Video: Tony Romo Said That Was a Catch; I Agree

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,843
Reaction score
16,032
Why do this to yourselves?

Really, really wanting it to be so still doesn't make it so. Just grasp the ball and go down and we're in business. Can't blame Dez for trying to score but the rule was what it was. At least it can never happen like that again. Beasley was there in the flat for what it's worth.
 

America's Cowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
32,803
Reaction score
46,301
Why do this to yourselves?

Really, really wanting it to be so still doesn't make it so. Just grasp the ball and go down and we're in business. Can't blame Dez for trying to score but the rule was what it was. At least it can never happen like that again. Beasley was there in the flat for what it's worth.
What was the rule at the time? It's a catch IF you grab the ball while controlled and take at least 2 steps to prove you made a move with the ball in hand? Dez did that. The officials on the field initially called it a catch, but the crooked officials in New York (part of the camera review) overruled it and called it not a catch. Almost 3 years later, the NFL's Review Board wholeheartedly agreed that it was a catch and should have been ruled a catch.
 

DandyDon52

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,215
Reaction score
15,287
yeah but cowboys still would have lost as GB would have scored last to win the game, so catch or not makes no difference in outcome of game.
however, the call on field should have stood.

If they have to look at for 2 min or longer and in slow mo etc to tell, the call on the field should just stand.

I still see calls, where I think yeah it is a catch, and then they say no it isnt lol, and I say it wasnt a catch, and they then say it was !
Same thing for fumbles, they tend to micro mange the calls with all the replays and slow mo, and still cant get it right if it was close either way.

It could be that the dallas GB game in 14, had to do with the over under, and if dallas scores there vegas loses a ton of money, so they rule no catch,
and then GB runs out clock, with no more scoring, making vegas very happy !
 

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,786
Reaction score
11,698
What was the rule at the time? It's a catch IF you grab the ball while controlled and take at least 2 steps to prove you made a move with the ball in hand? Dez did that. The officials on the field initially called it a catch, but the crooked officials in New York (part of the camera review) overruled it and called it not a catch. Almost 3 years later, the NFL's Review Board wholeheartedly agreed that it was a catch and should have been ruled a catch.

The reason it wasn’t called catch is the original rule stated that if you’re falling down during the act of securing a catch, you then must maintain possession through hitting the ground.

Dez caught the ball and started lunging toward the end zone, and the refs interpreted that as going to the ground even though it took a few steps to get there as he was no longer upright. The ball then hit the ground as he went down and popped out of his hand.

What the board did 3 years later was lessen that part of the rule. So they thought it should be a catch moving forward, but it wasn’t viewed as a catch in the old rule. The refs weren’t crooked, the rule book was flawed for not allowing ref interpretation of what Dez was attempting (controlled fall vs loss of balance).
 
Last edited:

America's Cowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
32,803
Reaction score
46,301
The reason it wasn’t called catch is the original rule stated that if you’re falling down during the act of securing a catch, you then must maintain possession through hitting the ground.

Dez caught the ball and started lunging toward the end zone, and the refs interpreted that as going to the ground even though it took a few steps to get there as he was no longer upright. The ball then hit the ground as he went down and popped out of his hand.

What the board did 3 years later was lessen that part of the rule. So they thought it should be a catch moving forward, but it wasn’t viewed as a catch in the old rule. The refs weren’t crooked, the rule book was flawed for not foreseeing the specific thing Dez did.
No, not true. The committee determined it was a legit catch according to the rule in place at the time the game took place in 2014.

Afterwards is when they changed the rule, but not until after they ruled the officials got it wrong.
 

Hawkeye0202

Well-Known Member
Messages
23,017
Reaction score
42,502
What was the rule at the time? It's a catch IF you grab the ball while controlled and take at least 2 steps to prove you made a move with the ball in hand? Dez did that. The officials on the field initially called it a catch, but the crooked officials in New York (part of the camera review) overruled it and called it not a catch. Almost 3 years later, the NFL's Review Board wholeheartedly agreed that it was a catch and should have been ruled a catch.

I will always believe THAT call, cost us a trip to the big dance. That was our window...
 

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,786
Reaction score
11,698
No, not true. The committee determined it was a legit catch according to the rule in place at the time the game took place in 2014.

Afterwards is when they changed the rule, but not until after they ruled the officials got it wrong.

You may be misremembering:


https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...s-cowboys-dez-bryant-playoff-game-ruled-catch

The NFL competition committee has reached a "unanimous" agreement that some of the league's most debated catch controversies should be ruled complete in the future, according to committee member and New York Giants owner John Mara.

"I think where we are unanimous," Mara told ESPN on Tuesday, "[are] plays like the Dez Bryant play in Green Bay, going to the ground, [and] the Calvin Johnson play from a couple of years ago. I think all of us agree that those should be completions. So let's write the language to make them completions."


They wanted those to be catches “in the future”, but the language prevented them from being catches; so they changed the language. Ergo, the rule at the time said it wasn’t a catch. They never disputed what was called on the field in GB was in agreement with the written rule. They felt it needed a new rule to make it a catch.
 
Last edited:

DogFace

Carharris2
Messages
13,132
Reaction score
15,595
The rules at the time were:

1. Control
2. Two feet in bounds
3. “Time” to make a football

Once those 3 steps are complete he’s a runner.
Not only did he have time to, he actually made at least two football moves.
1. Switching the ball from two hands to one after he brought if you his shoulder.
2. And lunging
 

America's Cowboy

Well-Known Member
Messages
32,803
Reaction score
46,301
The rules at the time were:

1. Control
2. Two feet in bounds
3. “Time” to make a football

Once those 3 steps are complete he’s a runner.
Not only did he have time to, he actually made at least two football moves.
1. Switching the ball from two hands to one after he brought if you his shoulder.
2. And lunging
Correct! It definitely was a catch by Dez. Plus, the other rule where the ground can not cause a fumble should also have been in play since the defender had already touched Dez as Dez was lunging forward towards the goal line just after Dez had already established a catch, plus football move.

The officials robbed the Cowboys.
 

DuncanIso

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,454
Reaction score
6,000
Why do this to yourselves?

Really, really wanting it to be so still doesn't make it so. Just grasp the ball and go down and we're in business. Can't blame Dez for trying to score but the rule was what it was. At least it can never happen like that again. Beasley was there in the flat for what it's worth.

crooked Green Bay replay ref.

NFL already said it was a catch.
 

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,843
Reaction score
16,032
Correct! It definitely was a catch by Dez. Plus, the other rule where the ground can not cause a fumble should also have been in play since the defender had already touched Dez as Dez was lunging forward towards the goal line just after Dez had already established a catch, plus football move.

The officials robbed the Cowboys.

This is what I meant by "why do this to yourselves?" @Aerolithe_Lion shows you that the ruling was correct by the rules at the time and still people continue their misinformation campaigns because they really, really wanted it to be so. I'm convinced that politicians saw these message boards then and thought to themselves, "You know? I think we've got something here" and thus "the media reporting stuff we don't like is the problem" was born, lol.

As for the rules, everyone yapping about this being catch just doesn't know them or their application before they were changed. There was simply a yes/no determination when it came to "going to the ground." Once you had that tag slapped on you, you had to keep the ball off the ground and/or maintain complete possession after you contact the ground. "Surviving the ground" was the term used. Dez was ruled as "going to the ground" so that applied, period. You could not complete the "upright" process of a catch rule while going to the ground back then. The only thing per the rules that would allow you to get out of a "going to the ground" label then was to execute a proper lunge because doing that shows you're not going to the ground and are under control, which is why the rules used the phrase, "...gathers himself...". Dez intended to execute a lunge but his 3rd step on the ground slipped and he was unable to.

Here's the best explanation I found when I debated the world on this play several years ago. He also called the overturn on live TV before it was announced.

 
Last edited:

CowboyRoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
57,924
Reaction score
38,930
yeah but cowboys still would have lost as GB would have scored last to win the game, so catch or not makes no difference in outcome of game.
however, the call on field should have stood.

If they have to look at for 2 min or longer and in slow mo etc to tell, the call on the field should just stand.

I still see calls, where I think yeah it is a catch, and then they say no it isnt lol, and I say it wasnt a catch, and they then say it was !
Same thing for fumbles, they tend to micro mange the calls with all the replays and slow mo, and still cant get it right if it was close either way.

It could be that the dallas GB game in 14, had to do with the over under, and if dallas scores there vegas loses a ton of money, so they rule no catch,
and then GB runs out clock, with no more scoring, making vegas very happy !

Agreed. And the goons would have still blamed Romo.
 
Top