Whyjerry
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 16,181
- Reaction score
- 25,031
Will let you all know if he catches it this time.
About 9 minutes left in the 1st Quarter.
Probably the post of the day.
Will let you all know if he catches it this time.
About 9 minutes left in the 1st Quarter.
Will let you all know if he catches it this time.
About 9 minutes left in the 1st Quarter.
That defense was trash. I know a lot of people think we would have just rolled Seattle like we did earlier in the season, but that defense was very very bad. They really should have lost to Detroit too, if we want to be honest.
Straw that broke camels back for me after that game.
I'm still a fan, but my passion for it is nowhere near what it once was.
Maybe that's healthy
Nothing to do with fan glasses. I felt the same with the Pittsburgh non touchdown catch. And I live 25 minutes from Gillette Stadium.
What is not indisputable about the ball clearly hitting the ground and Dez losing grip of the ball? When replay catches what an on-field official missed, should it not be corrected? That's what replay is there for. Did the ball hit the ground and did Dez lose grip of the ball. Yes or no?
Oh Mah Gah! I hope they win this time!Will let you all know if he catches it this time.
About 9 minutes left in the 1st Quarter.
Ah... the memories.Crazy it's been 4+ years since that game. The no-catch pisses me off a little but even more so the Cobb trap catch. Regardless of the Dez call, I feel like GB would have marched down and scored a TD.
Dallas' defense has come a long way since that season...
Those 2015 playoffs stick out due to the domino effect of luck from Detroit/Dal to Dal/GB to GB/Sea to Sea/NE. Just teams losing in the most agonizing fashion.
It’s disputable that Dez Bryant made a football move. It’s easily disputable that having control of the ball in your hand and reaching for the goal line, is a football move. Actually it’s a football move that happens often in NFL games.
That’s why the rule was stupid. Because as written, in situations where the receiver was going to the ground, it forced them into a judgement call on what is/isn’t an act common to the game. However, replay isn’t supposed to be about judgment calls. It’s supposed to be about clear visual evidence. Black
And white.
However, the Dez Bryant play forced the ref into an impossible situation where he had to use his opinion to determine what happened. Thankfully they rewrote the rule to make it more clear.
As Pereira said in that video I posted, the football move point is moot when you're deemed as going to the ground. Jesse James did more than even Dez and Calvin Johnson did with his non-catch before he lost possession and still his was ruled incomplete as well. He crossed the goal line to boot. The going to the ground rule was one of the 5 or so "kick-in" subrules back then that when they occurred, they kick-in and take precedence OVER the main catch rule which is for a receiver deemed a runner, or upright. This is why Dez' 3 steps and a hand didn't didn't make him a runner. Dez was falling the whole way so he was deemed as going to the ground and those rules kick in which state to possess the ball through contact with the ground.
The clear visual replay evidence was that the ball hit the ground and Dez lost possession afterwards. That is not opinion. That is fact. If Dez keeps the ball off the ground, everything else could have happened as it did and it would have been a catch. Interesting that you mention replay not being about judgment calls when the NFL just allowed review of pass interference calls which are completely judgment calls.
To me, the catch sub-rule wasn't dumb, it's just that people didn't understand it and the NFL can't have big fan bases like Dallas and Pittsburgh being so pissed off at losing on plays like that and having it affect fandom and hurt the brand so they changed it. They're not stupid.
I thought the rule was horrible. Because it allowed for a player to have 2 feet in bounds and clear possession of the ball for a second and then still be ruled incomplete. It didn’t pass the “common sense” test. IMO.
But 2 feet and possession doesn't always happen which is why those multiple subset of rules are necessary. Being carried out of bounds by a defender on the sideline is one of them. 2 feet down never happens in that case. Neither does it happen when a receiver lays out to make a diving catch. If he catches the ball with 2 hands clearly possessing the ball, his torso touches the ground first, but the ball comes out and rolls away as soon as he slams to the turf, should that be a catch? Common sense says no, but a strict possession, 2 feet down (torso) rule would make that a catch. This is why variants are needed.
The defense really has progressed.Crazy it's been 4+ years since that game. The no-catch pisses me off a little but even more so the Cobb trap catch. Regardless of the Dez call, I feel like GB would have marched down and scored a TD.
Dallas' defense has come a long way since that season...
Those 2015 playoffs stick out due to the domino effect of luck from Detroit/Dal to Dal/GB to GB/Sea to Sea/NE. Just teams losing in the most agonizing fashion.
My last response because you don't seem to understand what I'm trying to explain to you.. I understand the rule and that it was not a catch. What I'm trying do pass along. Is that it was a classic Dez Bryant move. That does not mean the changes the interpretation. I'm actually agreeing with you.The different interpretation thing is fine if there are no rules already in place dealing with what happened. The "fan glasses" part is making an accusation while interpreting something in a way that would have benefited your team when there ARE rules in place for what happened PLUS you ignore the clear explanation of the rule you just attempted to slander. At that point, you don't want truth, you just want your way. That's what I'm hitting out against but maybe it wasn't clear.
My last response because you don't seem to understand what I'm trying to explain to you.. I understand the rule and that it was not a catch. What I'm trying do pass along. Is that it was a classic Dez Bryant move. That does not mean the changes the interpretation. I'm actually agreeing with you.
Being carried out of bounds by a defender before the feet touch is an incomplete pass now. The rules used to let the officials use judgement to decide if the receiver would have come down in bounds if he wasn't touched, and if the officials thought he would have have landed in bounds then it was ruled a catch. However, I remember a lot of plays where I thought the player would have landed in bounds and the officials still called them incomplete. They changed the rule a few years ago to where it has to be two feet down or another body part such as a knee, so it's really smart now for a defender to knock the guy out of bounds before his feet touch.But 2 feet and possession doesn't always happen which is why those multiple subset of rules are necessary. Being carried out of bounds by a defender on the sideline is one of them. 2 feet down never happens in that case. Neither does it happen when a receiver lays out to make a diving catch. If he catches the ball with 2 hands clearly possessing the ball, his torso touches the ground first, but the ball comes out and rolls away as soon as he slams to the turf, should that be a catch? Common sense says no, but a strict possession, 2 feet down (torso) rule would make that a catch. This is why variants are needed.
The DL still has much to prove.The defense really has progressed.
Except for that little safety thing.
I do not like your contrary tone.The DL still has much to prove.
They really weren't any great shakes last year.
Average in the pass rush and the run D felt inflated. Especially when confronted by a talented team determined to run on them.
Being carried out of bounds by a defender before the feet touch is an incomplete pass now. The rules used to let the officials use judgement to decide if the receiver would have come down in bounds if he wasn't touched, and if the officials thought he would have have landed in bounds then it was ruled a catch. However, I remember a lot of plays where I thought the player would have landed in bounds and the officials still called them incomplete. They changed the rule a few years ago to where it has to be two feet down or another body part such as a knee, so it's really smart now for a defender to knock the guy out of bounds before his feet touch.