HOUR | Cole has a MAJOR issue with what is and is not a catch, Upset Pick Standings, & HS playoffs at a catfish restaurant | WIRE 2 WIRE 11 9 26 HOUR 3

Cole Bryson (0:04)

Well, it's Overreaction Monday. The phone lines are open. The text line is open. And I have an Overreaction Diesel that I want to see if you agree on if it's an overreaction or if you side with me. I'd also like to hear from the Tolos on this. Of course, you can call in with your own overreactions to 844-FAN-FON, 844-3263-663.

But I think we will have different Tolos Diesel land on different sides of this. I think maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm in the boat by myself. But the Miami Notre Dame game, by the way, Saturday night was a pretty good game, right? Yeah, pretty good game.

Diesel (0:41)

It looked like it was going to be a stinker.

Cole Bryson (0:43)

It did.

Diesel (0:43)

And then it turned out to be great.

Cole Bryson (0:44)

Miami came back, right? Miami came back. So here's my overreaction. By the way, I have been called a lot of bad names and words on Twitter over the weekend.

But I tweeted out, and I'm going to read you the tweet and then I'll explain what I mean. I think this is just the dumbest thing in the world. Here's the tweet. The tweet reads, The worst rule in football is having to complete the process of a catch after breaking the plane of the end zone or getting a foot down in the end zone. I understand having to complete the process of a catch in the field of play, but in the end zone, the rule should be different in my opinion. Well, a lot of people, Notre Dame fans had issue with that tweet. I don't know how they found my tweet, but I got caught a lot of bad words and a Miami fan as well several times. Let me explain.

The catch in the end zone by the Miami receiver on Saturday night should have in my opinion been ruled a touchdown. I'll tell you why.

If a runner, a quarterback or a wide receiver, Diesel possesses the football and they are running towards the end zone, and they are being tackled from behind, and they reach the ball out over the goal line, and that ball crosses the goal line, guess what? That plays over. It is a touchdown. Immediately, if a runner is running out of bounds and crosses the ball over the corner of the pylon, guess what? The play is over. It's a touchdown. But the rule is different for somebody who catches the football in the end zone. So, the receiver has to catch the football, get one foot down, and then after that, maintain the process of a catch all the way to Israel or the ground, wherever they decide to go, instead of, hey, what I think the rule should be, Diesel, when somebody catches the football, bam, in their chest, in their arms, and they get one foot down, I think immediately, right then and there, the play is over. It's done. It's a touchdown. Who cares what happens when the receiver runs to the ground or falls or goes the marching band? I think it's the dumbest rule is an overreaction.

Diesel (3:01)

Well, I'm going to argue two different points here, Cole. I think you're flat out wrong. Number one point, a catch or a photograph of a catch can tell you literally anything you want it to tell you. I mean, in a split second, you can find the exact frame that makes it look like a catch. You could go to the very next frame where clearly the ball is moving and it tells a completely different story.

There's a reason why video is used, not photographs, to determine these things.

You can find any piece of information that tells you that that was a catch, because we've all seen the video, we've all seen the photos. I tried to put one up here on the stream, but congratulations, they are thanks to the source, they put it in a weird format, we can't use it.

We've seen it, the player goes up and grabs it, he's got two hands on the ball, he's got two feet in bounds, it looks like a catch. Well, a split second later, the defender has hand on the ball and he knocks it loose. I think to push your conversation further or turn it around, I think the rule of the ball crossing the end zone should be changed to fit the reception rule. Think about this for a second, you got any player making his way to the goal line, stretches the ball out, a millimeter of the ball crosses the goal line to the point, boom, that's a touchdown. And then while he's still in the air, no part of his body is touching the ground, somebody comes in and knocks the ball out of his hand. Why is that a touchdown? You didn't maintain possession through the goal line. To me, it doesn't mean that you need to get across the goal line. It just means you need to maintain possession to the ground. You got the ball across the goal line, fantastic. But if the ball is slapped out of your hand in the process of getting it there, that's a fumble.