Changes to catch rule make harder to overturn on field of rulings

[StarBoyz83]

What game were you watching?

I agree that there's a good chance Rodgers scores again if the Dez catch were ruled properly (not 99%, but it was likely). I'd still like to have seen Romo with the ball and a chance to win it in the end.

Either way, that loss had zero to do with the play calling.

Every time Dallas had a chance to build the lead they'd just go 3 and out like they usually do. Predictable scared play calling as usual.

 

[sbark]

redundant...........when NFL instant replay was introduced, it was flatly stated that the ruling on the field by the referee right there would stand unless overwhelming evidence via replay could be seen.............and now they have to push back the off field nfl official powers back to the "exec" on the field........and then once again it will slowly be grabbed back by the New York office............rinse and repeat again in 10 years.

 

[TwoDeep3]

When a runner who goes down after contact by a defender loses the ball, that can't be a fumble because the play is over -- he's been tackled.

When a receiver loses the ball in that same situaton, it's an incomplete pass.

The only way they could call it incomplete was to claim Dez had not yet become a runner -- that he had not completed parts a, b, and c. Specifically, they pointed to part c. Then they removed most of part c from the rulebook (parts that would have confirmed the catch).

Now they've put those parts back in.

The rules used to be the runner could lose the ball hitting the ground. I grabbed your ankle as you run past and you nose-dive to the ground ansd it jars the ball loose. That should be a fumble. But it is not.

I know what the rules now say. It used to be a fumble. I'm with Blackie Sherod on this one. Why can't it cause the fumble?

 

[percyhoward]

TD my best guess is that if this were the case, then you bring in the official's judgment about whether the player was down "long enough" before the ball came loose. Better to keep it cut and dried.

There's also the safety aspect. You don't want runners on their knees taking shots from defenders trying to jar the ball loose.

 

[Idgit]

Every time Dallas had a chance to build the lead they'd just go 3 and out like they usually do. Predictable scared play calling as usual.

Right, that was is. All those plays they called that didn't work.

 

[Hoofbite]

The rule is, and always has been, entirely subjective. On field interpretation is always going to yield varying results because each official (for whatever reason) seems to have his own set of definitions.

Not sure these small rule changes do anything to the Dez play because they ruled he was going to the ground.

 

[nathanlt]

I'm glad that the rule is changed to be closer to common sense. The legacy of tampering with that playoff game will always hurt. I am also glad that the threat of that subjectivity is lessened. Apparently, Blandino was wrong and he knows it.

 

[JD_KaPow]

Every time Dallas had a chance to build the lead they'd just go 3 and out like they usually do. Predictable scared play calling as usual.

There's nothing I love more than when people just make stuff up, figuring nobody will actually bother pointing out the truth.

Dallas took a 14-7 lead in the 2nd quarter. The next time they got the ball, they ran 11 plays and missed a FG (it was a 50-yarder after a false start). On the last play of that drive before the FS, they had a 3rd-and-1 and threw deep ("scared play calling", indeed).
The next time they got the ball, they were ahead 14-10. That was the drive where Murray fumbled with an open lane to the end zone.
The next time they got the ball, they were ahead 14-13. They drove 80 yards for a TD.
The next time they got the ball, they were ahead 21-20. Tony took back-to-back sacks, killing the drive after they got a first down. Not a 3-and-out, and not playing "scared."
The next time they got the ball, they were behind. That was the Dez catch.

Zero 3-and-outs. One punt (after a 3rd-and-23). Not even a hint of "scared play calling."

 

[StarBoyz83]

There's nothing I love more than when people just make stuff up, figuring nobody will actually bother pointing out the truth.

Dallas took a 14-7 lead in the 2nd quarter. The next time they got the ball, they ran 11 plays and missed a FG (it was a 50-yarder after a false start). On the last play of that drive before the FS, they had a 3rd-and-1 and threw deep ("scared play calling", indeed).
The next time they got the ball, they were ahead 14-10. That was the drive where Murray fumbled with an open lane to the end zone.
The next time they got the ball, they were ahead 14-13. They drove 80 yards for a TD.
The next time they got the ball, they were ahead 21-20. Tony took back-to-back sacks, killing the drive after they got a first down. Not a 3-and-out, and not playing "scared."
The next time they got the ball, they were behind. That was the Dez catch.

Zero 3-and-outs. One punt (after a 3rd-and-23). Not even a hint of "scared play calling."

Could've swore the were 3 and outs when we had the lead. I remember not liking the playcalling that game.Oh well we lost like we deserved.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Right, that was is. All those plays they called that didn't work.

This is the point where I ask them what plays were called and what plays he would have preferred to see called that are actually in the offensive playbook.

I pay attention more than most and I struggle to recall route combinations and blocking calls down in and down out. Most people think calling run or pass and getting it half the time means they can comment on playcalling. It's hubris at best.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Could've swore the were 3 and outs when we had the lead. I remember not liking the playcalling that game.Oh well we lost like we deserved.

Thanks for illustrating how your remembrance should never be relied on.

 

[StarBoyz83]

Thanks for illustrating how your remembrance should never be relied on.

No prob bob

 

[DandyDon52]

Dez's third step proves he was "capable of taking additional steps."

If he was capable ,he would have, he took steps as he fell, so he was falling not running.
The ball moved when he hit the ground, and then came loose and in the air as he rolled over, which showed he didnt have control or
possesion all the way thru, that is why they overturned it.

It was 4th down play, he had the first down , there was no good reason for him to extend the ball.
you just catch it clean and make sure it is a catch in that situation.

If you reverse the situation, and GB is 4th and 2 and dallas is leading, and cobb does the same thing dez did, and they dont
overturn it , cowboy fans would still be saying it wasnt a catch.

To me that play was more dez's fault than the refs.

The call on the field was a catch, and I dont think there was indisputable evidence to overturn it, except that the ball did come loose
and was in the air, but he recaught it, so that made it possible to overturn it.

Bottom line is on a 4th down play and your over the yard to gain for first down you just catch the ball, no extending for goal line, that is just too
risky, and kinda dumb.
unless it is 4th and goal, and then you extend if you have to.

I think they should have ran the ball , from a 2 or 3 wr set, and more than likely murray gets the 1st down.

And Romo said he thought he would get another shot with a minute or so left and had some plays that he knew could get 25 yards or so,
that they hadnt used. (my thought was gee why hadnt they used these plays lol !) and then he said the packers just kept getting
1st downs.

So Dallas did not play good enough or like a championship team needs to play in that game,to win.
They made too many mistakes thru out the game.
You can blame the refs , blandino, murray, dez, garrett, etc, but it was a team loss, they all made critical mistakes, and just too many
mistakes to win against a good team.

And as many have said, if it was ruled a catch, and cowboys score a td ( they might not have, int, fumble) then GB had plenty of time to
drive for a go ahead score, and dallas had not been able to stop them, and couldnt at end, to help give our offense one more shot.

GB was the better team, and they were also better than seattle, but screwed up in that game, thinking they had it won.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

The catch was overturned because Dez didn't maintain control after contact with the ground, which is the rule for a player who hasn't yet established himself as a runner. The problem with that ruling is that Dez had already established himself as a runner before the ball came loose. He had control + two feet (at least) + football move. It's that last part (the football move) that the league says was missing.

Blandino tried to explain his ruling by claiming that Dez didn't make an "obvious" enough reach for the goal line, and went so far as to say that it would have been a catch if he'd extended his arm, or reached with two hands. IOW, those would have been football moves. But there has never been a rule that a player has to reach with two hands to break the plane of the goal line, and since Dez was falling toward the pylon, extending his arm would not have advanced the ball any farther than it was.

Thanks.

But to be clear, were they saying/claiming the ball touched the ground and caused him to lose control?

 

[JPostSam]

If the ground cannot cause the fumble, then why can it cause the fumble in a pass?

But more importantly, why can the ground not cause a fumble?

because, if the ball touches the ground while hou have possession, you're down. you can't fumble if you're already down.

but if you haven't established possession, and the ball comes loose when you hit the ground, then it's an incomplete pass -- no different than if you had tipped the ball and it then fell to the ground.

 

[percyhoward]

Not sure these small rule changes do anything to the Dez play because they ruled he was going to the ground.

No, they ruled that he went to the ground as a receiver. IOW, he had not yet become a runner. Runners lose control of the ball on contact with the ground all the time, and that obviously doesn't change a reception into an incomplete pass.

The rule that was changed in 2015 (and now changed back) is exactly what would have allowed them to say Dez hadn't yet become a runner.

 

[Idgit]

This is the point where I ask them what plays were called and what plays he would have preferred to see called that are actually in the offensive playbook.

I pay attention more than most and I struggle to recall route combinations and blocking calls down in and down out. Most people think calling run or pass and getting it half the time means they can comment on playcalling. It's hubris at best.

Most of the time, it's just ignorance. I think they really think guessing run or pass correctly is guessing the play call.

 

[DogFace]

99.9% chance we would've lost lol. Couldn't stop a one legged Rodgers all game. Dallas should've put that game away multiple times but scared play calling hurt us.

A very lucky tipped pass catch helped them. Along with a non catch to Cobb. Their luck on offense would've run out without one of the worst overturns in playoff history. I'm 99.999% sure.

 

[StarBoyz83]

A very lucky tipped pass catch helped them. Along with a non catch to Cobb. Their luck on offense would've run out without one of the worst overturns in playoff history. I'm 99.999% sure.

Dallas just made too many mistakes but that's Dallas football.

 

[gimmesix]

The catch was overturned because Dez didn't maintain control after contact with the ground, which is the rule for a player who hasn't yet established himself as a runner. The problem with that ruling is that Dez had already established himself as a runner before the ball came loose. He had control + two feet (at least) + football move. It's that last part (the football move) that the league says was missing.

Blandino tried to explain his ruling by claiming that Dez didn't make an "obvious" enough reach for the goal line, and went so far as to say that it would have been a catch if he'd extended his arm, or reached with two hands. IOW, those would have been football moves. But there has never been a rule that a player has to reach with two hands to break the plane of the goal line, and since Dez was falling toward the pylon, extending his arm would not have advanced the ball any farther than it was.

Yes, I don't believe the author of this article's conclusion would be correct.

Blandino still would say Dez was going to the ground and did not accomplish the following: avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps.

His contention was that no football move was made on the play, so I don't see why this would be any type of concession that Dez made one.