Twitter: Competition Committee says Dez caught it **merged**

[BlindFaith]

I'm becoming more and more curious if the loudest Dez' was not a catch" crowd are also either anti-Romo or anti-Dez guys as well.
Just a random curiosity.

Romo was a top 10 QB during his time. I like the guy personally, but I think he was over rated by a lot of Cowboy fans. I've never liked Dez the person. He has skill. But he is not football smart and limited as to what he can do in an offense. I thought it was a mistake to give him the big contract.

But, and I'm being dead honest, this has nothing to do with some vendetta against Dez. This is just about trying to explain how the rule was applied and why. I would have loved for it to have been a catch. I've been a Cowboys fan since I can remember. Seeing them lose is not something I cheer for, quite the opposite.

 

[blindzebra]

Here, since you insist on comparing and discussing a catch from 2013 where the rules are different, I give you this:

A.R. 8.10 GOING TO THE GROUND—INCOMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. The contact by B1 sends him across the goal line and to the ground in the end zone. The ball comes out as he hits the ground.
Ruling: Second-and-10 on B25. The pass is incomplete, as the receiver went to the ground in the process of making the catch and did not maintain possession of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground.

A.R. 8.11 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on A30. A1 throws a pass to A2 at the A45 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. The contact by B1 causes A2 to go to the ground where he maintains control of the ball.
Ruling: First-and-10 on A45. The pass is complete, as the receiver went to the ground in the process of making the catch and maintained possession of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground.

A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out.
Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.

A.R. 8.13 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who is contacted by a defender before he completes the catch at the three-yard line. Despite B2’s contact, A2 keeps his balance, gets both feet down, and lunges over the goal line. The ball comes out as he hits the ground.
Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The receiver went to the ground as the result of lunging for the goal line, not in the process of making the catch.


And, there is no mention of your precious AR 15 case play in the 2013 case play book. The only case play you ever reference in trying to establish Dez caught the ball. So the 2013 rules are clearly enforced differently and with even less gray area.

But as you can see above, the case plays that are in there are actually the same case plays that are in the 2014 version and 2015 version. And guess what, they say BRACE + LUNGE and BALANCE + LUNGE.

Again, I can't speak for Blandino, and I never want to. But, you can see in 8.13 where it says, gets both feet down. This is clearly what he is trying to communicate in his explanation. What he leaves off is the most critical part of the explanation. KEEPS HIS BALANCE, gets both feet down, AND LUNGES.

That is the best I can do. And can we please stop comparing catches from different rule books. I know you're hanging on by a thread here in trying to come up with justifications for it being a catch, but can we please stop?

And if you want to compare catches to 2007 or 1998, please do your homework and look up the rules before throwing out accusations. It's only fair that we don't have to do all the work all the time to keep you guys straight.

Copy and paste much. FYI, you are still wrong about it. The catch rules were EXACTLY THE SAME IN 2013 AND 2014. You love to accuse us of misrepresenting and here you go again saying they added your ridiculous time and balance BS. Those case plays did not just appear in 2014.

 

[MarcusRock]

No offense but that's a line for losers.

Game recognizes game I guess.

 

[Kevinicus]

Not going well? We've disproved every point, as random and incoherent as they are. I don't have to prove anything. The NFL has already ruled. No catch. And if you believe it was a catch, then you are part of the conspiracy crowd.

Proven nothing, just twisted words, context, and logic. Believing that someone made a mistake does not make you a conspiracy theorists. Your attempts to give people that moniker discredit you even more than your bad arguments and logical fallacies.

We're just trying to keep some sanity here for those who actually want to know how the rule works. I don't care what you think. And the reason I keep coming back is because you guys keep throwing in even more ridiculous things. I'm now trying to explain catches that happened in 2013 with different rules to the Dez catch. It's insane what lengths you guys will go to.

You need to understand how the rule(s) work before you try to do that. You clearly do not understand the rules. I thought it was just one, but it appears it is a widespread failure on your part.

 

[OmerV]

No offense but that's a line for losers.

Hard as it may be to accept, when the final seconds tick off in the 4th quarter the team that is behind is the loser.

 

[MarcusRock]

I'm becoming more and more curious if the loudest Dez' was not a catch" crowd are also either anti-Romo or anti-Dez guys as well.
Just a random curiosity.

Romo did the best he could with what he was given. The guy was basically a self-made QB and I respect that to high heaven. Dez I have never faulted for doing what came naturally on that play and is a player's player when it comes to wanting to win. His spirit gets the best of him sometimes but his heart absolutely cannot be questioned. He hasn't lived up to the contract but I'm rooting for him to have a monster year this year. My part in this has never been about Dez the player at all. It's about fans wanting a result so much for their team that they're willing to bend reality and character assassinate whomever they have to in order to have it. I simply disagree with those procedures.

 

[BlindFaith]

You said they can't be hit at all. That's not true. They can't be hit in certain ways (to the head/neck, spearing, etc.) but it does not eliminate any and all hits. You absolutely can throw a shoulder into the gut of a receiver as they are trying to catch a pass (assuming you don't get their too early to cause Pass Interference). The same rules apply to a QB throwing a pass, and other situations where they are considered "defenseless."

Did you read the entire thing you linked to?



Contact and hitting is clearly allowed, but certain types of contact and locations must be avoided. This is very straight forward.

I don't disagree with that. But there is an emphasis on protecting players still in the process of making a catch. Because of the rule, and how any act that ends up hitting the head will be ruled a foul, it has changed how a defender approaches the tackle. Its very easy for a receiver to duck his head to prepare for contact. If a defender was targeting his mid section, that point now could be a WRs head. And we've seen that called.

Defenders now don't load up for the kill, at least until after the player has become a runner. What you see now are more defenders trying to make a play on the ball instead of trying to blow up the receiver. But I agree, if they can time it perfectly and are willing to risk contacting the head, even if contact didn't start at the head, then go for it. And let's be honest, we've seen calls where a WR has dropped the ball and a defender just drills him, even without direct contact to the head and it was called hitting a defenseless player. Anything above the shoulders for sure gets called.

 

[BlindFaith]

Copy and paste much. FYI, you are still wrong about it. The catch rules were EXACTLY THE SAME IN 2013 AND 2014. You love to accuse us of misrepresenting and here you go again saying they added your ridiculous time and balance BS. Those case plays did not just appear in 2014.

Show me where AR 15 is in the 2013 case book. Or a case play reference to Act Common to the Game where the AR 15 from 2014 is.

And I copied and pasted because he obviously didn't take the time to read the 2013 rules.

 

[Rockport]

Hard as it may be to accept, when the final seconds tick off in the 4th quarter the team that is behind is the loser.

You're missing the point.

 

[BlindFaith]

Proven nothing, just twisted words, context, and logic. Believing that someone made a mistake does not make you a conspiracy theorists. Your attempts to give people that moniker discredit you even more than your bad arguments and logical fallacies.



You need to understand how the rule(s) work before you try to do that. You clearly do not understand the rules. I thought it was just one, but it appears it is a widespread failure on your part.

We don't have to prove anything really. The NFL has done that for us. And everyone who's opinion really matters has done that. All we are doing is trying to explain to the conspiracy theorists why they ruled that way.

You are the ones that have to prove the NFL and all the experts were wrong.

It's like telling a scientist that gravity isn't real. Or that the earth is flat. The NFL is laughing at you.

 

[OmerV]

You're missing the point.

Maybe there is some background context I'm not aware of. If so, my mistake.

 

[Kevinicus]

We don't have to prove anything really. The NFL has done that for us. And everyone who's opinion really matters has done that. All we are doing is trying to explain to the conspiracy theorists why they ruled that way.

You are the ones that have to prove the NFL and all the experts were wrong.

It's like telling a scientist that gravity isn't real. Or that the earth is flat. The NFL is laughing at you.

The evidence (from those same people) prove them wrong.

Your analogy is terrible. Your logical fallacies extreme. It's like telling someone they can't say that the Supreme Court did not rule in accordance to the Constitution because they are not a Supreme Court judge. As if the Constitution isn't available for others to read.

 

[MarcusRock]

The evidence (from those same people) prove them wrong.

Your analogy is terrible. Your logical fallacies extreme. It's like telling someone they can't say that the Supreme Court did not rule in accordance to the Constitution because they are not a Supreme Court judge. As if the Constitution isn't available for others to read.

As opposed to catch theorists just saying "they're wrong because of X, Y, Z," yet X, Y, and Z having zero support beyond these forums? In fact, just the opposite can be found. It's tough being a rebel these days but don't expect people with knowledge to just accept that crap.

 

[Kevinicus]

As opposed to catch theorists just saying "they're wrong because of X, Y, Z," yet X, Y, and Z having zero support beyond these forums? In fact, just the opposite can be found. It's tough being a rebel these days but don't expect people with knowledge to just accept that crap.

Except for x, y, and z having support in the rules, case plays, previous official rulings, comments by those infallible experts you love so much, logic, etc. Your support is the word of the people who made the mistake in the first place, despite documented evidence of them making comments that contradicts the statements you try and rest your entire argument on. Your entire argument is using the appeal to authority logical fallacy, and even using that argument, you fall on your face because the an appeal to the same authority provides ample evidence that your argument is wrong.

 

[MarcusRock]

Except for x, y, and z having support in the rules, case plays, previous official rulings, comments by those infallible experts you love so much, logic, etc. Your support is the word of the people who made the mistake in the first place, despite documented evidence of them making comments that contradicts the statements you try and rest your entire argument on. Your entire argument is using the appeal to authority logical fallacy, and even using that argument, you fall on your face because the an appeal to the same authority provides ample evidence that your argument is wrong.

No, my support is in addition to my own reading and understanding of the rules. Catch theorists have nothing additional to back what they say besides what they've come up with on their own, which is why those unanswered questions we keep asking continue to go unanswered. I mean, if you all are uncovering some gargantuan coverup by the NFL, why does no one else in the sports world see it despite the huge controversy this play caused? Did the NFL threaten everyone's first borns so they're all keeping it quiet? Where's your support beyond CowboysZone? Is there any?

 

[DogFace]

Here, since you insist on comparing and discussing a catch from 2013 where the rules are different, I give you this:

A.R. 8.10 GOING TO THE GROUND—INCOMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. The contact by B1 sends him across the goal line and to the ground in the end zone. The ball comes out as he hits the ground.
Ruling: Second-and-10 on B25. The pass is incomplete, as the receiver went to the ground in the process of making the catch and did not maintain possession of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground.

A.R. 8.11 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on A30. A1 throws a pass to A2 at the A45 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. The contact by B1 causes A2 to go to the ground where he maintains control of the ball.
Ruling: First-and-10 on A45. The pass is complete, as the receiver went to the ground in the process of making the catch and maintained possession of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground.

A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out.
Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.

A.R. 8.13 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who is contacted by a defender before he completes the catch at the three-yard line. Despite B2’s contact, A2 keeps his balance, gets both feet down, and lunges over the goal line. The ball comes out as he hits the ground.
Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The receiver went to the ground as the result of lunging for the goal line, not in the process of making the catch.


And, there is no mention of your precious AR 15 case play in the 2013 case play book. The only case play you ever reference in trying to establish Dez caught the ball. So the 2013 rules are clearly enforced differently and with even less gray area.

But as you can see above, the case plays that are in there are actually the same case plays that are in the 2014 version and 2015 version. And guess what, they say BRACE + LUNGE and BALANCE + LUNGE.

Again, I can't speak for Blandino, and I never want to. But, you can see in 8.13 where it says, gets both feet down. This is clearly what he is trying to communicate in his explanation. What he leaves off is the most critical part of the explanation. KEEPS HIS BALANCE, gets both feet down, AND LUNGES.

That is the best I can do. And can we please stop comparing catches from different rule books. I know you're hanging on by a thread here in trying to come up with justifications for it being a catch, but can we please stop?

And if you want to compare catches to 2007 or 1998, please do your homework and look up the rules before throwing out accusations. It's only fair that we don't have to do all the work all the time to keep you guys straight.

You continually add keeps his balance. When did any rule or anyone say anything about that?

What rules changed regarding catches after the 2013 season?

 

[Cowboysheelsreds053]

You just knew where this thread was headed. Even after the rule is changed some will continue to agonize over that play. Some of you are lucky you weren’t around when Jackie Smith dropped that TD pass in the SB and 20 minutes later Benny Barnes was called for a PI on Lynn Swann for incidental contact. Some of you don’t even know what agonizing is until you live through a couple of plays like that in a SB. Those two plays clearly cost the Cowboys a championship. The Cowboys would have likely lost to Green Bay even had Dez’s catch not been overturned.

Even had the Cowboys somehow pulled that game out they weren’t going to beat Seattle in the NFC title game the following week. They may have beat the Seahawks earlier that season up in Seattle but no way do they beat them with a Super Bowl on the line in front of that frenzied 12th man and their stout defense that held Aaron Rodgers to only 178 yards passing and picked him off twice in the NFC title game. Those who keep spinning that the Dez overturn cost us a championship are dreaming. I’ve lived through plays that cost the Cowboys a championship and the Dez play wasn’t one of them.

This and had never seen Tom Landry make a facial expression EVER till that drop. Remember telling my dad, did you see Tom, I was saying that but really cussing out Jackie in my head, so dad would not hear it. LOL

 

[BlindFaith]

The evidence (from those same people) prove them wrong.

Your analogy is terrible. Your logical fallacies extreme. It's like telling someone they can't say that the Supreme Court did not rule in accordance to the Constitution because they are not a Supreme Court judge. As if the Constitution isn't available for others to read.

The constitution is subjective, particularly due to changing societal views.

A rulebook should not be subjective. No one has said that the wording they used was the best.

But no one from your side has given any evidence that ANY act common to the game can complete the catch process.

The only act listed in AR 15 is time + lunge. If that was it, and no other examples were there. You would have a case. Honestly.

But you guys just stop there. AR 15 sets time + LUNGE as the act.

8.12 and 8.13 define what that time is. Brace + lunge and balance + lunge. Not one single example of any other act. Yet you guys just insist that ANY other act can be just inserted as you see fit. And most of you don't even acknowledge those two case plays.

Then when we back you into a corner on that, you shift to that he wasn't really falling. And you do this so you can shoehorn in part c of the catch process where any act basically makes one a runner. That's when the still photos come in. Somehow after Dez got his second foot down that he never would have continued to fall. Or that he wasn't really falling to begin with and that all the moves he made completed the process.

So, answer this:
1. Do you believe ANY act can complete the catch process while a player is going to the ground?
2. Do you think Dez was falling?

Just yes or no.

 

[BlindFaith]

You continually add keeps his balance. When did any rule or anyone say anything about that?

What rules changed regarding catches after the 2013 season?

You don't read anything we post do you?

8.12 and 8.13

 

[MarcusRock]

You don't read anything we post do you?

8.12 and 8.13

A no parrot policy would save you keystrokes.