Even though NFHS is very vague, I use some of the indicators from higher levels to define a catch, but it is also kind of you know it when you see it type thing. I like the no cheap turnovers philosophy as well. If in doubt the player was down, incomplete pass, forward pass etc.
BJ was in a good position to help on that call. Probably a better angle than the camera (or even possibly the wing). As a BJ I want to see the receiver “control” the ball (don’t care about steps or a “football move” after the catch).
NFHS has a lot of ambiguities so I relay on the philosophies from the NCAA. Possession, body part down in bounds, element of time. I learned over the years that we are taught to slow things down in our mind and by doing so, a play like this seems longer in our mind. We've all made this mistake and learn from our mistakes. I know I've ruled a play like this as a fumble and after that, they are all incomplete passes.
The reason for this is most high school chapters spend zero time in training philosophy- they send out sheets with rules on it - We all make mistakes on the field and watching video is so much easier to rule than live. With that being said this play isn’t really that close, it’s an incomplete -
Also Ryan, you said that ambiguous is a good thing, well ambiguous words leads to inconsistency in enforcing the rules, and that is never a good thing- why make a rule book if you are simple going to leave things open for interpretation- the NFHS needs to close these unclear rules nd interpretations as soon as it’s bought to their attention. There are a lot of rules that are ambiguous and leave too much open for debate , and would be pretty easy to write someone to clear them when issues rise with just a few choice words
From that angle incomplete. Show my an official who never missed a call and I'll see a liar. We're human, we're going to make mistakes.
Even though NFHS is very vague, I use some of the indicators from higher levels to define a catch, but it is also kind of you know it when you see it type thing.
I like the no cheap turnovers philosophy as well. If in doubt the player was down, incomplete pass, forward pass etc.
With as quickly as the ball popped out, no way it’s a catch. Shouldn’t the BJ have an angle on that?
BJ was in a good position to help on that call. Probably a better angle than the camera (or even possibly the wing). As a BJ I want to see the receiver “control” the ball (don’t care about steps or a “football move” after the catch).
The BJ has a great look at the play, I would be fine with him coming in and selling the incompletion.
When in doubt it is always incomplete
Who had doubt, lol it’s incomplete I didn’t even have to watch it twice
NFHS has a lot of ambiguities so I relay on the philosophies from the NCAA. Possession, body part down in bounds, element of time. I learned over the years that we are taught to slow things down in our mind and by doing so, a play like this seems longer in our mind. We've all made this mistake and learn from our mistakes. I know I've ruled a play like this as a fumble and after that, they are all incomplete passes.
Back Judge shouldn’t have an angle on that. The Linesman should have a better angle
The reason for this is most high school chapters spend zero time in training philosophy- they send out sheets with rules on it - We all make mistakes on the field and watching video is so much easier to rule than live. With that being said this play isn’t really that close, it’s an incomplete -
No catch. Good play on the D to break it up as the player was about to catch it.
I've got a play I'd love for you guys to review... is there a way to send you anything?
What game was the LJ watching?
Also Ryan, you said that ambiguous is a good thing, well ambiguous words leads to inconsistency in enforcing the rules, and that is never a good thing- why make a rule book if you are simple going to leave things open for interpretation- the NFHS needs to close these unclear rules nd interpretations as soon as it’s bought to their attention. There are a lot of rules that are ambiguous and leave too much open for debate , and would be pretty easy to write someone to clear them when issues rise with just a few choice words
Agree.