Fitz catch vs. Dez non-catch

[Kevinicus]

I have no idea why you think this. The reach occurred after Dez started going to the ground. He was still in the process of completing the pass when he started going to the ground so he has to hold onto the ball all the way throughout. Do you think he can satisfy this aspect of the requirements for a completed pass after the point at which his process of going to the ground has started? It seems that you must, but I'm asking for clarification because I can't imagine any other way that the reach is even relevant.

Yes, the process could be completed at any point up until the player actually hit the ground (2014 rules).

 

[Hoofbite]

More BS.

The Johnson Rule is in the End Zone where the 3 part process can't be completed by a football move because there isn't one to be made. The same occurs on the sideline where a receiver is not going to become a runner.

The rule didn't explicitly require a football move. While a move would satisfy that requirement, a move was not necessary. The only thing that was necessary was enough time afforded to have made such a move if the player wanted to.

While a move wouldn't be necessary in the endzone, the time required to have made a move didn't exist in the event that it would have been necessary.

 

[percyhoward]

His very first explanation confused many at the time and he's trying to add more clarity to it..

He's trying to whitewash it. Here's the entire transcript of his comments on the Dez play from last night's interview, for those interested.

"Dez didn't get control until he brought it down towards his shoulder. He went directly to the ground, there was no turn. It was one step, down to the ground, and that's why that was overturned to an incomplete pass."

That's the whole thing. He said nothing about the catch process, and treated the play as if it had been officiated under the new rule.

The part about there being "no turn" is hilarious, since Dez obviously turned to his left, otherwise he'd have been running sideways. Fitzgerald turned 180 degrees and Dez only turned 90, but that's only because of their body positions when they caught it. Fitzgerald had his back to the goal line, Dez had his back to the sideline. And there's nothing in the 2014 rule about having to turn anyway.

The "one step down to the ground" is not only a wildly inaccurate description of the play, it's also a complete contradiction of what he had said a year ago.

"t doesn’t matter how many steps he takes,’’ Blandino told the Dallas Morning News. “He has to maintain control of the football throughout the action and contact with the ground. If he goes to the ground and the ball comes loose, it’s an incomplete pass."

 

[percyhoward]

Do you think he can satisfy this aspect of the requirements for a completed pass after the point at which his process of going to the ground has started?

The question is, in 2014, what have you read or heard that makes you think he couldn't?

 

[Junglist]

Does this thread really need 24 pages? Smh

 

[percyhoward]

So being a runner implies the receiver has full possession of the ball. But having possession of the ball isn't dependent upon him being a runner. Obviously, since the receiver can catch the ball and just stand there for five minutes.

"Runner" doesn't necessarily mean his feet have to be moving, it just means he's completed the 3-part catch process. Having possession of the ball is dependent on his being a runner. Even if he just stands there, as long as he's completed the catch process (control, two feet, enough time for a football move), he has become a runner. Dez was a runner.

 

[dallasdave]

Does this thread really need 24 pages? Smh

 

[percyhoward]

Yes, the process could be completed at any point up until the player actually hit the ground (2014 rules).

Imagine a replay official trying to determine the point at which a player began to fall toward the ground.

 

[blindzebra]

The rule didn't explicitly require a football move. While a move would satisfy that requirement, a move was not necessary. The only thing that was necessary was enough time afforded to have made such a move if the player wanted to.

While a move wouldn't be necessary in the endzone, the time required to have made a move didn't exist in the event that it would have been necessary.

Oh, brother...

Going OOB or being in the endzone means that the 3 part process can't be completed to make going to the ground moot so it requires control to the ground. Unless you are envisioning a player on tippy-toe for 5 or 10 seconds on the side or in the endzone before they finish falling. The point being made was Blandino was saying and KJJ was wrongly repeating that Dez and the CJ rule were the same thing, they weren't. Under 2014 rules a player could finish the 3 step process after the going to the ground started and since a play in the endzone won't complete part 3 the Johnson rule has no reason to be brought up.

 

[Hoofbite]

Yes, the process could be completed at any point up until the player actually hit the ground (2014 rules).

I don't believe that is the case, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find it in the rulebook. From 2014:

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass.

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds: ​

a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.). ​

Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so. ​

Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch. ​

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete. ​

The "act of catching a pass" is fulfilling a), b), and c). As c) must come after a) and b), a player who goes to the ground at any point in the act prior to having fulfilled c) is required to maintain possession throughout the process of contacting the ground. There is no mention of being able to satisfy the requirements of c) AFTER a player has been determined to be going to the ground. You're either in the process or you are not. If you are, then you need to maintain complete control. The rule cannot apply to a play and be negated after it's application.

I still think you have it backwards. The 3 prerequisites supersede the rule, not the other way around. Once those 3 prerequisites are met, the rule wasn't to be applied.

Once the 3 prerequisites are met, the rule cannot be applied to a player who goes to the ground. It's only applicable to players who are going to the ground prior to meeting all these requirements. Additionally, once the rule is applied it makes not one bit of difference as to whether or not a player had complete control prior to going down or whether or not the time for a football move was afforded to him. The only thing that matters in determining if the pass in complete is whether or not the player secures possession without the ball hitting the ground in the process.

 

[Hoofbite]

Imagine a replay official trying to determine the point at which a player began to fall toward the ground.

Yeah, it would create quite a mess, wouldn't it?

 

[blindzebra]

I don't believe that is the case, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find it in the rulebook. From 2014:

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass.

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds: ​

a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.). ​

Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so. ​

Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch. ​

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete. ​

The "act of catching a pass" is fulfilling a), b), and c). As c) must come after a) and b), a player who goes to the ground at any point in the act prior to having fulfilled c) is required to maintain possession throughout the process of contacting the ground. There is no mention of being able to satisfy the requirements of c) AFTER a player has been determined to be going to the ground. You're either in the process or you are not. If you are, then you need to maintain complete control. The rule cannot apply to a play and be negated after it's application.



Once the 3 prerequisites are met, the rule cannot be applied to a player who goes to the ground. It's only applicable to players who are going to the ground prior to meeting all these requirements. Additionally, once the rule is applied it makes not one bit of difference as to whether or not a player had complete control prior to going down or whether or not the time for a football move was afforded to him. The only thing that matters in determining if the pass in complete is whether or not the player secures possession without the ball hitting the ground in the process.

I have posted the casebook play that was applicable in 2014, it 100% shows that the 3 step process continues while going to the ground which ends when the 3 step process is complete.

A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS
First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out.
Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.

 

[Hoofbite]

Oh, brother...

Going OOB or being in the endzone means that the 3 part process can't be completed to make going to the ground moot so it requires control to the ground. Unless you are envisioning a player on tippy-toe for 5 or 10 seconds on the side or in the endzone before they finish falling. The point being made was Blandino was saying and KJJ was wrongly repeating that Dez and the CJ rule were the same thing, they weren't.

Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Under 2014 rules a player could finish the 3 step process after the going to the ground started

Go ahead and find the exception in the rule that states that.

and since a play in the endzone won't complete part 3 the Johnson rule has no reason to be brought up.

Any time a player is tackled before having been afforded the time to make a football move part 3 goes unfulfilled. A diving player will never fulfill part 3 unless he actually able to get up off the ground.

Part 3 is not necessary when the rule is applied and going to the ground is applicable anywhere on the field. The TE for the Bengals lost a TD even though he broke the plane of the endzone on his way to the ground, which by definition is the exact same as standing in the endzone.

 

[Hoofbite]

I have posted the casebook play that was applicable in 2014, it 100% shows that the 3 step process continues while going to the ground which ends when the 3 step process is complete.

A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS
First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out.
Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.

All this does is highlight the subjectivity of the rule, which is the biggest inherent flaw.

It's a touchdown only because it was ruled that his going to the ground was a result of a football move and therefore occurred after he had fulfilled the requirements of completing a catch. Had the ruling been that his going to the ground was a result of the contact, it's incomplete.

Such a play happening live could be ruled either way and each ruling could be justified by the rule because there is absolutely no standard measuring stick when dealing with subjectivity.

 

[Hoofbite]

The question is, in 2014, what have you read or heard that makes you think he couldn't?

Other than the written rule? Other than the application on the field.

What are you looking at?

 

[blindzebra]

All this does is highlight the subjectivity of the rule, which is the biggest inherent flaw.

It's a touchdown only because it was ruled that his going to the ground was a result of a football move and therefore occurred after he had fulfilled the requirements of completing a catch. Had the ruling been that his going to the ground was a result of the contact, it's incomplete.

Such a play happening live could be ruled either way and each ruling could be justified by the rule because there is absolutely no standard measuring stick when dealing with subjectivity.

That is completely wrong. It clearly states he completed step 1 control, got one foot down and was contacted and THE RESULT OF THAT CONTACT CAUSED HIM TO GO TO THE GROUND. He was not a runner when contacted he completed step 2 with a second step and then a football move with the lunge.

The caseplay is clear and nearly identical to what happened in GB, and it proves without any doubt that they got it wrong.

 

[percyhoward]

What are you looking at?

Watch this (from 2013), and note that you will never hear anything along the lines of "He's making a football move here, but it doesn't matter because he's already started falling." It's always either, "he didn't complete the process of the catch," or "he completed the process, now he's a runner." Falling or upright, doesn't matter.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...00000246515/Calvin-Johnson-rule-strikes-again

Then watch this (January 2015). It's Blandino's interview after the game. At 1:15, he says they "absolutely" looked for a football move and they decided that it wasn't obvious enough, and that Dez needed to "reach with both hands" or "extend the ball for the goal line." If the rule had been that a football move couldn't be made while falling, then that's all that Blandino would have needed to say. He wouldn't have wasted his time looking for a football move that didn't matter.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-gameday/0ap3000000457053/Dean-Blandino-on-Dez-Bryant-call

If you're still not convinced, here's Perreira echoing what Blandino said. Perreira said nothing about the fall negating the catch process, and specifically noted that the catch process was not completed because of the nature of the reach (which obviously happened while Bryant was falling).

"If you're going to the ground, you have to prove that you have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game and do so," said Pereira. "And part of that is stretching all the way out and to me even though he moved the ball a little bit forward, they are not going to consider that a football act."

http://www.businessinsider.com/mike-pereira-dez-bryant-reversal-2015-1

Why doesn't he just say Dez's fall superseded the catch process? Because it clearly didn't.

 

[Kevinicus]

Imagine a replay official trying to determine the point at which a player began to fall toward the ground.

Don't give them ideas.

 

[Kevinicus]

I don't believe that is the case, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find it in the rulebook. From 2014:

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass.

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds: ​

a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.). ​

Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so. ​

Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch. ​

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete. ​

The "act of catching a pass" is fulfilling a), b), and c). As c) must come after a) and b), a player who goes to the ground at any point in the act prior to having fulfilled c) is required to maintain possession throughout the process of contacting the ground. There is no mention of being able to satisfy the requirements of c) AFTER a player has been determined to be going to the ground. You're either in the process or you are not. If you are, then you need to maintain complete control. The rule cannot apply to a play and be negated after it's application.



Once the 3 prerequisites are met, the rule cannot be applied to a player who goes to the ground. It's only applicable to players who are going to the ground prior to meeting all these requirements. Additionally, once the rule is applied it makes not one bit of difference as to whether or not a player had complete control prior to going down or whether or not the time for a football move was afforded to him. The only thing that matters in determining if the pass in complete is whether or not the player secures possession without the ball hitting the ground in the process.

Until a player contacted the ground they had not gone to the ground and the 3 requisites would have completed the process.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

Does this thread really need 24 pages? Smh

and some folks think this is an open shut case lol

its not. call on field should have stood regardless.

but yeh it actually needs 124 pages. that should do it.