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

[blindzebra]

For an upright player.

Can you not understand the going to the ground rule? If a player goes to the ground IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING A CATCH.

Was Dez ever in the process of making a catch? Did Dez go to the ground?

The only acts in the rules for what can be done by a player going to the ground are:

AR 15 Defining the act common. The only act common. Time +lunge

8.12 Under going to the ground to clarify the time element from AR 15
brace + lunge

8.13 Further clarification of what the time element is
Regains balance + lunge

Those are the only things in the rulebook. You adding whatever you want does not count. You saying, we'll they can't add everything, does not count.

If it was to be enforced that way they would have just said in AR 15 any act common instead of time + lunge.

Then have a couple case plays where a guy JUST reaches, or switches hands or takes extra steps. But they don't. Both case plays refer to gathering themselves and then lunging. And that is all.

Geeze. How can you not see that?

Oh, brother you are so ridiculously wrong it is funny. What does example mean?

If AR15.95, you can't even give the proper citation, says act common to the game, you look for act common to the game in the rules. It is really that simple. The case play and the rule go together. You love to keep saying just balance and lunge, brace and lunge, time and lunge, where are they in the rule book? Here is some help, look for them in 8.1.3.c because that is where the rules talk about act common to the game. I will make it even easier for you, here it is in its entirety.

c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.). Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

That is the applicable rule for A.R. 15.95. So apparently your case play acts are in that etc. area. Funny that if they are so significant to the rules that they are not even listed, much less mentioned as the only things that do it.

 

[percyhoward]

Where in the rule book is balance + lunge?

And where was it when Blandino appeared on GameDay Final to explain the overturn?

 

[BlindFaith]

Actually what they say is an act common to the game ends Item 1. What you are doing is projecting intent on the rules based on ONE POSSIBLE EXAMPLE of an act common to the game. The rules say ANY ACT COMMON TO THE GAME. That is straight from 8.1.3.c. Where in the rule book is balance + lunge, what rule is it under, and don't come back with a case play, case plays are examples of applying the rules, not THE RULE.

Funny, first you say case plays are rules, then you say they aren't. Which is it?

Because if you want to get rid of AR 15, 8.12 and 8.13, then lets go.

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

So that's it. He was going to the ground in the act of catching a pass. End of story. No catch.

Now you will spin it towards he wasn't actually going to the ground like PR Move said. That somewhere between his second foot and third foot he was tripped. And he would have never gone to the ground. But at least stick to that then. Don't talk about moves and all of these acts common to the game.

 

[BlindFaith]

Was he ever in the process of making a catch? Yes, of course.

Did he go to the ground? Obviously.

But those aren't the questions to ask. The question is:

Did he go to the ground before he completed the catch process?

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Where does it say anything about going to the ground BEFORE completing the catch process. The rule says If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass

Now is this where we shift back to the definition of falling and going to the ground? I'm guessing you think that after he was in the air and then got a foot down, that was the going to the ground part?

 

[BlindFaith]

Oh, brother you are so ridiculously wrong it is funny. What does example mean?

If AR15.95, you can't even give the proper citation, says act common to the game, you look for act common to the game in the rules. It is really that simple. The case play and the rule go together. You love to keep saying just balance and lunge, brace and lunge, time and lunge, where are they in the rule book? Here is some help, look for them in 8.1.3.c because that is where the rules talk about act common to the game. I will make it even easier for you, here it is in its entirety.

Really dude? I have to spell out Act Common to the Game every time? smh

Anyway, they are AR 15, 8.12 and 8.13. You know, the case plays defining what act is acceptable while going to the ground. But I don't know at this point if you think case plays are rules or not. You change your opinion whenever it suits you. The 8.1.3.c does list what acts can be performed by a player who is not going to the ground.

c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.). Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

That is the applicable rule for A.R. 15.95. So apparently your case play acts are in that etc. area. Funny that if they are so significant to the rules that they are not even listed, much less mentioned as the only things that do it.

So if any of those acts can be done by a player going to the ground, why do they only say Time, Brace and Balance in the sections talking specifically about going to the ground? Why not just leave those out all together? What is the purpose of having them? And if they do think they need to have them to clarify, why not have at least one of them mention any other act that can be done that is directly related to gathering themselves? Oh, I know, they cant possibly put in everything. But instead of putting in everything, or really nothing, because according to you there is no need for them at all anyway, they decided to do something very specific. Hmmm....

 

[BlindFaith]

Translation...I made up my rule history out of whole cloth.

Lazy arse.
http://www.nfl.com/rulebook

 

[blindzebra]

Funny, first you say case plays are rules, then you say they aren't. Which is it?

Because if you want to get rid of AR 15, 8.12 and 8.13, then lets go.

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

So that's it. He was going to the ground in the act of catching a pass. End of story. No catch.

Now you will spin it towards he wasn't actually going to the ground like PR Move said. That somewhere between his second foot and third foot he was tripped. And he would have never gone to the ground. But at least stick to that then. Don't talk about moves and all of these acts common to the game.

There you go again. Show a post where I said a case play was a rule I have been telling you and the rest of the wannabe rule interpreters that a case play is not a rule. So that is an outright LIE.
Dez was tripped by Shield's and to claim otherwise is another lie.
You do realize that the act of catching a pass ends when 8.1.3.c is complete right? You see that is how you read rules, you do it by understanding all of the parts. You make it to part c and you go to the ground as a runner, Item 1 applies to a receiver going to the ground. But that is clearly too complex for you to understand.

 

[BlindFaith]

When he caught the ball has nothing to do with what he looks like when he's falling. People were claiming it was obvious that he was falling before Shields tripped him, but he was actually more upright at that point than he was on the play where he scored standing up.

Not that it mattered whether he was falling or not on the catch that was overturned anyway. It was just to show people that there's no way they can conclude he would have fallen without the contact.

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Really? Do you even read the rules? Or just the parts that pop out to you that seem to support your view?

And to anyone who has ever watched a snap of football it was obvious that he was falling. Seriously, if you can't even admit that then there is no wonder this just keeps going round and round. That and the notion that any act can be performed while falling.

 

[BlindFaith]

There you go again. Show a post where I said a case play was a rule I have been telling you and the rest of the wannabe rule interpreters that a case play is not a rule. So that is an outright LIE.
Dez was tripped by Shield's and to claim otherwise is another lie.
You do realize that the act of catching a pass ends when 8.1.3.c is complete right? You see that is how you read rules, you do it by understanding all of the parts. You make it to part c and you go to the ground as a runner, Item 1 applies to a receiver going to the ground. But that is clearly too complex for you to understand.

So why did you chest bump the other sheep when you think you enlightened me to case plays. If they don't matter, then its obvious its not a catch.

The act of catching a pass for a player going to the ground ends by him maintaining possession through contacting the ground, if those pesky case plays don't really mean anything. Or are we throwing that out too?

How 'bout you just write the rules how you want them and you apply them to the Dez catch. You can win that way. Oh wait...that's what you are doing now.

 

[percyhoward]

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Really? Do you even read the rules? Or just the parts that pop out to you that seem to support your view?

And to anyone who has ever watched a snap of football it was obvious that he was falling. Seriously, if you can't even admit that then there is no wonder this just keeps going round and round. That and the notion that any act can be performed while falling.

Serious communication problems here.

The post you quoted was about a play against the Eagles in 2013.

 

[BlindFaith]

There you go again. Show a post where I said a case play was a rule I have been telling you and the rest of the wannabe rule interpreters that a case play is not a rule. So that is an outright LIE.
Dez was tripped by Shield's and to claim otherwise is another lie.
You do realize that the act of catching a pass ends when 8.1.3.c is complete right? You see that is how you read rules, you do it by understanding all of the parts. You make it to part c and you go to the ground as a runner, Item 1 applies to a receiver going to the ground. But that is clearly too complex for you to understand.

Really? Lies are pretty strong words. Play nice tough guy. Case plays may not be rules directly, but their accuracy and importance must be worth something if they are in there, right?

And to claim that anyone who thinks Dez wasn't tripped is lying? Must have touched a nerve here.

 

[percyhoward]

Where does it say anything about going to the ground BEFORE completing the catch process. The rule says If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass

What's the difference?

 

[BlindFaith]

Serious communication problems here.

The post you quoted was about a play against the Eagles in 2013.

What are you talking about? When did Shields play for the Eagles? Seriously, are you on meds or something?

 

[BlindFaith]

What's the difference?

~Banging my head

You tell me. This was your quote.
"But those aren't the questions to ask. The question is:

Did he go to the ground before he completed the catch process?"

You are just trolling now to get us to leave so you guys can prance around in your panties and shout out to the sheep how awesome you guys are and how you brought down the NFL conspiracy. lol I had more intelligent conversations with my 4 year old daughter.

 

[blindzebra]

Really dude? I have to spell out Act Common to the Game every time? smh

Anyway, they are AR 15, 8.12 and 8.13. You know, the case plays defining what act is acceptable while going to the ground. But I don't know at this point if you think case plays are rules or not. You change your opinion whenever it suits you. The 8.1.3.c does list what acts can be performed by a player who is not going to the ground.

c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.). Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.



So if any of those acts can be done by a player going to the ground, why do they only say Time, Brace and Balance in the sections talking specifically about going to the ground? Why not just leave those out all together? What is the purpose of having them? And if they do think they need to have them to clarify, why not have at least one of them mention any other act that can be done that is directly related to gathering themselves? Oh, I know, they cant possibly put in everything. But instead of putting in everything, or really nothing, because according to you there is no need for them at all anyway, they decided to do something very specific. Hmmm....

You are hopeless. Repeating your nonsense will never make it correct.
Again, the question you continue to avoid. If balance, brace, and lunge are it where is the rule saying so.

I will explain it to you again.
8.1.3 is the process of going from a receiver to a runner, that is it. Part a) and b) you are a receiver and after c) you are a RUNNER. Item 1 deals with a RECEIVER going to the ground. Simply put that means a player who has not established himself as a RUNNER. That requires you to refer to the applicable rule which is 8.1.3.a.b.c. to see if the RECEIVER going to the ground performed those three things. If they did complete all three prior to contacting the ground they are a RUNNER. See the Blandino video about Johnson and Thomas, because that is exactly what Blandino said.

A.R.15.95 is about an act common to the game. Again the applicable rule is 8.1.3.c. Notice how it says nothing there about balance, brace, or lunge. They are acts common to the game, but they are in that etc. area in the rules.

The other case plays about going to the ground show that completing part c) before you land can end Item 1. It is that simple. They show that completing a) b) and c) makes you a runner. Where in Item one does it say going to the ground can end? Where does it say the only way to do it is the stuff + lunge? It doesn't, and that is where your argument falls apart.

A.R. 15.95 links to 8.1.3.c, that is not contestable. It is headed act common to the game, that means one thing and one thing only that 8.1.3.c applies. The fact that the play supplied here links in scenario form with going to the ground case plays, hurts and does not help your stance. Because if you have to apply 8.1.3.c in A.R. 15.95, it also applies to A.R. 8.12 and 8.13. Which brings us back to ANY ACT COMMON TO THE GAME!

 

[blindzebra]

~Banging my head

You tell me. This was your quote.
"But those aren't the questions to ask. The question is:

Did he go to the ground before he completed the catch process?"

You are just trolling now to get us to leave so you guys can prance around in your panties and shout out to the sheep how awesome you guys are and how you brought down the NFL conspiracy. lol I had more intelligent conversations with my 4 year old daughter.

Did the players in 8.12 and 8.13?
I wonder how your daughter feels about how intelligent they were? Based on these threads I'd bet she was disappointed by your performance.

 

[percyhoward]

What are you talking about? When did Shields play for the Eagles?

The play against the Eagles was used to show that you can't just assume Dez would have fallen if Shields hadn't tripped him.

That has nothing to do with Item 1.

 

[BlindFaith]

A.R. 15.95 links to 8.1.3.c, that is not contestable. It is headed act common to the game, that means one thing and one thing only that 8.1.3.c applies. The fact that the play supplied here links in scenario form with going to the ground case plays, hurts and does not help your stance. Because if you have to apply 8.1.3.c in A.R. 15.95, it also applies to A.R. 8.12 and 8.13. Which brings us back to ANY ACT COMMON TO THE GAME!

AR 15 defines what act can be performed for a player going to the ground. The rule doesn't say, if the player goes to the ground they can perform any act common to the game.

It does specifically say TIME + LUNGE. Do we at least agree on what the actual case play says?

Then the other two case plays you always ignore say BRACE + LUNGE and REGAIN BALANCE + LUNGE. So, in your opinion, what are those case plays for? And remember, they are specifically under GOING TO THE GROUND.

Why have them? Or why not have at least one other case play to show ANY other act. But nope. Not a word. But keep on ignoring it as you always do.

 

[BlindFaith]

Did the players in 8.12 and 8.13?
I wonder how your daughter feels about how intelligent they were? Based on these threads I'd bet she was disappointed by your performance.

Did they what?

How intelligent who were? Nah, my daughter would get it. She can read and doesn't believe in some big NFL wide conspiracy.

 

[blindzebra]

AR 15 defines what act can be performed for a player going to the ground. The rule doesn't say, if the player goes to the ground they can perform any act common to the game.

It does specifically say TIME + LUNGE. Do we at least agree on what the actual case play says?

Then the other two case plays you always ignore say BRACE + LUNGE and REGAIN BALANCE + LUNGE. So, in your opinion, what are those case plays for? And remember, they are specifically under GOING TO THE GROUND.

Why have them? Or why not have at least one other case play to show ANY other act. But nope. Not a word. But keep on ignoring it as you always do.

Then why is it headed under acts common to the game? Explain that oh rule book expert?