Dean Blandino's explanation

[percyhoward]

This is all about Blandino for you and if he was as incompetent as you and a few others try to spin, he still wouldn't have his job. You're making a big deal of some of his explanations of the play and why he said this and why he said that or why he didn't say this or why he didn't say that.

I think the only way to understand what happened is to know the rules, and know how he explained the way he interpreted them. He's a PR guy with a degree in Communication and Media Studies, and has never even been a field official. So, since his knowledge of football rules obviously isn't what earned him his job, it wouldn't be a determining factor in whether he keeps it either.

Can you provide a comment from anyone who's credible, that isn't some Cowboys homer on a FAN board saying any of what you're spinning?

Blandino was asked the question, "What about the football move?" on the day of the play. Whoever thought to ask that question knew exactly what they were doing. If they happened to be a Cowboys fan, does that turn it into a bad question? Most people just go with what makes the most sense, but there's a lot to process on this one. A helluva lot.

You admit that Brown ruled Dez down by contact, but you don't realize that this then makes it impossible to reverse Brown's call without proving no football move.

The fact that the rule says Blandino should have had to prove no football move, the fact that he was asked about the football move, the fact that he said there wasn't enough of a football move, the fact that the football move was taken out of the rule book at the next available opportunity, and the fact that it was reinstated the next year all add up to this: The guy screwed up by ignoring the third part of the catch process, then tried to whitewash it by getting rid of the rule he'd ignored, then the rule was put back in a year later.

 

[KJJ]

I think the only way to understand what happened is to know the rules, and know how he explained the way he interpreted them. He's a PR guy with a degree in Communication and Media Studies, and has never even been a field official. So, since his knowledge of football rules obviously isn't what earned him his job, it wouldn't be a determining factor in whether he keeps it either.

Blandino was asked the question, "What about the football move?" on the day of the play. Whoever thought to ask that question knew exactly what they were doing. If they happened to be a Cowboys fan, does that turn it into a bad question? Most people just go with what makes the most sense, but there's a lot to process on this one. A helluva lot.

You admit that Brown ruled Dez down by contact, but you don't realize that this then makes it impossible to reverse Brown's call without proving no football move.

The fact that the rule says Blandino should have had to prove no football move, the fact that he was asked about the football move, the fact that he said there wasn't enough of a football move, the fact that the football move was taken out of the rule book at the next available opportunity, and the fact that it was reinstated the next year all add up to this: The guy screwed up by ignoring the third part of the catch process, then tried to whitewash it by getting rid of the rule he'd ignored, then the rule was put back in a year later.

Blandino knows the rules a hell of a lot better than you or any FAN on this board and he articulates them very well. It's no surprise he has a degree in communications but good luck for him or anyone else to communicate a RULE to a bunch of stubborn Cowboys homers on a FAN board that didn't go the teams way. You didn't like the way he explained the RULE and that's because you hate the RULE like everyone and because you can't come to grips with it you continue to argue and blame Blandino. It took more than Blandino to come up with the RULE and it took a committee to vote it in. What got Blandino the job was the 20 years he put into officiating. He managed the NFL’s instant replay program from 2003 to 2007 including overseeing the system’s upgrade to high-definition equipment in 2007. From 2007 to 2009 he was director of officiating which was the No. 2 position in the Officiating Department under Mike Pereira. Why is it you and other FANS on this board are the only ones pinning this on Blandino? You claimed in an earlier response that Blandino made the final ruling and according to him the final ruling was up to the official on the field. All Blandino does is provide an extra set of eyes to weight in on these plays and it's up to the official on the field to make the call. Mike Pereira said the same thing.

Blandino and other officials have been asked many times what is a "football move" and none have been able to provide an answer that satisfies anyone or clearly defines what it is. It comes down to judgement. Blandino did a spilt screen last year of the Dez play and the Larry Fitzgerald play to try and show what a "football move" is and what the officials are looking for. On the Fitz play he caught the ball, turned his body to go up field, then he started to go to the ground and the ball came loose when contacting the ground. Blandino said it was correctly ruled a catch because Fitz caught the ball and turned up field establishing himself as a "runner" which is a "football move" BEFORE he started "going to the ground." The Dez play was clearly different because his momentum was taking him to the ground before he even had control of the ball so he was going to have to complete the process of making the catch through the contact of the ground. As for Brown the official that called Dez down by contact, he made the right call at the moment because you couldn't see if the ball touched the ground when Dez regained control of it.

The official had to see when Dez had control of the ball and had to make sure both feet were in bounds, so he had to take in a lot and make a quick decision. He gave Dez the catch which was the proper call in that situation, not having seen the ball touch the ground. The call was reversed because the ball came loose when it impacted the ground and Dez was ruled "going to the ground" therefore he had to hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground. Any so called "football move" that might have occurred AFTER Dez was already "going to the ground" didn't matter because being RULED "going to the ground" REQUIRES him to maintain possession of the ball through the contact of the ground. EVERY official that weighed in agreed when they broke down the play and even Stephen Jones said Dez "going to the ground" required Dez to have to complete the process despite the ball changing hands and the reach towards the endzone.

 

[percyhoward]

Blandino knows the rules a hell of a lot better than you or any FAN on this board and he articulates them very well.

There had to be indisputable visual proof after Dez gained control and got two feet down, that he didn't have the ball long enough to enable him to make one football move. One, mind you.

Even though he had enough time to touch the ground with his foot a third time, enough time to be tackled, enough time to tuck the ball in his left arm, and enough time to reach to try to break the plane, Blandino's ruling that Dez never became a runner meant that he didn't have the ball long enough to make even one football move. By rule, that's what it meant.

When asked if the reach could be considered a football move, he didn't say, "That doesn't matter, because he was going to the ground." He couldn't say that because the rules wouldn't let him. He knew that the catch process -- not an official's judgment -- decides whether the player must hold on after going to the ground. He knew he had to address the catch process. He waited for the question.

“Yeah, absolutely. We looked at that aspect of it and in order for it to be a football move, it’s got to be more obvious than that, reaching the ball out with both hands, extending it for the goal line..."

Knowing that he had to prove the football move didn't happen, and knowing that there was no such visual evidence, all he could come up with was that the football move needed to be "more obvious than that." This is the height of insanity. More obvious than what? What thing was he referring to, if that thing didn't happen?

How can something that needs to be more obvious not be a thing?

It ends up having to be some kind of an act that proves there was no act. Something you look at in order to understand that you don't see it. Blandino wanted us to believe that, whatever Dez did, one of its visible features is its own non-existence.

"Going to the ground" does not supersede the catch process, and a replay official's judgment does not supersede a field official's judgment.

 

[KJJ]

There had to be indisputable visual proof after Dez gained control and got two feet down, that he didn't have the ball long enough to enable him to make one football move. One, mind you.

Even though he had enough time to touch the ground with his foot a third time, enough time to be tackled, enough time to tuck the ball in his left arm, and enough time to reach to try to break the plane, Blandino's ruling that Dez never became a runner meant that he didn't have the ball long enough to make even one football move. By rule, that's what it meant.

When asked if the reach could be considered a football move, he didn't say, "That doesn't matter, because he was going to the ground." He couldn't say that because the rules wouldn't let him. He knew that the catch process -- not an official's judgment -- decides whether the player must hold on after going to the ground. He knew he had to address the catch process. He waited for the question.

“Yeah, absolutely. We looked at that aspect of it and in order for it to be a football move, it’s got to be more obvious than that, reaching the ball out with both hands, extending it for the goal line..."

Knowing that he had to prove the football move didn't happen, and knowing that there was no such visual evidence, all he could come up with was that the football move needed to be "more obvious than that." This is the height of insanity. More obvious than what? What thing was he referring to, if that thing didn't happen?

How can something that needs to be more obvious not be a thing?

It ends up having to be some kind of an act that proves there was no act. Something you look at in order to understand that you don't see it. Blandino wanted us to believe that, whatever Dez did, one of its visible features is its own non-existence.

"Going to the ground" does not supersede the catch process, and a replay official's judgment does not supersede a field official's judgment.

If I continue wasting my time on this it may never end. You have a position you're never going to come off of and it's time for this chapter of the Dez catch to be put to an end.

 

[LandryFan]

There had to be indisputable visual proof after Dez gained control and got two feet down, that he didn't have the ball long enough to enable him to make one football move. One, mind you.

Even though he had enough time to touch the ground with his foot a third time, enough time to be tackled, enough time to tuck the ball in his left arm, and enough time to reach to try to break the plane, Blandino's ruling that Dez never became a runner meant that he didn't have the ball long enough to make even one football move. By rule, that's what it meant.

When asked if the reach could be considered a football move, he didn't say, "That doesn't matter, because he was going to the ground." He couldn't say that because the rules wouldn't let him. He knew that the catch process -- not an official's judgment -- decides whether the player must hold on after going to the ground. He knew he had to address the catch process. He waited for the question.

“Yeah, absolutely. We looked at that aspect of it and in order for it to be a football move, it’s got to be more obvious than that, reaching the ball out with both hands, extending it for the goal line..."

Knowing that he had to prove the football move didn't happen, and knowing that there was no such visual evidence, all he could come up with was that the football move needed to be "more obvious than that." This is the height of insanity. More obvious than what? What thing was he referring to, if that thing didn't happen?

How can something that needs to be more obvious not be a thing?

It ends up having to be some kind of an act that proves there was no act. Something you look at in order to understand that you don't see it. Blandino wanted us to believe that, whatever Dez did, one of its visible features is its own non-existence.

"Going to the ground" does not supersede the catch process, and a replay official's judgment does not supersede a field official's judgment.

The very last sentence above sums it up perfectly. Very well stated, Percyhoward!

 

[Cowboys_22]

I'm a homer and proud of it. It was a catch. If Dez was in the act of falling, he would have landed at the 2 yard line but because of the football move, he reached the foot line, catch all day long. Great catch Dez! Peace out. \/

 

[percyhoward]

You have a position you're never going to come off of.

You maintain that Blandino was within his rights to circumvent the catch process, and yet you can't come up with the rule that shows why, and can't explain why he didn't just point to that rule himself. This should tell you that there is no such rule. The catch process decides whether a player must hold on to the ball when he hits the ground. The football moves(s) proves the catch process was completed.

Then a few months after this controversy surrounding the football move(s), the competition committee eliminates the football move as the final requirement of the catch process. They take it out of the book completely, effectively leaving the criteria for a catch to the official's judgment -- ultimately, Blandino's judgment. The football move dates back to 1942. But you believe that NFL officials, players, and coaches suddenly didn't understand what a football move was in 2014, so it had to be eliminated before the 2015 season.

This was such a huge mistake that the NFL couldn't even make it through an entire season before the commissioner put together a "catch committee" made up of three coaches, a GM, a former wide receiver and a former field official.

 

[percyhoward]

The only reason Blandino even admitted that he saw a reach, and that it wasn't enough of a reach, was that Steratore put his foot in his mouth by telling the pool reporter after the game that he saw a reach. Oops.

"Although the receiver is possessing the football, he must maintain possession of that football throughout the entire process of the catch," Steratore said. "In our judgement he maintained possession but continued to fall and never had another act common to the game. We deemed that by our judgement to be the full process of the catch, and at the time he lands and the ball hits the ground, it comes loose as it hits the ground, which would make that incomplete; although he re-possesses it, it does contact the ground when he reaches so the repossession is irrelevant because it was ruled an incomplete pass when we had the ball hit the ground."

Otherwise, Blandino could have just said, "What reach? There was no football move."

 

[Melonfeud]

Ya, Dez caught that ball!
I was up at my best friends house watching that game( he'd sent his wife of 20 some years to Celebrity Rehab cuz she wanted to go, when she got out sober she split and took half ((of a bunch)) I think I spent 3 nights on his couch pulling suicide watch that Thanksgiving cuz it probably would have been one of those murder then suicide things)
Anyway were watching that game and he's got his soon to be ex wife's foam cheese head wedge hat on and talking all kinds of smack/ trash,, he even put a bucket of fried chicken on the coffee table and dancing around it trying to channel some kinda bad ju-ju,voodoo crap by dancing around a dead chicken right on that particular cowboy's drive,,,,ya, I guess it worked out for him,afterwards he felt bad about what he did,said we got *****d on that call.

(Straight up/true story)

 

[KJJ]

You maintain that Blandino was within his rights to circumvent the catch process, and yet you can't come up with the rule that shows why, and can't explain why he didn't just point to that rule himself. This should tell you that there is no such rule.

I haven't maintained any of that, you continue to make this about Blandino and you can't come up with anyone credible who backs your opinion. Many officials and talking heads/media have weighed in on that play and I haven't heard a single one of them spin the crap you've been spinning for the past 2 years on this board. That should tell everyone here who has a clue that you and the other FANS who continue to blame Blandino and say he got the call wrong are the ones who are wrong. You're so blinded by your homeriam you won't concede one thing about that play in fear it won't support any of your ridiculous theories. If that overturn was incorrect and not by the written RULE, Blandino and Gene Steratore would have been under fire from those in the media and those around the league.

The league would have admitted a mistake was made and heads probably would have rolled. EVERY official I saw break down the play which included 3 that are no longer apart of the league and can speak their mind agreed with the overturn under the RULE. That and the FACT the call was CONFIRMED by the league to be the correct call under the RULE should tell you and others here how wrong you are and how silly you're being. If there was an ounce of truth to the crap you've posted, Blandino wouldn't continue to have the job and changes to the RULE would have likely been made to try and avoid future mistakes. You're being as ridiculous as those who claim that the league is fixed, officials are being paid off and that there's a conspiracy against the Cowboys.

Only on this board do you read crap like that. You always try and spin everything in favor of the Cowboys, never once have I seen an ounce of objectivity or criticism about the team. All you did in 2015 was try an convince everyone with a bunch of stats that are running game was better than in 2014. Even the FANS you have under your spell had a tough time buying into you on that one. lol You have stats to make everything, even the defense look great. Everyone in the league/media and the officials got it wrong about that play and only you and the rest of the FANS on this board have it all figured out from your couch and computer. LOL

 

[KJJ]

Let's see if one admitted HOMER will provide an honest answer to this. If the same play happened to the Packers and the same call was made after replay overturning the call on the field of a completed catch, would any of you be saying the Packers got screwed? If the SAME play happened to the Packers every HOMER on this board would have seen the receiver "going to the ground," the ball coming loose and contacting the ground and would have argued they didn't complete the process. Everything would have become CRYSTAL CLEAR had that call gone against the Packers.

 

[percyhoward]

KJJ, what is the catch process for?

 

[KJJ]

KJJ, what is the catch process for?

Percy, why don't you go tweet Blandino and ask him and how about providing some links/articles from anyone in the media or around the league that shares your opinions of Blandino and how the RULE was officiated and botched in your opinion. Stop acting like you know better than those who get paid to make the calls and give opinions about the call and find a talking head/official or anyone in the media who backs any of your opinions. You're wasting your time unless you can come up with someone CREDIBLE who backs any of what you're spewing.

My opinions are backed by the league and every expert that I've seen who've weighed in on that play and you're only support are by HOMERS like yourself. NONE of what's being spewed by you or other FANS here can be found anywhere else but on Cowboys FAN boards. It's the RULE that's being bashed and criticized by the media and some around the league because everyone hates it but they all agree the overturn was correct under the RULE. Find someone CREDIBLE who thought the call was botched?

Stop acting like you're some damn expert when you're nothing more than a biased Cowboys FAN whose archives prove you spin everything in favor of the team. Find someone CREDIBLE who backs your ridiculous opinions of Blandino and how the play was officiated. You're dreaming up all this crap you've been repeatedly posting the past 2 years because none it has been reported. Who but you and FANS here are saying any of this? I've lost track of how many in the media have weighed in on that play and no one is disputing what you keep disputing so it's only YOU and other FANS here that are seeing the true picture? GET REAL!

 

[KJJ]

Can anyone provide a link/article from a respectable source who supports some of the lunacy being posted here about officials being paid off and a conspiracy against the Cowboys? Claims are being made by FANS that are only being supported by other Cowboys FANS. lol Where's the genius who claimed the picture of the ball on the ground was merely an optical illusion due to the angle?

 

[Bleedblue1111]

My 7 year old nephew and his friends, think Blandino is a bafoon, with no influence from me. Nice reputation he has with the younger NFL fans too. Lol

 

[KJJ]

My 7 year old nephew and his friends, think Blandino is a bafoon, with no influence from me. Nice reputation he has with the younger NFL fans too. Lol

Some of the lunacy that's being posted about officiating crews being paid off and a conspiracy against the Cowboys sounds like it's coming from 7 year olds. lol Some of what's been posted the past 2 years on this topic is pure comedy that can only be found on FAN boards.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

Some of the lunacy that's being posted about officiating crews being paid off and a conspiracy against the Cowboys sounds like it's coming from 7 year olds. Some of what's been posted the past 2 years on this topic is pure comedy that can only be found on FAN boards. lol

He's doomed. It's only a matter of time before the NFL realizes how inept he is doing his job. Officiating has gotten progressively worse throughout the league, since he has been in charge.

 

[KJJ]

He's doomed. It's only a matter of time before the NFL realizes how inept he is doing his job. Officiating has gotten progressively worse throughout the league, since he has been in charge.

Can you find anything from a credible source that supports that? You finally figured out how to post a quote, now all you have to do is learn how to google information, to add some credibility to your views.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

Can you find anything from a credible source that supports that? You finally figured out how to post a quote, now all you have to do is learn how to google information, to add some credibility to your views.

Do you watch every game, every week like I do? It's not rocket science to notice more games ending in controversy, than in the past.

 

[KJJ]

Do you watch every game, every week like I do? It's not rocket science to notice more games ending in controversy, than in the past.

I've been watching NFL football every week since the 1972 season. The problem today with the officiating is that HD super slo-mo instant replay and all the many angles available has added much more scrutiny than years ago. The many camera angles and HD catch things now that could never be clearly detected before. The RULES have become more confusing to fans especially the catch RULE. "Going to the ground" is in the rulebook but nothing in the rulebook explains what "going to the ground" means because it comes down to judgement. A "football move" is in the rulebook but nothing in the rulebook explains what constitutes a "football move" because that comes down to judgement. A FANS judgement of what replay reveals is always going to be clouded if it's a call that goes against their team. Players have gotten so good and there's so many freakish athletes, especially receivers who can make plays that defy belief which is why I believe they've added a process receivers have to complete to perform a legal catch.

It's confused everyone and has added more scrutiny and controversy. Receivers have to do more today than just catch the ball for it to be a catch and that's caused a real issue amongst fans, players and everyone who watches the game. The players, coaches and fans don't like the RULE. Catching the ball and performing a magical juggling act in the process isn't enough to be a "football move" if a receiver is ruled "going to the ground" and that's what's caused this debate and all the other debates on what is and isn't a catch. The most freakishly talented players are mostly receivers, due to their size, speed, leaping ability and their huge hands. The rules have given them an advantage over defenders.

We're seeing catches today that are incredible and the league appears to be trying to add more of a degree of difficulty in making a legal catch to compensate for the amazing ability the receivers of today have. What upsets me isn't as much the RULE as it is about Dez who has the amazing ability to make the most incredible catch, while battling a defender and switch hands with the ball in mid air and reach for the goal line but he can't hold onto the ball once he impacts the ground. He did the hardest parts that maybe only 2 or 3 other receivers in the entire league can do and nothing could keep him from making that catch in Green Bay, not gravity, the defender or the reach to the endzone but it was contact of the ground that always gets the better of him. He can do everything but keep the damn ball off the ground and from coming loose.