Truth & Rumors > NFL

Head of officiating wants consistency with catch rulings

Views
6373
Comments
24

12:06 PM ET 11.30 | In today's NFL, there are many fans who no longer know what a catch is. The rulings are incredibly inconsistent when it comes to deciding what is and isn't a catch, and it appears that the officials have questions themselves about the official rules. The league recently sent out a video to the officials to show what is and isn't a catch, as NFL Head of Officiating Dean Blandino called for more consistency in the rulings. Unfortunately for the officials, not only are their catch rulings inconsistent, but nearly every rule in the NFL rulebooks has been up for debate this season. The referees need to start doing a better job all around.

FanSided.com

Bill Leavy, Getty Images Bill Leavy, Getty Images
November 30, 2013  05:12 PM ET

The NFL motto:


Give me ambiguity............or give me something else.

November 30, 2013  06:50 PM ET
QUOTE(#1):

The NFL motto:


Give me ambiguity............or give me something else.

My motto;


Those are my beliefs. If you don't like them - I have others.

November 30, 2013  06:51 PM ET

More fine leadership from the Choirboy and his cohorts.

November 30, 2013  08:50 PM ET

False starts are ridiculous anymore with everyone pointing and turning around to look at the QB.

November 30, 2013  09:25 PM ET

Instant replay every play.

November 30, 2013  09:40 PM ET
QUOTE(#2):

My motto; Those are my beliefs. If you don't like them - I have others.

THIS is great!

November 30, 2013  11:01 PM ET
QUOTE(#2):

My motto; Those are my beliefs. If you don't like them - I have others.

My answer to all things"

Yes, but no.

November 30, 2013  11:14 PM ET
QUOTE(#2):

My motto; Those are my beliefs. If you don't like them - I have others.

Sounds like Obamacare negotiations between the Democrats and the large unions.

December 1, 2013  12:07 AM ET

what is a catch or is incomplete is not the real issue. what I see more is the question is DBs can all but mug the receiver and get no call of holding or interference. If a receiver so much as extends his arm its called offensive interference.

December 1, 2013  12:07 AM ET

There will be a consensus from this:

Screw over the Raiders at every turn.
Flag any defender within 2 yards of a QB making over 8 mil a year.
Keep an eye on Suh on every play, ignoring Fairley's transgressions.
Remind themselves about screwing the Raiders.
Apologize to Brady if he gets a blade of grass on his uniform.
Ignore Tomlin if he's on the field during a play.
Beg Mike Pereira for a job for post-NFL career.
Take off-season classes on how to job the Raiders.
Don't swear at players, because they're professionals who would never swear at you.
Go on strike so the Packers have something to whine about.
Get ready to be second-guessed by some yahoo like Brian Billick that has super slowmo.
Again, screw over the Raiders.

Did I mention jobbing the Raiders?

December 1, 2013  12:13 AM ET

rule books!!! we refs don't need no stinkun rule books. we will make up our own rules, and call it accordingly. Other refs calls might be called differently.

December 1, 2013  12:13 AM ET
QUOTE(#10):

what is a catch or is incomplete is not the real issue. what I see more is the question is DBs can all but mug the receiver and get no call of holding or interference. If a receiver so much as extends his arm its called offensive interference.

Respectfully disagree.

Offensive PI is rarely called. Rule changes since the 80s have made divas out of WRs.

If you want to see the mugging of a receiver, go find some film of Mel Blount, Michael Haynes or Jack Tatum, and they did it legal back then.

December 1, 2013  01:34 AM ET
QUOTE(#12):

rule books!!! we refs don't need no stinkun rule books. we will make up our own rules, and call it accordingly. Other refs calls might be called differently.

Ed Zachary.

They go on strike to emphasize their discontent with their compensation, now they look, well, bad.

At least that strike cost GB a game.

December 1, 2013  03:17 AM ET

No, the fans know exactly what a catch is; it's the refs and competition committee who don't. The rule needs to be simplified, clarified and made uniform for both touchdowns and completions: Control - two feet down and in bounds - end of story. What "football moves" and control out of bounds have to do with anything, I do not know.

December 1, 2013  08:09 AM ET

Let's add even more offense - only one foot in bounds means a catch.

December 1, 2013  08:19 AM ET
QUOTE(#15):

Let's add even more offense - only one foot in bounds means a catch.

And then make overtime a battle of who has the better red zone offense...

December 1, 2013  08:23 AM ET

December 1, 2013  08:25 AM ET

December 1, 2013  09:24 AM ET
QUOTE(#11):

Screw over the Raiders at every turn.....

To be fair, there's a lot of fan support for that one.

 
December 1, 2013  10:04 AM ET

Why would the refs have to screw over the Raiders, they do it well enough by themselves.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Irving: Fans don't deserve the Cavs
    Views
    22261
    Comments
    684
  2. 2
    D'Antoni's newest 'blunder'
    Views
    1286
    Comments
    558
  3. 3
    Baseball's top 2015 free agent
    Views
    1274
    Comments
    518
  4. 4
    Red Sox dodged two injury scares
    Views
    3402
    Comments
    504
  5. 5
    The NHL's model franchise?
    Views
    1354
    Comments
    114

SI.com

SI Photos