Rules of the Game: The Completed Catch

To kick off our new feature on examining some confusing rules in sports, let’s start with one of the most controversial rules in professional football: What constitutes a catch?

According to Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3 of the NFL rule book:
“A forward pass is completed…or intercepted… if a player, who is inbounds:
a). secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
b). touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands.”

Roger Goodell might have a
rule adjustment to make
after the season thanks to
Jermaine Gresham's non-catch.

Let’s dissect this rule for a minute. First off, the old rule of a player needing to make a “football move” is no longer a requirement for a completed catch. All that is required is for a player to get control of the ball and get two feet (or any other non-hand part of the body…remember John Madden’s famous “one knee = two feet” explanation) in bounds. But that leaves one huge question: what constitutes “control” as it is read in section a). ? The answer: there is none…at least according to the rule book.

Now, even with the controversy of what is truly “control,” this rule is pretty cut-and-dry, black-and-white. However, as the athleticism of the game has increased, and more and more diving/sliding/juggling/falling/acrobatic catches are being made, further rule considerations have to be implemented.

The following three items supplement the definition of a catch:
“Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball…whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds…in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, or the pass in incomplete.
Item 3: End Zone Catches. If a player controls the ball while in the end zone, both feet, or any part of his body other than his hands, must be completely on the ground before losing control, or the pass is incomplete.”

So again, to analyze this, if a player goes to the ground to make a catch, he needs to control the ball throughout the process of the catch, whether in bounds or not. And, as I read the rules, if you have control of the ball with two feet (or one knee as John would say) down, it’s a catch and a touchdown. And again, a judgment call still needs to be made here: what constitutes “the act of catching a pass” in this situation? When is the act of the catch…for lack of a better word…completed?

At this point, let’s look at the most recent controversial “catch” in the NFL. In week 11, with the Cincinnati Bengals down 10 and driving late in the game against Baltimore, Andy Dalton finds Jermaine Gresham just short of the pylon. He juggles the ball, regains possession (again, what do we consider to be “possession” anyway?), gets two feet down in-bounds, one more step out of bounds, then falls to the ground out-of-bounds after crossing the goal line. As Gresham goes to the ground, the ball in his right hand hits the ground and is slightly dislodged from his hand. The call on the field: Touchdown.

After further review, the ruling was overturned. “When the receiver went to the ground he lost control of the ball, therefore it is an incomplete pass” announced referee Ron Winter.

There are two disgusting assumptions I read in this decision.

First, yes, I agree he loses possession of the ball when he goes to the ground. But, how is this still required? He took three steps after gaining control (?) of the ball. How is that still considered to be the act of making the catch? By the same logic, Gresham could have gotten possession at the 20, tip-toed the sideline, dove into the end zone and lost the ball, and the ruling be an incomplete pass. He gains control, takes three steps, then falls. He’s STILL making the catch at that point? I don’t agree.

Second, and obviously, he lost control of the ball. I agree with you there Ron Winter, but what defines control? After the ball touches the ground, it appears to move, but Gresham keeps the ball in his belly the rest of the way through the catch. That’s more control than half of the catches made in the middle of the field. But, even so, according to the rules as written, that pass was incomplete (though it requires serious judgment calls).

But finally, look at Item 3 above. Gresham did have two feet down and was in the end zone before losing control. So by Item 3, the ruling of touchdown should have been upheld. So at the very least, we have one play that has two sections of the rulebook contradicting each other. Wonder why people are so confused on this play?

This is hardly the first time this sort of catch has posed problems. In week 1 of the 2010 season, Calvin Johnson leaped up and made a spectacular catch against the Bears. He came down in the end zone with a total of four feet, a hip, and a hand. He then lost control of the ball in the exact same fashion as Gresham did. Originally ruled a touchdown, the referees had a conference and ruled incomplete. Video review ensued and the call of incomplete was confirmed.

In the video above, Mike Pereira of NFL on FOX explains why Johnson’s catch wasn’t truly a catch. He says to ignore the fact that every inch of Johnson’s body lands in bounds, because he still loses the ball in the process of the catch.

One other interesting catch is Troy Polamalu’s interception against Peyton Manning in the 2006 AFC playoffs. He picks off Manning’s pass, takes a step on his way to the ground, rolls over, and begins to get up to run when he literally knees the ball out of his own hands. Completion on the field, the call was overturned and the Colts stayed in the game. (At least the NFL admitted later on that the ruling was incorrect)

Our ruling on the rule: With each “Rule of the Game” segment, we will go one step beyond explaining the rule. We will also provide some commentary on the fairness/correctness/reasonableness of the rule.

In terms of catching the ball going to the ground, I believe there is still way too much judgment call to be made to allow both Gresham’s catch to be ruled incomplete, especially after review. If things like a false start or pass interference cannot be reviewed because it is just a judgment call, then to me you cannot judge when the process of a catch begins or ends in a review (oh, and when Baltimore never would have challenged, but free review made that play get overturned...another issue for another day). But, in general, to say a player can take four steps with possession, then fall, then lose the ball…I can’t think of a word strong enough. Help?