I do not see any difference between that play and the Dez play in 2014 *merged*

[blindzebra]

Shouldn't be a shock. The whole point of changing the rule should be so that when it is applied to the Calvin/Dez/James non-catches, they would be considered catches under the new guidelines. If not, then they failed.

Dez's play was a catch under the pre-2015 rule, when it was control, two feet down in bounds and a football move. There was nothing wrong with the rule, until Blandino forced a rule that should only be used in the end zone or side line, onto the field of play. Regardless of what some will try to tell you, in 2014 a football move ended going to the ground. In 2015 football move was CHANGED to upright long enough to make the Dez play incomplete by rule. Instead of admitting the mistake the NFL changed the rules to make it the correct call.

 

[Aviano90]

Can we make it a rule for Dez to wrap the ball up on 4th down? At least a team rule, and throw in keep your pinky in bounds too!

 

[Doomsay]

It did result in an immediate rule change the following season. Too little too late for the Cowboys.

The point.

 

[MarcusRock]

That’s probably because this is your first go around in those Dez threads. At east the first time I’ve seen you take part in them. I’m tired of them. Percy never tires of them, he has a ton of notes put away from past Dez threads that he pastes onto posts so he can keep those threads going. Instead of always repeating himself he just copies and pastes previous posts he’s made.

Well if half the information in those copy and paste posts were accurate and not made up suppositions, maybe the debates would be shorter, lol. I like mine succinct but I can do the long game too obviously. It is my first go round here on these boards. The old DC boards threw a hissy fit for a little while and then it waned without resurrection from what I remember so I'm not sure it would have come up again from the Ertz catch in the SB if those boards were still going.

 

[KJJ]

Well if half the information in those copy and paste posts were accurate and not made up suppositions, maybe the debates would be shorter, lol. I like mine succinct but I can do the long game too obviously. It is my first go round here on these boards. The old DC boards threw a hissy fit for a little while and then it waned without resurrection from what I remember so I'm not sure it would have come up again from the Ertz catch in the SB if those boards were still going.

Noticed they moved the Dez thread to the drama zone. That should’ve happened at least 80 pages ago. As long as Percy has someone to argue with those threads never die. In the previous threads I’ve pretty much been the only one on the opposing side that agreed with the ruling and once I finally got tired and moved on the threads would die. Every time there’s a play that everyone sees the same as the Dez catch that’s ruled a catch, it will result in another lengthy thread with the usual suspects led by Percy and his folder of copied material ready to be pasted.

 

[Soth]

Yeah they didn't change much when it happened to us. Go figure. Yet there is no injustice towards the Cowboys ever according to some on here.

I don't know how some posters here can claim no bias against Dallas. When this happened to us the league doubled down on their decision and their rule. They claimed to have "clarified" the rule, but nobody admitted the rule was an issue. Then when this happens to the steelers, you see Roger Goodell stating that the catch rule bothers him. Really? It didn't bother him when it affected Detroit or Dallas, but now that the steelers get eliminated and its a problem?

The giants kicker is accused of domestic violence and gets 2 games, then the same happens to Zeke and he gets 6? How can anyone explain this BS?

If this thing about Jerry being fined millions is true, then I really don't know how people can claim there is no bias. How in the world is the league justified in asking Jerry to pay a fine for the Goodell extension thing?

At the end of the day, a few owners and Goodell rule the NFL and they clearly have an issue with the cowboys. They can do whatever they want and the rules don't matter.

 

[Beast_from_East]

so when it messed up the steelers its time to change the rule again

As soon as the Steelers were robbed, the rule has to be changed

Of course, why am I not surprised

 

[DogFace]

I have answered that question. MANY times. I believe Item 1 applies to a receiver that is going to the ground and has no ability to prevent that from happening whether he is contacted or not. And there is nothing in either the rule book or the case book that says differently. Just because you disagree with my viewpoint doesn't mean I haven't answered it. As I've said, at the end of the day it amounts to you and I seeing this differently, but that doesn't mean both sides haven't provided an answer to the question.

No. Sorry I wasn’t clear. This is Percy’s question and I think a very good one.

Why would Blandino say he was looking for a football move on Dez’s way to the ground if that possible move did not matter because he was going to the ground and as your side says, going to the ground trumps the 3 part process.

Why wouldn’t he just say “no I didn’t look for a move because he was going to the ground”?

 

[BlindFaith]

No. Sorry I wasn’t clear. This is Percy’s question and I think a very good one.

Why would Blandino say he was looking for a football move on Dez’s way to the ground if that possible move did not matter because he was going to the ground and as your side says, going to the ground trumps the 3 part process.

Why wouldn’t he just say “no I didn’t look for a move because he was going to the ground”?

It's been answered over and over and over and over and over and over again. All you need to do is read.

 

[DogFace]

It's been answered over and over and over and over and over and over again. All you need to do is read.

Thanks. I wanted his answer. Yours was basically he made a mistake the first time he spoke. Yet, several other examples were shown of him saying the same thing.



The ability to regain balance. Is that what you added to make the case play that you said was wrong at first fit the narrative?

 

[OmerV]

No. Sorry I wasn’t clear. This is Percy’s question and I think a very good one.

Why would Blandino say he was looking for a football move on Dez’s way to the ground if that possible move did not matter because he was going to the ground and as your side says, going to the ground trumps the 3 part process.

Why wouldn’t he just say “no I didn’t look for a move because he was going to the ground”?

I've answered that too. You guys are treating it as if Blandino said that Dez was going to the ground with no ability to regain his balance, but even then he was looking for a football move. That's not accurate. Blandino was asked if he looked for a football move that could have established Dez as a runner, and he said he looked at that aspect and rejected it. He didn't say he looked for it after already determining Dez was going to the ground.

Also, I find it interesting that you guys have steadfastly ignored that in the same interview Blandino specifically said Dez was going to the ground, and as such had to maintain control all the way through the play, and he also said that reaching for the goal line was all in the process of Dez's momentum carrying him to the ground, and therefore was determined to be a player going to the ground.

Bottome line, it seems obvious to me that Blandino was only saying he was open to looking for something that would establish Dez as a runner rather than as a receiver going to the ground, and there was nothing there.

 

[DogFace]

I've answered that too. You guys are treating it as if Blandino said that Dez was going to the ground with no ability to regain his balance, but even then he was looking for a football move. That's not accurate. Blandino was asked if he looked for a football move that could have established Dez as a runner, and he said he looked at that aspect and rejected it. He didn't say he looked for it after already determining Dez was going to the ground.

Also, I find it interesting that you guys have steadfastly ignored that in the same interview Blandino specifically said Dez was going to the ground, and as such had to maintain control all the way through the play, and he also said that reaching for the goal line was all in the process of Dez's momentum carrying him to the ground, and therefore was determined to be a player going to the ground.

Bottome line, it seems obvious to me that Blandino was only saying he was open to looking for something that would establish Dez as a runner rather than as a receiver going to the ground, and there was nothing there.

So when he said he looked at the reach, the reach(the one he said was not enough of a football move)when he was perpendicular and a foot off the ground he hadn’t determined he was going to the ground yet?

He said he was going to the ground and had to maintain because he misapplied the rule. His looking for the football move after the fall was obviousy taking him to the ground shows that he could complete the process on the way to the ground.

The rule nor the caseplay nor Blandino ever said the catch process couldn’t be completed on the way to the ground. Examples were provided by Percy to the contrary. Where other plays were ruled correctly and he specifically said he didn’t have to maintain control because he’d already established himself as a runner.

Again, why wouldn’t he say he wasn’t open to something that would make Dez a runner because Dez was going to the ground so he could never become a runner.

People make mistakes. He did. He lost his job and I believe this was part of why.

 

[OmerV]

So when he said he looked at the reach, the reach(the one he said was not enough of a football move)when he was perpendicular and a foot off the ground he hadn’t determined he was going to the ground yet?

He said he was going to the ground and had to maintain because he misapplied the rule. His looking for the football move after the fall was obviousy taking him to the ground shows that he could complete the process on the way to the ground.

The rule nor the caseplay nor Blandino ever said the catch process couldn’t be completed on the way to the ground. Examples were provided by Percy to the contrary. Where other plays were ruled correctly and he specifically said he didn’t have to maintain control because he’d already established himself as a runner.

Again, why wouldn’t he say he wasn’t open to something that would make Dez a runner because Dez was going to the ground so he could never become a runner.

People make mistakes. He did. He lost his job and I believe this was part of why.

Again, it's interesting that you completely ignore everything else Blandino said in the same interview.

What I'm saying is Blandino determined that the reach wasn't sufficient to change his mind that Dez was going to the ground the whole way. He didn't say Dez was a runner going to the ground and then was still looking for a football move, he was merely saying that he considered all aspects of the play for something that would change his mind that Dez was going to the ground the whole way. The rest of his comments that you refuse to acknowledge also support this. And he didn't misapply the rule - Item one is consistent with his comments, and Blandino said the way the play was called was consistent with how the play has been ruled in the past.

 

[MarcusRock]

*** READ THIS! ***

We are trying our best to leave this thread open. What we are now doing is removing people (and their posts) who post insults and personal attacks from this thread as that usually means they no longer have a legitimate comment or response to the discussion.

Once you are removed from a thread, you do not regain access to it! So keep that in mind when you post.

So with the Admins monitoring of this thread, can y'all take a vote as to whether y'all think Dez caught it per the rules or not based on what was presented here? Or does all the text just look like the characters and symbols in the Matrix to all of you?

 

[glimmerman]

It’s beem long enough since we got screwed so they can change it now.

 

[MarcusRock]

Noticed they moved the Dez thread to the drama zone. That should’ve happened at least 80 pages ago. As long as Percy has someone to argue with those threads never die. In the previous threads I’ve pretty much been the only one on the opposing side that agreed with the ruling and once I finally got tired and moved on the threads would die. Every time there’s a play that everyone sees the same as the Dez catch that’s ruled a catch, it will result in another lengthy thread with the usual suspects led by Percy and his folder of copied material ready to be pasted.

Too bad all that "material" was properly shut down this time. Next time one of those threads pops up, just deploy the bat signal, lol.

 

[Idgit]

So with the Admins monitoring of this thread, can y'all take a vote as to whether y'all think Dez caught per the rules or not based on what was presented here? Or does all the text just look like the characters and symbols in the Matrix to all of you?

Dez caught it.

 

[MarcusRock]

Again, it's interesting that you completely ignore everything else Blandino said in the same interview.

What I'm saying is Blandino determined that the reach wasn't sufficient to change his mind that Dez was going to the ground the whole way. He didn't say Dez was a runner going to the ground and then was still looking for a football move, he was merely saying that he considered all aspects of the play for something that would change his mind that Dez was going to the ground the whole way. The rest of his comments that you refuse to acknowledge also support this. And he didn't misapply the rule - Item one is consistent with his comments, and Blandino said the way the play was called was consistent with how the play has been ruled in the past.

So did Pereira. When you know the rule, it's actually not that difficult. This is why I don't think it should be changed because it's "hard to understand." Make fans pick up a rulebook, read and apply logic, lol.

 

[OmerV]

So did Pereira. When you know the rule, it's actually not that difficult. This is why I don't think it should be changed because it's "hard to understand." Make fans pick up a rulebook, read and apply logic, lol.

I think one of the main keys is understanding that Item 1 is not subordinate to the 3 step process, but rather is an exception to it that applies a different standard for a player who is "going to the ground". To me the only thing the refs had to determine was whether Dez was going to the ground regardless of whether he was contacted or not by a defender, and I believe it's pretty clear he was.

 

[foofighters]

I didn't watch a second of the playoffs or the SB.

Watching football is a pleasant pastime. Turns out it isn't that hard to turn people away from a "pleasant pastime". There are lots of them available these days, so why go with one that gives you reasons not to?

That’s where I am at too!