretty quickly but at some point you have to punish a receiver who doesn't try to tuck the ball away.

Correct. Steps has nothing directly to do with the NCAA catch rule. Don't confuse it with the NFL rule. Based on the NCAA rule they prefer this to play out and then make a ruling on replay. At that point they aren't necessarily confirming or reversing the call on the field. They are making a ruling. That's where it could go either way but the best way to rule on this play is in real time not slow motion. That's why I think the better call was incomplete. But I would have understood catch/fumble as well.

FWIW...the play in the Bison game should have probably let it play out and then let replay rule forward/backward. No idea how replay would have ruled on that one. In that example a game without replay would have likely been ruled forward and incomplete.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Professor Chaos]

Why? So if he catches it and runs it in for a TD without ever tucking it away and spikes it, that's a fumble? Dumb.

Well, if he turns up field then it doesn't matter if he tucks it away.

[EC8CH]

Well, if he turns up field then it doesn't matter if he tucks it away.

What if he just runs sideways out of bounds for a first down? Id say 4 times as many steps to prove you are in bounds should be enough to prove you had possession of the ball and made the catch.

[IndyBison]

Why? So if he catches it and runs it in for a TD without ever tucking it away and spikes it, that's a fumble? Dumb.

Correct. No requirement to tuck it to complete it. But if that's your first act you'll need to maintain possession during that tuck to complete the catch because it's part of the process of the catch. That didn't really apply in this case IMO. Watch the play in real time and determine if you get her had it long enough. You will never get unanimous agreement either way from any group of officials on a play like that. Ultimately the decision is based on the judgement of the replay official.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Professor Chaos]

What if he just runs sideways out of bounds for a first down? Id say 4 times as many steps to prove you are in bounds should be enough to prove you had possession of the ball and made the catch.

Well then he's an idiot.

The in bounds/out of bounds argument is silly because you can get one foot in bounds but if you don't maintain control of the ball either when hitting the ground or a defender out of bounds it's also not a catch.

[EC8CH]

Correct. No requirement to tuck it to complete it. But if that's your first act you'll need to maintain possession during that tuck to complete the catch because it's part of the process of the catch. That didn't really apply in this case IMO. Watch the play in real time and determine if you get her had it long enough. You will never get unanimous agreement either way from any group of officials on a play like that. Ultimately the decision is based on the judgement of the replay official.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

His first act in this case wasn't tucking it either. He kept it away from his body for a few steps then tried tucking it. By then he had possession and had already completed the catch. I don't think the replay official had clear enough evidence to over turn the call.