Florio: NFL to once again revisit catch rule

[Iamtdg]

[pdom]

Only applicable to Steelers and Patriots.

[DLK150]

Get rid of #3, still too damn arbitrary.

[Chocolate Lab]

Yeah, what does 3 of #3 even mean? The ability to perform such an act?

[Iamtdg]

Yeah, what does 3 of #3 even mean? The ability to perform such an act?

Nobody knows. This rule could have gotten much better, but this very well could make it worse. Are the refs supposed to predict if a player could have made a football move, could have had control, or could have made a 3rd step? It's still confusing as hell.

[Cowboysrock55]

Yeah, what does 3 of #3 even mean? The ability to perform such an act?

I guess if a player catches the ball and just stands there? Technically they wouldn't have done 1 or 2 at that point. So they needed something to cover it.

[jsmith6919]

I guess if a player catches the ball and just stands there? Technically they wouldn't have done 1 or 2 at that point. So they needed something to cover it.

I'd think even if a player did that anyone with common sense would say he had control so the 1st rule should cover it

[Cowboysrock55]

I'd think even if a player did that anyone with common sense would say he had control so the 1st rule should cover it

You have to meet all 3 criteria. Control, 2 feet and then something out of the third category.

[jsmith6919]

You have to meet all 3 criteria. Control, 2 feet and then something out of the third category.

Yea, should have explained myself better. I'm saying having control and 2 feet or body part should be it. Having to make a football move still gives way too much leeway for ridiculous calls/reversals