Anyone notice the refs

[glimmerman]

Where have you been? They changed the catch rule a few years ago. Once a receiver makes a football move they no longer have to hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground. Dez’s catch in Green Bay would be a catch today.

Yeah, but they have been acting like the old rule still implies.. Every time there is a catch like that you don’t hear the commentators saying he don’t have to keep control. They look to see if he kept control all the way through. Whether he was contacted by the defender or not.

 

[Mannix]

No it was not

Yes it was....look again

 

[KJJ]

Yeah, but they have been acting like the old rule still implies.. Every time there is a catch like that you don’t hear the commentators saying he don’t have to keep control. They look to see if he kept control all the way through. Whether he was contacted by the defender or not.

Being contacted by the defender doesn’t matter. What they have to look at is whether the receiver made a football move. A football move can be bringing the ball into the body and securing it. Watch Diggs’ interception yesterday. He went up caught the ball and brought it into his body then the ball was pulled out. By bringing the ball into his body and securing it equated to a football move and a catch. I mentioned on the game chat prior to the review that I thought he secured the ball before it was pulled out.

 

[glimmerman]

Being contacted by the defender doesn’t matter. What they have to look at is whether the receiver made a football move. A football move can be bringing the ball into the body and securing it. Watch Diggs’ interception yesterday. He went up caught the ball and brought it into his body then the ball was pulled out. By bringing the ball into his body and securing it equated to a football move and a catch. I mentioned on the game chat prior to the review that I thought he secured the ball before it was pulled out.

What did you think of the play that was like the one similar to a few weeks ago. When the opposing receiver caught the ball and tucked it and turned up field and even took another step or so and the ball is punched out or comes out. Both times now they have called it incomplete and both times they have caught it and pulls it in and makes another move turning it up..

 

[KJJ]

What did you think of the play that was like the one similar to a few weeks ago. When the opposing receiver caught the ball and tucked it and turned up field and even took another step or so and the ball is punched out or comes out. Both times now they have called it incomplete and both times they have caught it and pulls it in and makes another move turning it up..

I would have to look at the play you’re referring to. It couldn’t have been as clear-cut as you’re describing or it would’ve been a catch. Maybe you can find the play on YouTube.

 

[Typhus]

Okay, here's the video (because I knew it'd be an issue today). After 2 steps, I slow the video down. 3rd step is the left shin. The 4th step is the right foot dragging on the ground, all as Diggs touches him in the back. The ball only starts coming out after the foot drag. That's 4 limbs on the ground and a touch by the defender, which is down by contact. If Diggs doesn't touch him then it IS a fumble.

I believe the ball begin to roll ever so slightly before the knee was down..

 

[Runwildboys]

Okay, here's the video (because I knew it'd be an issue today). After 2 steps, I slow the video down. 3rd step is the left shin. The 4th step is the right foot dragging on the ground, all as Diggs touches him in the back. The ball only starts coming out after the foot drag. That's 4 limbs on the ground and a touch by the defender, which is down by contact. If Diggs doesn't touch him then it IS a fumble.

No matter how many times I watch it, I can't see if Diggs touches him. Is there a reverse view?

 

[Runwildboys]

cowboys fans sticking up for the giants...

this place,man.

Nobody's sticking up for the Giants. If anything, they'd be sticking up for the officials. But the truth is, they're being honest about what they saw. If there's a reverse angle that shows Diggs didn't actually touch him before the ball came out, I'm on your side. If it shows Diggs did touch him first, then I say it's down by contact.

 

[MarcusRock]

I believe the ball begin to roll ever so slightly before the knee was down..

No matter how many times I watch it, I can't see if Diggs touches him. Is there a reverse view?

Here's the touch by Diggs, which looks to be way earlier than the front angle.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

I saw a tuck rule they ruled a fumble .

Its insane.

 

[jaythecowboy]

What did you think of the play that was like the one similar to a few weeks ago. When the opposing receiver caught the ball and tucked it and turned up field and even took another step or so and the ball is punched out or comes out. Both times now they have called it incomplete and both times they have caught it and pulls it in and makes another move turning it up..

I just saw a play during this Raiders game that had the same thing happen. The guy catches the ball and turns upfield. The ball gets knocked out and they call it incomplete. And it was way more of a football move than that play in the Cowboys game.

 

[kevm3]

Yesterday's game was actually a reasonably reffed one. They didn't constantly try to take over the game.

 

[Runwildboys]

Here's the touch by Diggs, which looks to be way earlier than the front angle.

Oh Hell yeah, he's down by contact. Wow, from the other angle I really wasn't sure if Diggs' arm was long enough, but he doesn't even have it outstretched! Also, from this angle you can tell that he actually gives a little shove, not just a touch. Sorry @cowboyec , that's no fumble. I was hoping you were right. In fact, during the game, I thought it probably was a fumble. Pretty clear here. Thanks, @MarcusRock .

 

[Big_C_KU]

1. Giants catch and fumble that was overturned should have been just an incompletion. The WR barely took 2 steps and lost it as he was going to the ground. In live play it’s clear he didn’t possess it long enough to be a completed catch. That was a case of slowing down a play too much to convince yourself of a completed pass.

2. On Diggs interception it was closer because Diggs had established the catch, down by contact, and the ball ripped away by the defender. Not sure Diggs possessed it long enough either to be a catch but endzone and defender ripping it away instead of Diggs just losing going to the ground it makes it much closer.

The only thing good about the calls to me is the refs and review were consistent in their decisions.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

I keep saying the same thing , Diggs is insane good .

WR was down and the refs didnt give Diggs that tackle.

 

[glimmerman]

Here's the touch by Diggs, which looks to be way earlier than the front angle.

He was touched. I didnt see it during the game or they showed it and I was so pissed I was outside yelling.. Was used to the old rule where the touch didn’t matter..

 

[cityochamps]

Like to see them be more consistent with the roughing the passer rule, unnecessary roughness or what ever they call it when Rodgers get pushed down after a pass and gets a flag and Dak does not

 

[MarcusRock]

1. Giants catch and fumble that was overturned should have been just an incompletion. The WR barely took 2 steps and lost it as he was going to the ground. In live play it’s clear he didn’t possess it long enough to be a completed catch. That was a case of slowing down a play too much to convince yourself of a completed pass.

Bro, he got 4 limbs on the ground before the ball came loose. 2 feet, a shin/knee, and a foot drag. Someone's trying to convince themselves alright, and it ain't the rest of us.

 

[glimmerman]

Bro, he got 4 limbs on the ground before the ball came loose. 2 feet, a shin/knee, and a foot drag. Someone's trying to convince themselves alright, and it ain't the rest of us.

Before the rule change that’s a incomplete pass. Even though the rule has changed I have seen the refs call these incomplete..

 

[MarcusRock]

Before the rule change that’s a incomplete pass. Even though the rule has changed I have seen the refs call these incomplete..

Yes, before the rule change it would have been incomplete. Number of steps did not matter when you went to the ground, only maintaining possession did.