Toulon
There were numerous calls this past season during televised coverage (that I observed) when even the so-called "expert" (former league official) in the booth predicted the outcome of the looming call wrongly. So the issue seems to be one of consistency more than anything else. What is deemed a "catch" in one game wasn't deemed a "catch" in another game, week to week, game to game, in those instances. With the benefit of instant replay no less.
If the league officials aren't on the same page... if the league officials have their own individual interpretations of what "is" or "isn't" a catch - then there is no real bonafide standard to go by. Without a definable standard, without clear-cut evidence that goes by a singular, definable standard - how on earth are they to officiate those calls without what appears to be no bias/prejudice?
The league certainly needs to address this. And it seems like there's enough of an uproar in the fanbase to, at the very least, warrant simplification of the definition of a "catch." Currently, there is no definable "standard" that the officials can refer to.
And it shouldn't matter if it's week 1 of the season or week 16, or the postseason playoff games.
Simplify the definition. If it ends up favoring the receiver - so be it. At least there is an enforceable standard. I personally believe that the standard has been much too strict on receivers. But for the love of God - define what is or isn't a "catch" so that the officials officiating these games don't need 10 minutes of replay to scrutinize every last nano-second of a potential bobble of the ball when a player is going to the ground. Definitively determine what "control" is, so it's not varied from one game to the next.
Did the ball hit the ground? Did the receiver maintain possession of the ball without the ball hitting the ground?
This shouldn't be that complicated, but the league has made it that complicated over the years.
Simplify it. Otherwise, completely do away with instant replay, because then the only purpose it serves is to extend games needlessly and create controversy, and it was originally designed to remove controversial calls. Correct?
Instant replay HAS NOT removed controversy. And if that's the case, if they can't get on the same page to define what is or isn't a catch - why have it?