Jalen Camp: Catch or No Catch?

Was this a catch?

  • Catch

    Votes: 84 71.2%

  • No Catch

    Votes: 34 28.8%
  • Total voters
    118

FightWinDrink

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,341
Frenchise said:
Ball of the foot was inbounds, heel landed(later) out of bounds. 50/50 call. Ruling on the field stands.
Click to expand...
not sure the wording in college but in the NFL if any part of the foot in the continuous motion comes down out of bounds then it's not a catch. I'm thinking they ruled that even though his toes came down in bounds the heel was on the edge of the line. It doesn't matter then if the toes were in or not because part of his foot landed out of bounds in the landing motion. Toe touch only counts if they fall

if his heel never actually came down when he first landed and you say he just fell over then it would help his case
 
UgaBlows

UgaBlows

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,831
gt2kmd said:
Catch. I don't think the heel hit the ground. It only looked like it did on one view because of the angle.

More clearly though: Oliver was in on the 1 yard TD. Why didn't the refs review it to overturn it? ACC refs definitely need the practice on reviews.
Click to expand...
Pity call for Alcorn
 
wreckrod

wreckrod

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
429
LongforDodd said:
Next question...why do you think it was a catch?
Click to expand...

He goes up for it, stops the ball with one hand, as he's gathering it and getting it under control, his toes come down in bounds, he achieves full control as he's falling down, his heel never touches the ground, with full control with a toe in bounds, he lands on his side out of bounds.

I know it happened a little slower, but to me that sequence of events is exactly the same as a WR who is diving OOB and makes the catch and taps his toe in bounds before landing out.

That's what I saw anyway.
 
Supersizethatorder-mutt

Supersizethatorder-mutt

Banned
Messages
13,443
Location
Augusta, GA
FightWinDrink said:
not sure the wording in college but in the NFL if any part of the foot in the continuous motion comes down out of bounds then it's not a catch. I'm thinking they ruled that even though his toes came down in bounds the heel was on the edge of the line. It doesn't matter then if the toes were in or not because part of his foot landed out of bounds in the landing motion. Toe touch only counts if they fall

if his heel never actually came down when he first landed and you say he just fell over then it would help his case
Click to expand...
I don't think you are correct there. There have been completed passes where only a toe lands inbounds, before every other inch of the receiver's body falls out of bounds, but the pass is ruled a completion.
 
FredJacket

FredJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,241
Location
Fredericksburg, Virginia
FightWinDrink said:
not sure the wording in college but in the NFL if any part of the foot in the continuous motion comes down out of bounds then it's not a catch. I'm thinking they ruled that even though his toes came down in bounds the heel was on the edge of the line. It doesn't matter then if the toes were in or not because part of his foot landed out of bounds in the landing motion. Toe touch only counts if they fall

if his heel never actually came down when he first landed and you say he just fell over then it would help his case
Click to expand...
Pretty sure you've nailed it. Here's the language

Eligible A80 is airborne near the sideline when he receives a legal forward pass. As he comes to the ground facing the field of play, his toe (a) clearly drags the ground inbounds before
he falls out of bounds; (b) touches the ground inbounds and then his heel comes down on
the sideline in a continuous motion. He maintains firm control of the ball in both cases. RULING: (a) Complete pass. (b) Incomplete pass. The continuous toe-heel touching is part of a single process and by inter pretation he has landed out of bounds, thus not executing a catch.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR17updated.pdf#page174
 
RonJohn

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,994
FredJacket said:
Pretty sure you've nailed it. Here's the language

Eligible A80 is airborne near the sideline when he receives a legal forward pass. As he comes to the ground facing the field of play, his toe (a) clearly drags the ground inbounds before
he falls out of bounds; (b) touches the ground inbounds and then his heel comes down on
the sideline in a continuous motion. He maintains firm control of the ball in both cases. RULING: (a) Complete pass. (b) Incomplete pass. The continuous toe-heel touching is part of a single process and by inter pretation he has landed out of bounds, thus not executing a catch.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR17updated.pdf#page174
Click to expand...
Watching the replay in slow motion it doesn't appear that his heel ever touched the ground.

The replay crew must have had other camera views to confirm the call.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Supersizethatorder-mutt

Supersizethatorder-mutt

Banned
Messages
13,443
Location
Augusta, GA
FredJacket said:
Pretty sure you've nailed it. Here's the language

Eligible A80 is airborne near the sideline when he receives a legal forward pass. As he comes to the ground facing the field of play, his toe (a) clearly drags the ground inbounds before
he falls out of bounds; (b) touches the ground inbounds and then his heel comes down on
the sideline in a continuous motion. He maintains firm control of the ball in both cases. RULING: (a) Complete pass. (b) Incomplete pass. The continuous toe-heel touching is part of a single process and by inter pretation he has landed out of bounds, thus not executing a catch.

http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/FR17updated.pdf#page174
Click to expand...
I sure read that differently than you did.
 

FightWinDrink

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,341
Supersizethatorder-mutt said:
I don't think you are correct there. There have been completed passes where only a toe lands inbounds, before every other inch of the receiver's body falls out of bounds, but the pass is ruled a completion.
Click to expand...
The heel is a weird exception. so if they ruled Camp had control and he had just fallen out of bounds it would have counted. If they ruled he had possession and his toes were in but his heel went out without lifting the foot back up then it is out. so it would have been a better choice to completely fall over after touching green then try to stay on his feet. it's kind of counter intuitive in my opinion but it is a slight nuance in the rules.

I'm pretty surprised it was ruled confirmed just because of the ambiguity of the heel. like others have mentioned it is kind of hard to see from the tv angle if the heel ever touched. If you don't think the heel touched then it should have been ruled a catch

catching on your toes and then having your heel come all the way to the ground and touch after is ruled the same as catching flat footed. However, tapping your toes and falling does not take into account the landing point of the body
 
Last edited:
wreckrod

wreckrod

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
429
Longestday said:
Got to click on picture

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone disagrees that his toes come down first and in bounds, it's whether or not his heel touches OOB as he's coming down, or if it kind of swings out of the way and his whole body lands OOB first.

Personally, on the replays I saw it looks like his heel never touches, and that's why I think it was a catch. If there's a view that shows his heel does touch, it's not a catch.

Regardless! I'm excited about having a big physical receiver go up and get that ball. We need more of that.
 
Top