Dean Blandino's explanation

[KJJ]

Yeah, I got it… You stuck your foot in your mouth and now you're changing your story, qualifying it, and adding it a bunch of "yeah, buts...". Meanwhile, that foot of yours just keeps getting deeper and deeper into your mouth.

There was nothing in LF's post that said anything about "the archives of this board". You added that after he brought up the Barnes play in SB X.

You may they brought blanket statement, and when called on it, you started backtracking and sidestepping. Yeah, I get it just fine. So does everyone else who reads this board.

The only mouth I stuck my foot in is yours. We're talking about officiating and you're coming around trying to twist some comments I made in an attempt to start a fight. Dude, it couldn't be more obvious, you're the only one making an issue out of this. Nothing about archives had to mentioned because it was clear he was talking about comments he's made on the board. My views and opinions on the Dez overturn bothers some of you so much, you look for anything and everything to try and start a fight. Go find someone to have a pillow fight with.

 

[Bullflop]

I'm hoping this rule can either be wiped out or clarified in the offseason to eliminate the gray areas if it is retained. There's nothing we can do at this point to change what has happened but perhaps a repeat of this obscure ruling could at least be made to eliminate the controversy from happening again. It's a good example of the nit-picky types of things that have made the NFL rules so shaky.

 

[DandyDon52]

Easily explained by Green Bay holding consistently all game. Hard to generate a pass rush when the refs won't call a hold on the opposing team you are trying to rush. Just my opinion.

It is also hard when you rush only 3 or 4 and play coverage.
Did they hold Atlanta too ? or did they decide not to hold in Atlanta game??

 

[percyhoward]

From all the many times I've heard Blandino and Pereira discuss the play, once a receiver is deemed "going to the ground" the receiver must complete the process of maintaining possession of the ball through the contact of the ground. Dez's reach for the endzone was pointed out to Blandino and he was asked isn't that a "football move?" He said once the receiver is "going to the ground" they still have to complete the process. He and Pereira agreed once the receiver is "going to the ground" they have to complete the process regardless of a reach or anything else.

If -- and only if -- the player is still a "receiver." That's the key part you keep missing.

The catch process comes first, and supersedes the subsection on "receivers going to the ground." When the player completes the catch process, he's no longer a "receiver." He's now a "runner." That's why the subsection has always read, "if a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass" instead of simply "when a player goes to the ground."

Blandino didn't say the football move (which completes the catch process) didn't matter. He said they "absolutely" looked at it, and that it needed to be "more obvious than that." He had to say that the catch process wasn't completed before he could even apply the subsection on "receivers" going to the ground. The rule book forced him to address the catch process. Because the catch process comes first. A player can't be a "receiver" going to the ground if he's no longer a "receiver."

 

[DandyDon52]

About the call, it was a violation of the rules, and I think GB noticed that dallas did this sometimes, and alerted officials to look for it,
and it paid off.
This was the fault of Dallas coaches, why send a guy on field who then comes back off lol it makes no sense,
and is sloppy and disorganized.
They should also be aware of all the rules, it does help to know the rules lol.
Either butler was needed or he wasnt, what play was called? you could see there was confusion about the play and personel
and that should not happen in a playoff game, or any late season game, maybe in game one or preseason, but not in playoffs.

Same thing on getting caught with 12 men or the guys running off field , they knew rodgers would do that, and sean lee
said we will be smart about it, but evidently not smart after all ?
Those things had a big affect on their slow start, and it was coaching and preparation errors.

 

[DandyDon52]

If -- and only if -- the player is still a "receiver." That's the key part you keep missing.

The catch process comes first, and supersedes the subsection on "receivers going to the ground." When the player completes the catch process, he's no longer a "receiver." He's now a "runner." That's why the subsection has always read, "if a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass" instead of simply "when a player goes to the ground."

Blandino didn't say the football move (which completes the catch process) didn't matter. He said they "absolutely" looked at it, and that it needed to be "more obvious than that." He had to say that the catch process wasn't completed before he could even apply the subsection on "receivers" going to the ground. The rule book forced him to address the catch process. Because the catch process comes first. A player can't be a "receiver" going to the ground if he's no longer a "receiver."

Dez took steps, but he was also always going to the ground , leaning or in the act of a fall, so the steps did not make him a runner.
It was like a long fall.
However the bad thing was it was called a catch on the field, and it wasnt clearly not a catch, so it should not have been overturned.
There is supposed to be overwhelming evidence to overturn a call, and it was not that, it was debatable evidence.

So it isnt whether it was or not, it was should it have been overturned or not.
The best thing there was to let it stand, and then GB drives for a score and wins anyway, and they dont have this controversial overturn.

But on the same hand, the call against hitchens in Det game should not have been picked up or whatever that was, it was called
as interference and he never looked back, so it should have stood.
Had that call not been reversed, Dallas might not have even been in GB.

To overturn a call , it should be clear to everyone that it was wrong call, if you look at it on replay, and say well I think this or that, then
the call should stand.
There were several catches in playoffs this year that I thought were clearly out of bounds, but called a catch.
But then I see the replays, and hard to believe, but they got both feet "clearly" in bounds so yeah it stands.
But even if it is debatable, the call on field should stand.
It would have to "clearly" show 1 foot not in bounds to overturn it.

On the dez play nothing was really "clear" it was I think or it looks like etc.

 

[percyhoward]

Dez took steps, but he was also always going to the ground , leaning or in the act of a fall, so the steps did not make him a runner.

No sir. There is nothing in the catch process about body position, so a player can complete the catch process, even while falling, as long as he meets all 3 requirements: control, two feet, football move. See the Julius Thomas example vs. the Giants in 2013, and listen to Blandino's explanation at the time.

That's why Blandino had to address the football move and the catch process. That comes first. It's the only thing that allows anyone to apply the "going to the ground" subsection of the catch rule.

To say that the catch process didn't apply because the receiver was going to the ground is to put the cart before the horse. Being considered a receiver going to the ground is contingent upon failure to complete the catch process.

 

[phildadon86]

It is also hard when you rush only 3 or 4 and play coverage.
Did they hold Atlanta too ? or did they decide not to hold in Atlanta game??

No they held in Atlanta too. They always hold. They are never flagged for it however, because they always do it. There was actually an article on here explaining that its how they practice.

 

[KJJ]

If -- and only if -- the player is still a "receiver." That's the key part you keep missing.

The catch process comes first, and supersedes the subsection on "receivers going to the ground." When the player completes the catch process, he's no longer a "receiver." He's now a "runner." That's why the subsection has always read, "if a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass" instead of simply "when a player goes to the ground."

Blandino didn't say the football move (which completes the catch process) didn't matter. He said they "absolutely" looked at it, and that it needed to be "more obvious than that." He had to say that the catch process wasn't completed before he could even apply the subsection on "receivers" going to the ground. The rule book forced him to address the catch process. Because the catch process comes first. A player can't be a "receiver" going to the ground if he's no longer a "receiver."

Move on and let it go.

 

[percyhoward]

Move on and let it go.

Do your homework.

 

[KJJ]

Do your homework.

You're arguing with those who implemented the RULE and the league who CONFIRMED the overturn was the correct call under the RULE. You're the one who needs to do their homework and stop trying to put your own spin on the RULE because it didn't go the Cowboys way. You keep coming on here trying to tell Blandino and the league how the RULE should have been enforced. You're one of those who come off like a typical armchair FAN who thinks they know better the league and those who implemented the RULE.

 

[KJJ]

What's upset me about the Dez overturn isn't the RULE, it was Dez's inability to keep the ball off the ground and from coming loose. Had he just tried to catch the ball and not score it would have been a completed pass. It was the lung and reach that caused the ball to impact the ground jarring it loose. He did the most difficult part by winning the battle for the ball and securing it but right at the very end he allowed the ball to come loose. This has been a huge issue for him and it comes down to his lack of awareness. We saw the same thing on opening day when he had a TD overturned by once again allowing the ball to come loose right at the very end.

On that occasion he didn't allow the ball to touch the ground but by the time he regained control of the ball he was OB. The ground has been a bigger enemy for Dez than defenders on these plays. Edelman showed great awareness in the SB by not allowing the ball to touch the ground. You could see he was making a conscious effort to keep the ball off the ground. Although the ball can touch the ground, if there's even the slightest movement of the ball it's going to give the officials a reason to call the pass incomplete so you have to keep the ball off the ground. The only sure way to get these type of plays to go your way is to keep the ball off the ground.

 

[LandryFan]

No sir. There is nothing in the catch process about body position, so a player can complete the catch process, even while falling, as long as he meets all 3 requirements: control, two feet, football move. See the Julius Thomas example vs. the Giants in 2013, and listen to Blandino's explanation at the time.

That's why Blandino had to address the football move and the catch process. That comes first. It's the only thing that allows anyone to apply the "going to the ground" subsection of the catch rule.

To say that the catch process didn't apply because the receiver was going to the ground is to put the cart before the horse. Being considered a receiver going to the ground is contingent upon failure to complete the catch process.

To add to what you said above, when blandino was on one of the post game shows immediately after the game, he didn't initally address the catch process at all when talking about the reversal. He went right to the "holding onto the ball through contact with the ground" angle. It wasn't until the interviewer asked him about the catch process (and whether Dez made a football move, specifically) that he addressed it. That's when he said "yea, we looked at that and he didn't make "enough" of a football move so he had to maintain control of the ball through contact with the ground." From the beginning, he has used the "possession through contact with the ground" as a red herring to divert attention away from the fact that he did not have indisputable evidence to overturn the call on the field that the catch process had been completed. At the very least there was insufficient evidence to claim it hadn't been completed, thus the call on the field should not have been overturned. Some people, especially blandino, need to go to the dictionary and look up the definition of "indisputable".

 

[KJJ]

Blandino and Mike Pereira both said the same thing that Dez didn't do enough for it to be considered a "football move" to trump "going to the ground" and not having to complete the process. That comes down to JUDGEMENT and judgement will always be apart of officiating calls. The "football move" had to occur PRIOR to Dez being ruled "going to the ground." Most avid fans and a lot of players that have seen the play feel the ball changing hands after the catch, the lunge and the reach were all "football moves" but the problem is that Dez was ruled "going to the ground" PRIOR to all those moves being made therefore he had to complete the process. On the the Julius Thomas and Fitzgerald play both players caught the ball, then made a turn upfield a "football move" just PRIOR to "going to the ground" therefore they didn't have to complete a process because control and the catch had already been established.

 

[percyhoward]

To add to what you said above, when blandino was on one of the post game shows immediately after the game, he didn't initally address the catch process at all when talking about the reversal. He went right to the "holding onto the ball through contact with the ground" angle. It wasn't until the interviewer asked him about the catch process (and whether Dez made a football move, specifically) that he addressed it. That's when he said "yea, we looked at that and he didn't make "enough" of a football move so he had to maintain control of the ball through contact with the ground."

This is exactly what happened. He fast-forwarded the discussion to talk about "going to the ground," and was probably hoping nobody knew enough to say, "hold everything, isn't there a catch process?" Because he knew he didn't have a leg to stand on regarding the catch process.

Some people were fooled into buying it, others (like you) know better.

 

[KJJ]

Blandino and the official had to look at the entire sequence because JUDGEMENT was involved. He and the official in their "judgement" didn't feel Dez did enough prior to "going to the ground" for it to be considered a "football move." Too big a deal is being made of Blandino's initial comment that he looked a the lunge and reach if it had already been determined that Dez was "going to the ground." No where did he say Dez "going to the ground" had already been determined.

He and the official had to look closely at everything before coming to a conclusion because some "judgement" was involved in the entire play. Even Dez "going to the ground" involved some judgement. You're NEVER going to remove "judgement" and each officials interpretation of what they're seeing. It's impossible! Not everything is clear cut even in HD frame by frame replay so some "judgement" is going to be involved.

 

[KJJ]

The only thing about the Dez overturn that was 100% clear cut is that the ball came loose as it contacted the ground and the final ruling came down to that. There was INDISPUTABLE evidence that the ball came loose when it contacted the ground and those who've disputed that FACT have some real issues. The league has made it very clear that if a receiver is ruled "going to the ground" they MUST hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground or it will be ruled incomplete.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

As soon as he reached and slammed the ball on the turf, the ball popped up due to the impact of the ground. I can only imagine some of theories you and others had after watching the Zapruder film. lol

Sir, you just described a "football move."

Stating, "as he reached."

 

[KJJ]

Sir, you just described a "football move."

Stating, "as he reached."

Sir, you haven't been following along because Dez was ruled "going to the ground" PRIOR to the lunge and reach, therefore he had to complete the process of hanging onto the ball through the contact of the ground. None of this is Rocket Science.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

[QUwe'reE="KJJ, cleart: 7214141, member: 24819"]Is this clear enough for you or do you consider those pictures optical illusions? They've only been posted more than a dozen times on this board. Try opening your eyes!

[/QUOTE]
Asside from the clear football move, we're just supposed to pretend Blandino had access to this cut up during his review?