Dez catch

[sunalsorises]

Whether the call on the field was correct or not, there simply was not enough evidence to change it. The play should have stood as called on the field. Even if the call on the field was incomplete, it should have stood due to lack of video evidence.

On an aside, I am a catch believer.

 

[MarcusRock]

Whether the call on the field was correct or not, there simply was not enough evidence to change it. The play should have stood as called on the field. Even if the call on the field was incomplete, it should have stood due to lack of video evidence.

On an aside, I am a catch believer.

It was quite clear the ball hit the ground and came out of Dez' grip. That is DOA via the going to the ground rule so it was irrefutable evidence.

And I prefer the term catch theorist, lol.

 

[sunalsorises]

It was quite clear the ball hit the ground and came out of Dez' grip. That is DOA via the going to the ground rule so it was irrefutable evidence.

And I prefer the term catch theorist, lol.

As a catch theorist I would have to argue that he did enough prior to going to the ground to establish possession. He's falling. Did he run three steps and lunge? Did he stumble three steps and fall? Does it matter as long as he took three steps with possession?

 

[DCwarrior]

Horrible ruling. Dez caught it!!!

 

[Diehardblues]

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?

Or he could just of gone down with the ball and not extended to endzone.

His possession wasnt in dispute until he extended to score.

 

[DogFace]

Possession can't be established in the air though. Coming to the ground is essential to whether possession is established. The ruling was that he was immediately headed to the ground after coming down. The question was and still is whether what he did after coming down qualified as a "football move" under the rules. If not, he had to maintain possession all the way through falling to the ground. If so, the fact the ball touched the ground would be irrelevant.

He showed he had possession when he his 2nd foot hit the ground as he was moving the ball down to secure it with his shoulder. He doesn’t have to do a move, (though I’d argue him maneuvering the ball to his shoulder is a move) he only needed to have time.

 

[DogFace]

Every one of those are the kind of movements that can be performed while in the air or falling to the ground before possession is established. In short, arm movements alone aren't sufficient to satisfy the rule.

The rule was related to having the time and ability to perform the kind of movement needed to make a cut or try and avoid contact, or other similar type movement displaying body control. With that being the case, the steps are what the Cowboys have to use for the argument, and not merely hand movements

No. You’re speculating and adding in things that were not part of the rule.

1. Control
2. 2 feet in bounds
3. Time to make a move

He satisfied the time when he brought the ball to his shoulder has he touched the ground.

Again, he was not going to the ground to make the catch. He was going up. Going to the ground rule was for when a player is going to the ground to make a catch.

 

[locked&loaded]

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?

3 steps is a football move, though. The rule is a football move. 1 step...not a football move. 2 steps or a toe tap on the sideline requires you to maintain possession. 3 steps or over and you're a runner. seems pretty cut and dry to me.

You keep acting like I am claiming 3 steps is the rule. I'm not. I am arguing that 3 steps while having enough control of the ball to switch hands and reach out is in fact a football move

face plant? he fought gravity for 7 yards and extended his body under control. we have a vastly different understanding of what a face plant is.

if you can't admit that a diving catch or a sideline toe tap is distinctly different than the dez catch, we are done here. Those are plays where a receiver is going to the ground under the influence of gravity and is expected to complete the catch because they arent a runner (heres a hint, runners put one foot infront of the other and generally move in the direction of the endzone). Dez doesn't have to meet a certain running form requirement, he could freaking limbo into the end zone as long as he actively controls his body and makes a football move which mitigates his fall.

Dez did that.

 

[DogFace]

He had to maintian control throughout the process, he did not, falling forward is not a football move...I said it before the play was even reviewed that it was going to be overturned per the NFL rule...

Calvin Johnson rule

He caught it then fell while holding it with one hand. Dez caught it, took 3 steps, lunged, then reached off the last step.

 

[MarcusRock]

As a catch theorist I would have to argue that he did enough prior to going to the ground to establish possession. He's falling. Did he run three steps and lunge? Did he stumble three steps and fall? Does it matter as long as he took three steps with possession?

Well 3 steps didn't mean anything because it wasn't listed in the rules then but is now. That's why I'm not sure why people keep using that to claim it was a football move. It didn't exist as a football move then.

 

[HonoluluCowboy]

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!

It was a Beautiful throw from Romo as well !!

Years later of course the NFL changed to rules back and admitted that was a Catch !!
We were not crazy , we got robbed !

Had we won that Game, Romo's " perceived choking " is negated .

 

[MarcusRock]

Or he could just of gone down with the ball and not extended to endzone.

His possession wasnt in dispute until he extended to score.

Yeah but I don't blame him either. Instinct just took over and he tried to get in the end zone. Just unlucky. Dez was always just on the cusp of greatness but found a way to get snared. The finger in the Giants game and this one. Those both turn out well and we're talking about him in much different terms when it comes to Cowboys receiver lore. Sucks for him.

 

[Diehardblues]

Yeah but I don't blame him either. Instinct just took over and he tried to get in the end zone. Just unlucky. Dez was always just on the cusp of greatness but found a way to get snared. The finger in the Giants game and this one. Those both turn out well and we're talking about him in much different terms when it comes to Cowboys receiver lore. Sucks for him.

Yes. He had a history of his instincts being questionable.

On 4th and 1 you must secure the catch and just go down.

 

[5Stars]

Is this post for the boring? Damn, it's over and done with, cry about something current.

 

[MarcusRock]

3 steps is a football move, though. The rule is a football move. 1 step...not a football move. 2 steps or a toe tap on the sideline requires you to maintain possession. 3 steps or over and you're a runner. seems pretty cut and dry to me.

You keep acting like I am claiming 3 steps is the rule. I'm not. I am arguing that 3 steps while having enough control of the ball to switch hands and reach out is in fact a football move

Except that if you're ruled going to the ground your steps did not matter in the slightest then. You can take 4 or 5 so long as you're going down. You saw the video, right? Did you see Dez go anywhere with his body other than down? That's what they were looking at. And when that's the case, the ball has to not touch the ground and come loose. It did. That's a done deal on the GTTG rule, which supersedes your upright rule claim. Again, if Dez was upright and not falling, why did he not just run into the end zone? Because he was falling, right? Then you have GTTG. That's how it was then. They changed it now so NOW you can claim 3 steps means something. You could not then.

face plant? he fought gravity for 7 yards and extended his body under control. we have a vastly different understanding of what a face plant is.

if you can't admit that a diving catch or a sideline toe tap is distinctly different than the dez catch, we are done here. Those are plays where a receiver is going to the ground under the influence of gravity and is expected to complete the catch because they arent a runner (heres a hint, runners put one foot infront of the other and generally move in the direction of the endzone). Dez doesn't have to meet a certain running form requirement, he could freaking limbo into the end zone as long as he actively controls his body and makes a football move which mitigates his fall.

Dez did that.

Fought gravity? Lol. Did he win? Because if he did, he should have just run right into the end zone, right? Why didn't he? Because he was falling. There's a rule for that. It's called going "to the ground in the act of catching a pass" verbatim per the rules and you have to meet that standard. We both know he didn't. Don't know where you're getting "actively controls his body" from but that's nowhere in the rulebook. You can actively control your body and fall to the ground. Look, I'm actually telling you theorists what to attack here and it's the lunge part. Dez clearly tried to lunge with his 3rd step and slipped on the turf doing so (that's not body control, is it?) which is why he couldn't get an actual lunge off. Because of that, his trajectory never changed on his way to the ground. That's what they were looking for. If you're not falling, show us that you're not. No trajectory change? You're still falling, so they apply the GTTG tag. And yes he does need to meet a running form requirement: it's called not crumpling to the ground after you snag a ball in the air. If you're a runner, you keep running after the snag, not faceplant after slipping.

 

[OmerV]

body control? the switching and reaching towards the goal line shows balls control. When combined with 3 steps, it objectively makes Dez a runner.

The mental gymnastics in this thread is astounding. Is the sky still blue?

The whole argument was Dez didn't make a football move. What about securing the ball in the air, switching hands, reaching out, all while taking 3 steps over the course of 7 yards....isn't a football move?

if Dez caught a screen pass at the 1 yard line and stumbled for 99 and then fell on ball and it popped loose...was he going to the ground the whole time?

No, that shows arm control. Again, those are actions that can be made in the air or falling to the ground - a player doesn't have to have established possession of the ball or have the ability to redirect his body to make arm movements. I explained all that before, but you act like you never saw it.

You ask about securing the ball in the air, but that has never been the standard, and still isn't. Possession cannot be established with the player's body in the air.

The stumbling for 99 yards comment is funny - it makes no sense, but it's funny.

 

[OmerV]

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.

I don't disagree, I'm just saying the steps are the closest thing fans have to an argument. It may not be a great argument, but it's closer to one than saying he moved the ball in his hands

 

[OmerV]

No. You’re speculating and adding in things that were not part of the rule.

1. Control
2. 2 feet in bounds
3. Time to make a move

He satisfied the time when he brought the ball to his shoulder has he touched the ground.

Again, he was not going to the ground to make the catch. He was going up. Going to the ground rule was for when a player is going to the ground to make a catch.

You're completely ignoring the going to the ground aspect. Going to the ground was ruled as not having time to make a move - he has no control of his body to do anything but go to the ground.

As for the notion he was going up to make the catch, yes, at the beginning. But the catch & possession isn't established while the player is in the air. There is still a requirement to come down with the ball, and if going all the way to the ground the ball has to stay secure through the contact with the ground. If the player hits the ground and is in the process of falling he had to maintain possession all the way through the fall.

 

[MarcusRock]

You're completely ignoring the going to the ground aspect.

Catch theorists have to or their argument is dead in the water. That's why all of them never mention going to the ground and die hard legislate to keep Dez upright during the play.

 

[locked&loaded]

Except that if you're ruled going to the ground your steps did not matter in the slightest then. You can take 4 or 5 so long as you're going down. You saw the video, right? Did you see Dez go anywhere with his body other than down? That's what they were looking at. And when that's the case, the ball has to not touch the ground and come loose. It did. That's a done deal on the GTTG rule, which supersedes your upright rule claim. Again, if Dez was upright and not falling, why did he not just run into the end zone? Because he was falling, right? Then you have GTTG. That's how it was then. They changed it now so NOW you can claim 3 steps means something. You could not then.


Fought gravity? Lol. Did he win? Because if he did, he should have just run right into the end zone, right? Why didn't he? Because he was falling. There's a rule for that. It's called going "to the ground in the act of catching a pass" verbatim per the rules and you have to meet that standard. We both know he didn't. Don't know where you're getting "actively controls his body" from but that's nowhere in the rulebook. You can actively control your body and fall to the ground. Look, I'm actually telling you theorists what to attack here and it's the lunge part. Dez clearly tried to lunge with his 3rd step and slipped on the turf doing so (that's not body control, is it?) which is why he couldn't get an actual lunge off. Because of that, his trajectory never changed on his way to the ground. That's what they were looking for. If you're not falling, show us that you're not. No trajectory change? You're still falling, so they apply the GTTG tag. And yes he does need to meet a running form requirement: it's called not crumpling to the ground after you snag a ball in the air. If you're a runner, you keep running after the snag, not faceplant after slipping.

so was his fall to the ground different than a diving catch or a toetap catch? I think we both understand it was. Those scenarios are what the rule you incessantly have been bringing up was intended for. You keep incorrectly bringing it up because you won't admit he met the threshold of a football move by maintaining his balance for long enough to take 3 steps. I'm sorry, I can't help you there.

By bringing up gravity I am trying to distill this down to simple physics. You seem to think there is no difference between a free fall and stumbling forward while actively fighting against gravity, which is what Dez did. you laugh, but these are distinctly different things.

when someone is skydiving they are falling, right? Lets say one sky divers parachute doesn't open and the others does. They are both still both falling correct? well one is distinctly different than the other.

And he crumpled? for 21 feet? what. this is purposeful ignorance at this point.

I give up, though.