Blandino says McFadden lacked “firm control” on overturned catch

[bark]

Honestly wouldn't mind taking firm control of this bozo for a few

 

[Sportsbabe]

Blandino says McFadden lacked “firm control” on overturned catch
Posted by Michael David Smith on November 4, 2015, 1:28 PM EST

In Sunday’s game against the Seahawks, Cowboys running back Darren McFadden got a pass from Matt Cassel, grabbed the ball, started to turn and run and then lost the ball, where Seattle recovered what was ruled on the field as a fumble. And then it was time for every football fan’s favorite game: Catch Or No Catch?
After looking at the replay and talking it over with the NFL’s officiating command center, the referee ruled no catch. The Cowboys kept the ball.
According to NFL head of officiating Dean Blandino, reversing the ruling on the field was the right decision. Blandino explained on NFL Network that McFadden didn’t have “firm control” of the ball.
“This is a close one,” Blandino said. “McFadden has to gain firm control of the football. That’s the key first element in all catch/no catch plays.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...dden-lacked-firm-control-on-overturned-catch/

Girl bye.

 

[T-RO]

"Firm control"

Seems awfully ambiguous to me.

With an array of obscure rules and bizarre exceptions the league now effectively has a fog machine installed over each NFL stadium. They can rule whatever they want to...whenever they want to.... and explain it however they want to. The NFL has lost all credibility to me.

 

[JDSmith]

Jesus. I'd rather hear an explanation from Dez's monkey.

Monkeys throw feces, Blandino throws feces.

At least monkeys are cute.

 

[Vtwin]

Change the rules over time to aid the offense yet nit pic the catch which more often than not hurts the offense in a controversial manner.

No logic in that at all.
Unless the motive isn't about putting out a quality product.

 

[DandyDon52]

The same can be said about the NFL with respect to its definition of what constitutes a catch.

Is it me or do NFL rules seems overly complicated to the point of absurdity as if they were drafted by a team of lawyers intent on making everything as convoluted as possible?

yeah they seem to want it so they can make the call either way.

 

[nathanlt]

I went freeze frame on this thing, and here's the truth. McFadden caught the ball and fumbled. His left hand awkwardly tried to tuck the ball under his shoulder, but tossed it backwards instead. This happened after two feet were down with ball under control, and it was only a fraction of a second after that second foot touched that he lost control.

A catch, in general terms, is possession with two feet down. Any other definition that attempts some nuance only allows the league to tamper with the outcome of games, and ensures inconsistent enforcement of a simple concept. Possession with two feet down.

I don't want calls slanted toward or against the Cowboys, I just want a clean game.

 

[JoeKing]

Blandino makes a ruling in favor of the Cowboys and fans object? Some folks you just can't make happy. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. lol

 

[JDSmith]

I went freeze frame on this thing, and here's the truth. McFadden caught the ball and fumbled. His left hand awkwardly tried to tuck the ball under his shoulder, but tossed it backwards instead. This happened after two feet were down with ball under control, and it was only a fraction of a second after that second foot touched that he lost control.

A catch, in general terms, is possession with two feet down. Any other definition that attempts some nuance only allows the league to tamper with the outcome of games, and ensures inconsistent enforcement of a simple concept. Possession with two feet down.

I don't want calls slanted toward or against the Cowboys, I just want a clean game.

That's what I saw as well. I didn't even think it was really debatable, especially on replay. But in their attempt to justify the Dez call last year they have gone to ridiculous lengths to validate something that was obviously wrong. Now the water is so muddied that nobody can even begin to guess what they'll call.

 

[JDSmith]

Blandino makes a ruling in favor of the Cowboys and fans object? Some folks you just can't make happy. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. lol

I was glad he ruled wrong, because it favored us. But they officiating is ruining the game.

It's not just replay either, the refs on the field are so inept that it appears criminal, unless they are actually quite good at their jobs and they really are criminals.

 

[Seven]

With an array of obscure rules and bizarre exceptions the league now effectively has a fog machine installed over each NFL stadium. They can rule whatever they want to...whenever they want to.... and explain it however they want to. The NFL has lost all credibility to me.

Well said, my man. Well said.

17 likes. Mods......tally 'em up.

 

[mahoneybill]

I went freeze frame on this thing, and here's the truth. McFadden caught the ball and fumbled. His left hand awkwardly tried to tuck the ball under his shoulder, but tossed it backwards instead. This happened after two feet were down with ball under control, and it was only a fraction of a second after that second foot touched that he lost control.

A catch, in general terms, is possession with two feet down. Any other definition that attempts some nuance only allows the league to tamper with the outcome of games, and ensures inconsistent enforcement of a simple concept. Possession with two feet down.

I don't want calls slanted toward or against the Cowboys, I just want a clean game.

Agree on the " if 2 feet are down" its a catch regardless of where it occurs on the field . To me if the player loses it for whatever reason after 2 feet down in the field of play its a fumble. If it's 2 feet down in the end zone its a TD. Why differentiate between breaking the goal line and losing the ball and its still a TD vs " a catch"

 

[Kevinicus]

I went freeze frame on this thing, and here's the truth. McFadden caught the ball and fumbled. His left hand awkwardly tried to tuck the ball under his shoulder, but tossed it backwards instead. This happened after two feet were down with ball under control, and it was only a fraction of a second after that second foot touched that he lost control.

A catch, in general terms, is possession with two feet down. Any other definition that attempts some nuance only allows the league to tamper with the outcome of games, and ensures inconsistent enforcement of a simple concept. Possession with two feet down.

I don't want calls slanted toward or against the Cowboys, I just want a clean game.

The bolded is exactly why it was determined to be incomplete. It wasn't, "long enough."

 

[Kevinicus]

Agree on the " if 2 feet are down" its a catch regardless of where it occurs on the field . To me if the player loses it for whatever reason after 2 feet down in the field of play its a fumble. If it's 2 feet down in the end zone its a TD. Why differentiate between breaking the goal line and losing the ball and its still a TD vs " a catch"

What differentiation are you referring to? If the ball crosses the goal line and comes loose before it is considered a catch, it's still incomplete.

 

[nathanlt]

The bolded is exactly why it was determined to be incomplete. It wasn't, "long enough."

I'm not using the NFL rules, I'm using what everybody generally refers to as a catch. The written rules are so confusing, even Blandino isn't able to articulate what he wrote. It's complete foolishness to try to apply nonsensical rules, the NFL has no clarity when it comes to a catch.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

"Firm control"

Seems awfully ambiguous to me.

I have no idea what is or isn't a catch anymore.

 

[nathanlt]

And another thing, Blandino is trying to gain favor with Dallas fans by tossing them an insanely stupid call (no fumble when it actually was) during a likely losing effort. When playoff time comes around, he'll take another catch away and end the season. Don't fall for his attempt at legitimizing his catch tampering insanity. He needs to go back to the comedy circuit.

I've never seen "firm control" as a term in the rulebook. He's making up new concepts up again.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

Jesus. I'd rather hear an explanation from Dez's monkey.

Whooo there is kids in these forums

 

[Mr Cowboy]

Former ref Scott Green: Punishment of officials arbitrary PR move

Posted by Josh Alper on November 5, 2015, 8:28 AM EST

Getty Images
Earlier this week, former NFL referee and current CBS rules analyst Mike Carey criticized the NFL for their decisions to suspend and reassign officials for mistakes during games because he feels they serve to weaken officiating.

Another former referee has chimed in with a similar opinion on the way the league is handling errors by officials this season. Scott Green, who worked three Super Bowls and was president of the National Football League Referees Association, wrote a piece for USA Today castigating the league for the punishments that Carey took issue with on Twitter.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...en-punishment-of-officials-arbitrary-pr-move/

 

[mahoneybill]

What differentiation are you referring to? If the ball crosses the goal line and comes loose before it is considered a catch, it's still incomplete.

My point was more towards the 2 feet down with the ball in the end zone, vs a runner breaking the plane . In either case I think it should be a TD . All this possession/football move just muddies it up.