The NFL's Official Change to What Is A Catch: Dez Bryant play rule rewritten *merge*

[KJJ]

Well, it's not as if there is anything else going on in the NFL to talk about.

I'm sure this thread will die down once Training Camp starts.

I thought once training camp started this thread would die. Usually by camp everyone is onto the next season. This is at least the 10th thread we've seen on this topic and it turned out to be the longest one. I didn't even have the staying power for this one.

 

[KJJ]

I contributed to everyone of the threads on this topic and it got to the point where we were rehashing the same things over and over. Every thread was a repeat of what we discussed in the previous thread. I'll promise you whatever anyone's opinion of the play was back in January hasn't changed. This thread started on July 23rd and you still had a few claiming the ball never came loose or touched the ground. If you have FANS who can't even concede that you're wasting your time.

 

[blindzebra]

Typical of KJJ, there was plenty in this thread that never came to light earlier, in fact the topic started on a drastic change to the rule. Add to that the Blandino video and case book play 8.12 which is identical to the Dez play.
And something tells me KJJ did frequent this thread under the name of joeflr.

 

[BlindFaith]

Typical of KJJ, there was plenty in this thread that never came to light earlier, in fact the topic started on a drastic change to the rule. Add to that the Blandino video and case book play 8.12 which is identical to the Dez play.
And something tells me KJJ did frequent this thread under the name of joeflr.

Drastic change to the rule? lol

You just got your panties ruffled because the "drastic" rule change only clarified the point of the original rule. Anyway, you see it the way you see it. Kudos. Most objective viewers can see how it looked like a catch. We also see how and why it wasn't ruled as one.

You only see your side.

 

[blindzebra]

Drastic change to the rule? lol

You just got your panties ruffled because the "drastic" rule change only clarified the point of the original rule. Anyway, you see it the way you see it. Kudos. Most objective viewers can see how it looked like a catch. We also see how and why it wasn't ruled as one.

You only see your side.

How is removing move common to the game and adding upright long enough clarifying the rule? As for it not being a change, explain 8.12 where the A-C process is completed while going to the ground. Being upright long enough was never part of the rules until it was needed to justify overturning the catch in GB.

In this thread we have shown that a football move taking place after going to the ground begins was relevant in 2014. Blandino is on record saying as much, and the NFL's own Case Book says the same thing. I see facts. I understand how the rule was intended to be applied. That is objective and I'd be saying the same thing if it was Cobb or Nelson getting screwed over and not Dez. The fact is that after the DET game and the Part Bus report Blandino was in a bind and they misapplied replay twice in that game. Are you going to tell me the ball bouncing off the ground twice on the Cobb catch in the first half was correct too?

 

[Joefrl]

I contributed to everyone of the threads on this topic and it got to the point where we were rehashing the same things over and over. Every thread was a repeat of what we discussed in the previous thread. I'll promise you whatever anyone's opinion of the play was back in January hasn't changed. This thread started on July 23rd and you still had a few claiming the ball never came loose or touched the ground. If you have FANS who can't even concede that you're wasting your time.

Same conclusion I am coming to.

 

[Joefrl]

Typical of KJJ, there was plenty in this thread that never came to light earlier, in fact the topic started on a drastic change to the rule. Add to that the Blandino video and case book play 8.12 which is identical to the Dez play.
And something tells me KJJ did frequent this thread under the name of joeflr.

What good would that do? I don't see why you would even want to do that.

 

[Joefrl]

How is removing move common to the game and adding upright long enough clarifying the rule? As for it not being a change, explain 8.12 where the A-C process is completed while going to the ground. Being upright long enough was never part of the rules until it was needed to justify overturning the catch in GB.

In this thread we have shown that a football move taking place after going to the ground begins was relevant in 2014. Blandino is on record saying as much, and the NFL's own Case Book says the same thing. I see facts. I understand how the rule was intended to be applied. That is objective and I'd be saying the same thing if it was Cobb or Nelson getting screwed over and not Dez. The fact is that after the DET game and the Part Bus report Blandino was in a bind and they misapplied replay twice in that game. Are you going to tell me the ball bouncing off the ground twice on the Cobb catch in the first half was correct too?

The example some one found of a football move being done after going to the ground begins was from 2012.
There is nothing in the 2013 or 2014 rules that support that.
Dez is not the only one that had that rule applied to them. There have been many, including Calvin Johnson twice!
Blandino has contradicted himself so may times, I wonder why you ignore his statements that are a contradiction to yours.........
I don't remember the Cobb play, so I don't know about that one.

I would love to discuss this years catches and noncatches....or anything else regarding the rules......Will there be a thread for that?

 

[Joefrl]

How is removing move common to the game and adding upright long enough clarifying the rule? As for it not being a change, explain 8.12 where the A-C process is completed while going to the ground. Being upright long enough was never part of the rules until it was needed to justify overturning the catch in GB.

In this thread we have shown that a football move taking place after going to the ground begins was relevant in 2014. Blandino is on record saying as much, and the NFL's own Case Book says the same thing. I see facts. I understand how the rule was intended to be applied. That is objective and I'd be saying the same thing if it was Cobb or Nelson getting screwed over and not Dez. The fact is that after the DET game and the Part Bus report Blandino was in a bind and they misapplied replay twice in that game. Are you going to tell me the ball bouncing off the ground twice
on the Cobb catch in the first half was correct too?

8.12 regards an incomplete interception attempt. I think you are still looking at old rules?

 

[blindzebra]

It is a case book play from the case book that still applied to the 2014 rules. I can't answer why a new case book was not put out or why this case play was not put in the examples in 2013/2014 rules books but it does not change the fact that it was still correct. There were no changes to the catch rules or points of emphasis in 2013/2014 to refute it's relevance, and Blandino's comments in 2013 and 2014 support the fact that the A-C process can be completed after going to the ground has started.

 

[DogFace]

There's a pass, there's control in midair, There's a receiver going to the ground, never stopping his fall, there's a recever dropping the upon hitting the ground. Again, identical to the example except for which body part hit first which does not matter. Open your eyes.

Previous post he explains it again for you. I'm still waiting on the answers to my questions. Or are your true colors being shown. You telling me you really don't believe the crap you're saying.

 

[DogFace]

8.12 regards an incomplete interception attempt. I think you are still looking at old rules?

Just, at least, give me your definition for bracing and why and how it supercedes the given definitions that I provided you. Hard being wrong I would imagine.

I mean think about that. You actually make up meanings to words to fit your narrative.

 

[Joefrl]

Just, at least, give me your definition for bracing and why and how it supercedes the given definitions that I provided you. Hard being wrong I would imagine.

I mean think about that. You actually make up meanings to words to fit your narrative.

I will gladly answer any question you have, sorry if I missed one.

Webster's Dictionary:
Brace - 5 :to put or plant firmly.

Nothing firm done on the Dez play......

 

[Joefrl]

It is a case book play from the case book that still applied to the 2014 rules. I can't answer why a new case book was not put out or why this case play was not put in the examples in 2013/2014 rules books but it does not change the fact that it was still correct. There were no changes to the catch rules or points of emphasis in 2013/2014 to refute it's relevance, and Blandino's comments in 2013 and 2014 support the fact that the A-C process can be completed after going to the ground has started.

There are 2 possibilities:
#1) A-C process must be completed before going to the ground, as I say.
#2) A-C pricess can be completed after going to the ground, as you say.

Agree so far?

One of those 2 have to be the case 100% of the time.

Agree? I don't know how anyone can disagree so far..........

I have shown you 2 different rules, and an example that support #1 above: 8-3-item 1, 8-3 item 2, & A.R. 8.9.

Conclusion: #1 must be the case 100% of the time.

 

[blindzebra]

There are 2 possibilities:
#1) A-C process must be completed before going to the ground, as I say.
#2) A-C pricess can be completed after going to the ground, as you say.

Agree so far?

One of those 2 have to be the case 100% of the time.

Agree? I don't know how anyone can disagree so far..........

I have shown you 2 different rules, and an example that support #1 above: 8-3-item 1, 8-3 item 2, & A.R. 8.9.

Conclusion: #1 must be the case 100% of the time.

Are you really that dense?

#2 is correct. Every post you have made had nothing, I REPEAT NOTHING, to do with them being complete before going to the ground. What you posted are plays where one or more parts of A-C was missing when THEY HIT THE GROUND. The only thing that was 100% in the catch rule is parts A-C must be met, and if one is missing when a player hits the ground control must be maintained.

 

[Joefrl]

Are you really that dense?

#2 is correct. Every post you have made had nothing, I REPEAT NOTHING, to do with them being complete before going to the ground. What you posted are plays where one or more parts of A-C was missing when THEY HIT THE GROUND. The only thing that was 100% in the catch rule is parts A-C must be met, and if one is missing when a player hits the ground control must be maintained.

Read them again, they all go from control and 2 feet down, right to must maintain possession when hitting the ground. They don't allow for the possibility for a football move while going to the ground.
Like item 2......control the ball with 2 feet inbounds, falling out of bounds, must maintain possession when hitting the ground. It does not allow for a football move while falling. It's as clear as 3 strikes and your out, but you would probably dispute that two.

 

[blindzebra]

Read them again, they all go from control and 2 feet down, right to must maintain possession when hitting the ground. They don't allow for the possibility for a football move while going to the ground.
Like item 2......control the ball with 2 feet inbounds, falling out of bounds, must maintain possession when hitting the ground. It does not allow for a football move while falling. It's as clear as 3 strikes and your out, but you would probably dispute that two.

Lies.

 

[nathanlt]

I will gladly answer any question you have, sorry if I missed one.

Webster's Dictionary:
Brace - 5 :to put or plant firmly.

Nothing firm done on the Dez play......

He firmly held onto the ball long enough to pitch it, and ward off a defender.

 

[Joefrl]

He firmly held onto the ball long enough to pitch it, and ward off a defender.

Those things have to be done before he starts going to the ground. Otherwise, what is the point in having them in the rulebook?

 

[BlindFaith]

He firmly held onto the ball long enough to pitch it, and ward off a defender.

Falling is falling. That's what you guys don't get. Football move has ALWAYS been intended to mean that the player is not falling. That the player can cut, run, progress be in control. NOT FALLING.

You can do many cool and athletic things while falling. Dez was able to do things while falling that many cant. Could of he pitched the ball? Probably. Can someone tackle someone while falling? Sure. Can you stumble and reach and flip over while falling? Yes. But you are still FALLING.

It is clear as day, to me anyway, that in the second that the play took, Dez was falling to the ground after the ball touched his hands. Since he is going to the ground it doesn't matter what else he can or can not do with the ball. He has to maintain control through the act of contacting the ground.