Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MavKikiNYC
You may be right--I don't think I've ever seen the situation on a sideline play.
But I still don't like the rule. It seems inconsistent.
If the ground can't cause a fumble, why can it cause an incompletion when the player posseses the ball on the way down, with knees contacting the ground?
Butch Johnson's Super Bowl catch involved far less possession, IMO.
|
I thought about the Butch Johnson catch myself. Haven't seen the highlight in a while but didn't Butch maintain possession?
As an addendum, that Tampa rule only applies when the player is being tackled while making the catch. Here’s a quote from a league exec who oversees the officals:
Under league officiating procedure, an "act common to the game" is defined as controlling the ball long enough to hand it, pitch it or pass it. But Pereira noted that this definition only applies when there is "contact with a defensive player and the ball comes loose, which did not happen here."
So when you look at it in that context, the rule makes a little more sense. They’re basically saying that if a defender is close enough to make a play on the ball or the man then they’re going to give him the benefit by requiring the offensive player to maintain possession even after he hit’s the ground.