I thought so too
But if you watch the video the ball came loose before the third step
It was reviewed upstairs as they have lots of plays this year
But again where does the current rule refer to the of a third necessity third step? I know Mr. Marcus is too cowardly and lacking integrity to answer the question because his ego is all this is about for him. The rule says two feet down plus control and a football move which could entail only one step, two steps of in fact three or more steps after the two feet are down and control established.
I mean if that is the rule why isn't it in the official NFL Rule Online Rulebook either in the rule summary or the expanded rule section?
I don't think the issue is Mr. Marcus contradicting his own arguments - that's what a professional (in their own eyes) debater does because winning the arguments trumps everything else including the facts and truth.
But enough about that - The point a number of people are making about the receiver whose progress is sopped in mid-air is simply that the rules seem or the application of the rules seems highly inconsistent and open to both honest on dishonest interpretation and certainly open to inconsistent interpretation. Certainly, you have seen the same play ruled differently whether involving Dallas or not. at some point, maybe even this year..
There needs to be a more complete, comprehensive, and most importantly consistent rule and rule interpretation that is consistently applied, whether that would make this play a fumble period or not a fumble period,.that has some real credibility with the player, the teams, and the fans. The problem is when this inconsistency appears to be encouraged by the League and within its rules. People in the NFL talk about human error as if it's perfectly okay. Imagine if major airlines - or minor airlines for that matter) took that view. Imagine if Nuclear Power plant builders took that attitude.
My point isn't that no human error is ever acceptable but the NFL could do a number of things to reduce the human error and
diminish the impact of what human error there is by reducing the inconsistencies in the League's rules and their interpretation. Why in the world wouldn't the HFL to be more competently and consistently officiated for fans to have a clearer understanding of why officials make the calls they make and why in fact they are correct. Why wouldn't they want to those calls right or wrong to have the least possible impact on the outcome of games?
That's the real question not whether the NFL and its officials are biased in any way against the Cowboys. They ask the same questions across the League in cities with NFL franchises.. Of course Cowboy fans are going to notice it more when it impacts the Cowboys - we watch the Cowboys before we watch anyone else. Of course its going to outrage us more when it impacts the Cowboys. Otherwise we'd be Eagle fans or Giant fans or whatever-you-what-to-call Washington fans. But trust me fans of every other team have seen this seen as often as we have and with the same painful results as we have. Is this the long-sought parity the NFL is working toward - everybody gets cheated and every bit as often? Are we supposed to conclude that this much inconsistency is some weird form of consistency?
