Dez catch

[Aerolithe_Lion]

a football move was part of the rule, though. thus...taking 3 steps, switching the ball into his hand and reaching out...while he covered 7 yards.

you are talking about someone going to the ground without making a football move, Dez was a runner at that time.

Dez was never upright after he went for the ball; he was going to the ground from the moment he caught it

 

[diamonddelts]

It was the correct call with the rules that were in place at that time.

Hell naw.

 

[MarcusRock]

Didn't the NFL a year later admit they got the call wrong?

No. They tweaked the wording of the rule a year later but the rules still had the same effect as when the Dez play happened. It wasn't until years later after the Jesse James TD that wasn't that they changed the effect of the rule to say that those types of catches would now be valid, not that they were wrong as called in the past.

 

[MarcusRock]

the steps are what the Cowboys have to use for the argument, and not merely hand movements

Except "3 steps" was not in the rules at the time so those don't even matter. He could have taken 6 steps but if he was going to the ground, the time element is only satisfied by holding onto the ball past hitting the ground.

 

[Jarv]

No. They tweaked the wording of the rule a year later but the rules still had the same effect as when the Dez play happened. It wasn't until years later after the Jesse James TD that wasn't that they changed the effect of the rule to say that those types of catches would now be valid, not that they were wrong as called in the past.

Okay, I thought this article spelled out that the NFL admitted they blew the call.

https://www.fox4news.com/sports/dez-caught-it-nfl-committee-says-three-years-later

 

[Rock423]

Appreciate this has been talked about many times before but having watched it again just now it must go down as one of the worst reversals I have ever seen.

Surely when Dez touched the ground with his right elbow then he's down having completed the process of a catch (he had made a football move by taking 2-3 steps after securing the ball).

In any event, I haven't seen any clear and unequivocal footage of the ball touching the ground at any point - part of his arm looked to be under the ball when he went to ground so worst case scenario he has caught the ball in the end zone as Shields didn't mark him down by contact.

People say well Rodgers would have just marched down the field any way - great let's see him do it and it's irrelevant to the above call.

It's still annoying all these years on!

The Murray fumble was the real killer in that game. It never should have come down to the Dez catch.

 

[MarcusRock]

Okay, I thought this article spelled out that the NFL admitted they blew the call.

https://www.fox4news.com/sports/dez-caught-it-nfl-committee-says-three-years-later

Clickbait. Fox, no less, lol. Click the ESPN link that story references and you get a much different headline. That was the huge deal I was trying to tell people when they were OUTRAGED! when what really happened was the rule got changed and those past catches would be catches under the new rules but were correctly called in their time. Even Mods were losing their cool in that thread, lol.

 

[jjtrcka22]

Still havent seen the video or picture of the ball definitively hitting the ground.

 

[McKDaddy]

I respect your opinion but it is not how running backs are taught to carry the ball through the line, regardless if a hole is practically nonexistent or split like the Red Sea. Backs are taught to always cover up the ball at the line to avoid exactly what happened.

Murray was lackadaisical protecting the ball on the play. A quick review of video in other games demonstrate Murray more often carried the ball like a loaf of bread than tucking it. It is never a problem until the ball gets successfully stripped. However, the defense is always trying to strip the ball on every possible occasion, which is why coaches teach proper ball protection.

And I respect yours as well as reminding us all of Murray playing with an injury.

 

[Diehardblues]

That play (link) has sat with me heavily as much as the Dez Bryant ref play. Julius Peppers made a fantastic play, literally launching and stretching back into the hole to strip the ball. Peppers' great effort would have been completely negated if Demarco Murray had simply covered up the ball like coaches teach running backs in junior high.

No doubt the Murray fumble was huge . One of the greater contributing factors to our loss.

And we possible could have taken more control of the game at that point.

But It’s not like the Murray fumble directly cost us the game. We still had opportunity to win the game .

 

[Diehardblues]

That 2014 offense was IMO a championship caliber offense . Romo’s most effective season. Murray leading the league in rushing. We had our 21st Century version of the Triplets.

What a shame we never fielded them together again. I really thought that core could contend for several years . Probably the last time I was really excited about the Cowboys.

 

[MarcusRock]

Still havent seen the video or picture of the ball definitively hitting the ground.

Posted these back yonder but ...

 

[DallasEast]

No doubt the Murray fumble was huge . One of the greater contributing factors to our loss.

And we possible could have taken more control of the game at that point.

But It’s not like the Murray fumble directly cost us the game. We still had opportunity to win the game .

All negative factors, occurring in every game ending in a loss, contribute to the final result. I would not attempt to mitigate the real outcome by downplaying an almost certain touchdown run from the what if but that is just me.

 

[CoachD]

Butch Johnson's catch in the Super Bowl.......Nope not even close to a catch but called a TD
Dez Bryant's catch in the playoff........Obvious catch ruled incomplete

 

[locked&loaded]

Dez was never upright after he went for the ball; he was going to the ground from the moment he caught it

where do you draw the line? One would think a controlled stumble where a player actively fights against going to the ground, so much so that he is able to travel 21 feet while extending the ball before hitting the turf, would be enough.

but evidently only upright running, ALA Forrest Gump, counts?

 

[locked&loaded]

When you go to the ground, THOSE rules take precedence over the upright catch rules you're citing. A catch has 3 parts: control, feet down, and time. Back then you could complete a catch while upright or after going to the ground. The latter is because you DIDN'T satisfy the time element (football move or "time enough" to do one) because you dived or are falling and can't/don't do a football move. So if you can't do part 3, you have to keep the ball in your possession through hitting the ground.

Some notes about what you mention: 3 steps wasn't in the rules then; you don't switch hands when you grab it with 2 and choose to put it in 1; reaching out is not a lunge where you "gather yourself" and push forward per the rules. That is the ONLY thing you can do get out of a going to the ground tag per the rules. So you could wave to your mama on the way to the ground but still need to control the ball after hitting it. Also, yards covered or number of steps taken do not matter when going to the ground is called.

by that 'logic' you could jump for a ball at the 1 and stumble 99 yards and it would all be considered as going to the ground. During this 99 yard stumble you can't make a football move? That is imbecillic.

There is a distinct difference between falling down during a catch, such as diving for a ball or toe-tapping on the sidelines and falling (which requires you to maintain possession), and a jump ball where you land, take 3 steps and fight against a fall for 21 feet, switching hands and extending the ball.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

where do you draw the line? One would think a controlled stumble where a player actively fights against going to the ground, so much so that he is able to travel 21 feet while extending the ball before hitting the turf, would be enough.

but evidently only upright running, ALA Forrest Gump, counts?

You could stumble infinitely… and if you are going to the ground in the process, you have to maintain possession through the ground.

Main thing to keep in mind is the NFL rulebook doesn’t determine what is and isn’t legal. The rulebook is a guideline, it’s the ref’s interpretation of the rule that decides what is legal. And on that day, the ref determined the WR was going to the ground.

 

[Diehardblues]

All negative factors, occurring in every game ending in a loss, contribute to the final result. I would not attempt to mitigate the real outcome by downplaying an almost certain touchdown run from the what if but that is just me.

Not attempting to downplay. The bigger point is we had opportunities to overcome .

 

[MarcusRock]

by that 'logic' you could jump for a ball at the 1 and stumble 99 yards and it would all be considered as going to the ground. During this 99 yard stumble you can't make a football move? That is imbecillic.

There is a distinct difference between falling down during a catch, such as diving for a ball or toe-tapping on the sidelines and falling (which requires you to maintain possession), and a jump ball where you land, take 3 steps and fight against a fall for 21 feet, switching hands and extending the ball.

Again, 3 steps means nothing (not in the rules). You don't "switch" hands when you initially gripped it with 2 and extending the ball while leading with your elbow is not extending the ball. A good way to think about this is the just watch the video at real speed. Look at Dez' height with each of his 3 steps to the ground. Is he not lower and lower each time before he basically face plants into the turf? If he was upright, why didn't he just run into the end zone?

 

[DallasEast]

Not attempting to downplay. The bigger point is we had opportunities to overcome .

Understood.

The Murray fumble erased six points from the scoreboard. Seven points counting the extra point. A 'bigger point' can be made but the fumble is a fact that cannot be overlooked, overexamined or over speculated.