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

[MarcusRock]

You ask 1000 people that are not Cowboy fans if Dez caught it and well over 75 % would say yes. Present them the rule support we have given in this thread and that number would be approaching 90%.

Would they be emotional non-Cowboys fans? Because your numbers would probably be right then.

 

[BlindFaith]

These?

Now, if any act can be performed while falling, why couldn't they have at least 1 example for that? And why doesn't AR 15 just say any act in the case play?

That's a good start.

 

[BlindFaith]

You ask 1000 people that are not Cowboy fans if Dez caught it and well over 75 % would say yes. Present them the rule support we have given in this thread and that number would be approaching 90%.

My responses to you on polls are getting deleted. But between two that I found, it's about 52% no catch 48% catch

 

[MarcusRock]

Tell me again how you didn't ask for what I posted.

Try the post before that when I asked for additional support for your "rules changing" theory. That was the subject at hand. Do you have any?

 

[Kevinicus]

Kevin, these rules aren't rocket science. Plus they're finite to boot. It's not not like there are infinite possibilities so it's not hard to analyze them at all unless you're trying to shoehorn what you want to see. That would be why no one else in the sports world sees what you lot see but sees the opposite instead. And I lie and lack honesty? LOL. You think comparing different parts of different rules to make up a story of the rules changing is on the up and up then? Not to mention answering me with stuff I didn't ask for when the real answer is "no, I don't have anything like that." You didn't strike me as one who projects like our resident parrot but no one is immune I guess.

Different parts of different rules? What are you even talking about?

I gave you what you asked for. You didn't like it and so whine and pretend it doesn't exist. And that's ignoring that what you are disturbingly fixated on is completely stupid and irrelevant to everything in this thread, makes no valid point, and serves no purpose other than to deflect and obfuscate.

 

[BlindFaith]

Would they be emotional non-Cowboys fans? Because your numbers would probably be right then.

They're not right. Majority don't think it was a catch.

 

[Kevinicus]

Try the post before that when I asked for additional support for your "rules changing" theory. That was the subject at hand. Do you have any?

I gave you two articles, one for the dez play and how it was ruled wrong, and one on the rule change. You didn't like it and whined and then lied.

 

[Kevinicus]

They're not right. Majority don't think it was a catch.

Source?

Of course that ignores that the vast majority have only seen the item 1 thing and have no knowledge of the catch process and case plays and the history of how these plays were ruled and statements by NFL and "experts" in the past that.

 

[BlindFaith]

Source?

Google Dez catch poll.

 

[MarcusRock]

I gave you two articles, one for the dez play and how it was ruled wrong, and one on the rule change. You didn't like it and whined and then lied.

LOL. Oh, you mean the one about being confused about the new wording of the rule while saying Dez didn't look like a runner. Okay, go with that. Didn't like it? I LOVED that article. It captured the catch theorists lunacy perfectly.

 

[blindzebra]

http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/01/did_dez_bryant_really_make_tha.html


https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/2000211-sports-and-racing-nfl/70994941

From a google search, only one agrees with the call and it is by less than 1 %, the other 3 are strongly saying catch.

 

[BlindFaith]

Source?

Of course that ignores that the vast majority have only seen the item 1 thing and have no knowledge of the catch process and case plays and the history of how these plays were ruled and statements by NFL and "experts" in the past that.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/2000211-sports-and-racing-nfl/70994941

 

[BlindFaith]

http://www.pennlive.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/01/did_dez_bryant_really_make_tha.html


https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/2000211-sports-and-racing-nfl/70994941

From a google search, only one agrees with the call and it is by less than 1 %, the other 3 are strongly saying catch.

We have no idea what these are. Even if they were dramatically in favor of no catch I'd say they are far from conclusive. And the general feel is that it's 50 50.

 

[Kevinicus]

Google Dez catch poll.

I found several at 60-77% catch, and a couple around 50/50. None had a huge sample size.

 

[blindzebra]

We have no idea what these are. Even if they were dramatically in favor of no catch I'd say they are far from conclusive. And the general feel is that it's 50 50.

LOL, but at least mine show up. And no, they are 56/44, 77/23, 75/23/2 saying catch and 50.74/49.26 saying no catch.

 

[BlindFaith]

I found several at 60-77% catch, and a couple around 50/50. None had a huge sample size.

Again, without knowing who were voting it's kind of meaningless.

The gamer faq one I think had around 600. Like 54% no catch. But I have no idea who they are. So I don't put much stock in it.

 

[Kevinicus]

LOL. Oh, you mean the one about being confused about the new wording of the rule while saying Dez didn't look like a runner. Okay, go with that. Didn't like it? I LOVED that article. It captured the catch theorists lunacy perfectly.

Look like a runner being someone stanfing up running. That is not what a runmer is in the NFL. But hey it's an article so it counts as support. You said so yourself. The crap you posted did not offer anything in-depth and just echoed their understanding based on the PR comments the NFL gave them. They did not break down the rule and case plays and other rulings or the changes implemented. It's all useless. Just like your trolling.

 

[BlindFaith]

LOL, but at least mine show up. And no, they are 56/44, 77/23, 75/23/2 saying catch and 50.74/49.26 saying no catch.

How many voters in each? Like 20? Hardly a valid sample size.

 

[blindzebra]

Again, without knowing who were voting it's kind of meaningless.

The gamer faq one I think had around 600. Like 54% no catch. But I have no idea who they are. So I don't put much stock in it.

50.74 to 49.26 and it is one I posted with the correct results.

 

[BlindFaith]

LOL, but at least mine show up. And no, they are 56/44, 77/23, 75/23/2 saying catch and 50.74/49.26 saying no catch.

Here's another one. Less close. Still no catch.

Between the two you should have your 1000.
http://www.thebassbarn.com/forum/12...dez-make-catch-not-poll-4.html#/topics/558018

This one is 54/46 no catch. Less than 100 votes