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

[BlindFaith]

So a case play with a heading ACT COMMON TO THE GAME does not link to the rule covering ACT COMMON TO THE GAME.

It links to the rule for going to the ground and what act common to the game can be performed by a player going to the ground. Exactly as the case play explains.

 

[BlindFaith]

And where within that rule, or any rule, is your stuff + lunge written.

Where is the rule that says any act stuff can be performed while a player is going to the ground?

 

[blindzebra]

It links to the rule for going to the ground and what act common to the game can be performed by a player going to the ground. Exactly as the case play explains.

Then why wasn't it under going to the ground?

So again your rule citation is the case play.

 

[BlindFaith]

Wow is all I can say.
Me:
Rule...............................case play.
Rule citation......................case play link.

You:
Case play....................rule.

Case play...................no rule citation to link to so I will go back to........case play and spin the old switching things lie.

Its not my problem if you haven't read the hundreds of post we put up. It's pretty clear if you had. But I will clarify it all for you again shortly.

 

[blindzebra]

Where is the rule that says any act stuff can be performed while a player is going to the ground?

8.1.3.c.

Going to the ground is for a receiver so you judge that player by 8.1.3.a.b, if said player completes 8.1.3.c they are no longer a receiver they are a runner.

 

[blindzebra]

Its not my problem if you haven't read the hundreds of post we put up. It's pretty clear if you had. But I will clarify it all for you again shortly.

Oh, I can't wait. Your make believe is almost as entertaining as the Lord of the Rings, and probably as long too.

 

[OmerV]

The case play offers a single play to provide guidance on a rule concept. That concept (at least in this instance), and thus the case play, covers multiple similar scenarios. This isn't complicated. This case play does take out any uncertainty and makes it crystal clear - the process trumps "going to the ground." Or I should say "trumped" since they changed it.

It's complicated for you. Sorry, but you are wrong on this. The case play is very specific, and if it were meant to cover a multitude of situations it wouldn't be. One foot down and then getting hit and then going to the ground specifically as a result of the hit is not a broad scenario. It is not an "apply your own scenario as you deem fit" kind of thing, because if it were it wouldn't clear up anything at all.

 

[BlindFaith]

Then why wasn't it under going to the ground?

So again your rule citation is the case play.

What are you talking about now?

The "rule" is under
RULE 8 FORWARD PASS, BACKWARD PASS, FUMBLE
SECTION 1 FORWARD PASS

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass
A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
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.
Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch.

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.

The "case plays" are under
RULE 8 FORWARD PASS, BACKWARD PASS, FUMBLE
FORWARD PASS—CATCH/NO CATCH

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.


If you have bothered to read this, hopefully you see how it relates directly to going to the ground???????????????????

 

[percyhoward]

You've got my attention with this. Blandino seems to indicate that a player can be established as a runner if going to the ground.

Not the first time someone has tried to get your attention with Blandino's video tutorial.

But it's good to see you finally took the time to listen to his words. Better late than never. And @Mr. C persistence pays off.

 

[OmerV]

If this were true how many volumes of cases would they need to cover every situation?

And even if it were like case law you are wrong about it being case specific for use. Cases are used to support different circumstances all the time. Sometimes multiple ones are used to argue a case and a judge decides if they work for the case before them.

Case plays link to rules in the rule book and are a guide not the only possible scenario.

The NFL case book isn't intended to clarify every rule in the play book, it is just intended to clarify individual points in the play book.

 

[BlindFaith]

8.1.3.c.

Going to the ground is for a receiver so you judge that player by 8.1.3.a.b, if said player completes 8.1.3.c they are no longer a receiver they are a runner.

I'll be getting to this later.

 

[gimmesix]

This is the problem. If you understand the rule, it is pretty cut and dry in the Dez case.

Now, the Fitz play or the Thomas play. Those are much more boarder line. But the Dez play is pretty cut and dry that he was going to the ground, never gathered himself prior to the lunge/reach. Understanding the nuance of the way the rules are written has been a struggle to some. And to be fair, as has been said all along, the rules are poorly written.

I don't agree that it is cut and dry, but I don't think it's worth arguing about anymore.

 

[OmerV]

Not the first time someone has tried to get your attention with Blandino's video tutorial.

But it's good to see you finally took the time to listen to his words. Better late than never. And @Kevinicus persistence pays off.

I hadn't seen it before - don't be an ***.

 

[Kevinicus]

It's complicated for you. Sorry, but you are wrong on this. The case play is very specific, and if it were meant to cover a multitude of situations it wouldn't be. One foot down and then getting hit and then going to the ground specifically as a result of the hit is not a broad scenario. It is not an "apply your own scenario as you deem fit" kind of thing, because if it were it wouldn't clear up anything at all.

Except the case play is under acts common to the game. The one foot then contact is not the key component of the play, just like the down, distance, and yardline aren't the key aspects and can be changed without affecting the ruling.

One foot then contact, two feet then contact, no contact. All would work here. The key is the catch process and when it can be completed.

 

[percyhoward]

I hadn't seen it before - don't be an ***.

I gave you the link a week ago -- not once but twice. You just didn't bother to watch it.

Thanks for finally watching it and listening to his words. Whether you want the thanks or not.

 

[blindzebra]

What are you talking about now?

The "rule" is under
RULE 8 FORWARD PASS, BACKWARD PASS, FUMBLE
SECTION 1 FORWARD PASS

Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass
A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
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.
Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch.

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.

The "case plays" are under
RULE 8 FORWARD PASS, BACKWARD PASS, FUMBLE
FORWARD PASS—CATCH/NO CATCH

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.


If you have bothered to read this, hopefully you see how it relates directly to going to the ground???????????????????

What is the act of catching a pass? That is your rule reference.

It is 8.1.3.a.b and when c) gets completed you are a runner and are no longer in the act of catching a pass.

And again, the only reason you can post it is because I ALREADY DID.

The difference is I understand that Item 1 is a subsection of 8.1.3 and exists within that rule. I also understand what a rule citation means. It requires more than saying oh it is Item 1, it requires making the connection to the part of the rule that applies to the case play. Where in the rule book does it say your stuff + lunge?

 

[Kevinicus]

Is this seriously what you think? So linking to someone from the NFL, or creditable news outlet that puts in due diligence to understand the rules is the same as linking to Nate, who thinks having one foot touch the ground completes the act of going to the ground? Or to C who admits he hasn't even read all of the rules?

And this coming from someone that thinks it was a big PR move to cover up the fact that they blew the call, all the while creating 100 times the outrage about the rule itself by doing so. You have no cred my man, none.

Um, the guys he quoted were not doing due dilligence to understand the rules. Far less than that of those I posted.

This coming from someone who doesn't understand PR even though that PR wotked perfectly on you. Their PR did not create more outrage. Please provide a source? If more people believe the NFL like you claimed before, why would it result in more outrage?

If you mean the play result itself, it was too late to fix that, so PR starts.

 

[Kevinicus]

LOL. Glad to hear you didn't write that trash (if you're even telling the truth there). But nice of you to continue repeating a lie. The authors weighed in themselves. They weren't quoting or summarizing anything. Two sets of a specific rule are not hard to analyze. Projection overload on your side. Deflection, embarrassed. Look, like I said, I don't need an admission. I know that'll never come. I just need to "know" and your responses and overall contributions to this discussion confirm that. So back to the sidelines saying "you're wrong" to everyone. Too bad the domain for that story can't be linked to here but the quotes are priceless and too good to let go of.

Do you recall the origins of this thread and your feelings on the media?

 

[MarcusRock]

Um, the guys he quoted were not doing due dilligence to understand the rules. Far less than that of those I posted.

This coming from someone who doesn't understand PR even though that PR wotked perfectly on you. Their PR did not create more outrage. Please provide a source? If more people believe the NFL like you claimed before, why would it result in more outrage?

If you mean the play result itself, it was too late to fix that, so PR starts.

LOL. Not doing due diligence? If they didn't understand the rules they couldn't have come to the conclusions they did. By themselves. Not quoting or summarizing what the NFL said. I asked if you had additional support and you send me that garbage of someone being confused about the rule in 2014 and then the re-write in 2015. He was confused enough to not even know the usage of basic football terminology as it relates to the catch rule. So you still haven't actually produced anything and look worse for producing what you did. Just say no like we know the answer to be.

While additional support doesn't prove anything, it does show that multiple independent sources can analyze the same situation and come to the same conclusion separately on what amounts to a very small area of a rule book. But what you and other catch theorists support is akin to a research study where n=1. How would that work out in the scientific world? A study with n=20 would at least be given much more credit.

 

[blindzebra]

The NFL case book isn't intended to clarify every rule in the play book, it is just intended to clarify individual points in the play book.

Actually it is intended to clarify every rule in the rule book, what it can't do is cover every situation pertaining to those individual rules.