The NFL’s rules on what constitutes a catch continue to confuse.
Buccaneers cornerback Aqib Talib intercepted a pass from Texans quarterback Matt Schaub today, then started running it back and dropped it before jumping on his own fumble. At least, that’s what the ruling on the field was.
After the Texans challenged the call, the ruling was changed on replay to an incomplete pass -- the referee said Talib never had possession. Former NFL head of officiating Mike Pereira wrote on Twitter that it was the right call.
“Talib didn’t possess the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game, pitch or pass,” Pereira wrote. “ball came out right after his feet hit the ground, didn’t maintain control long enough.”
But as I look at the replay, I think Talib absolutely did have the ball long enough that he could have performed an act common to the game, like pitching it to a teammate. And the whole idea of instant replay is that the referee is only supposed to overturn an on-field call if he sees indisputable visual evidence that the call was wrong. That evidence didn’t exist on this play.
And so I continue to get the feeling that no matter how many times the NFL “clarifies” the rules on what constitutes a catch, there’s going to be no clarity. Except that a catch is whatever a referee says a catch is, even if his replay review provided him with no better view than the official on the field whose call he overturns.
