Dez catch

[locked&loaded]

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.

the 99 yard comment is meant to be extreme because if you can't admit that's enough to establish body control, and the possibility of a football move, nothing is.

i ignored it because it is nonsense. a player doesn't have to have established possession of the ball to make arm movements....well no, I guess not...but we are talking about catching and possessing a football, right?

when a quarterback throws a football, it sure helps if it's in his hand. soooo, when a receiver reaches towards the goal line, it sure helps when he's holding the football.

he caught the ball in the air (not enough), he landed with one foot still possessing the ball (not enough), he took another step (essentially the same as a toe tap, still needs to possess to the ground), he took another step (that's 3, incase you ran out of fingers) and is now a runner.

Goodnight.

 

[Whirlwin]

What catch. When he dropped

 

[MarcusRock]

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.

Again, with terms that are not in the rulebook. Maintaining balance isn't there either. And you're assuming to boot. Going to the ground was for ALL of those types of catches, whether you get no feet down, coming down after a snag when you don't land on your feet and just keep running, etc. unless the catch type had its own rule. Show me where it's not. Coincidentally, sideline catches have their own rule. Here they both are and they are virtually the same:

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact​

by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field​

of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass​

is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.​

​

Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the​

process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the​

process of contacting the ground, or the pass is incomplete.​

Again, no distinction between diving or using steps as a receiver goes down. You can use steps when going to the ground on a sideline pass, can't you? I mean especially when a receiver has to get feet down to drag or 2 steps quickly before going out. Notice how steps aren't mentioned there even though steps or feet down are essential to a completed sideline catch. These are the kinds of connections the average football fan needs to make to truly understand how these rules work but most just can't so it's no wonder they want to just cry "CONSPIRACY!" because that's way easier than spending the time to educate themselves. But here we are with you making points that in order to be falling, a receiver has to fall straight down, even when they're running full speed ahead when they jump to snag a ball. Really, bro? Really? This is why I can't help YOU there.

 

[locked&loaded]

Again, with terms that are not in the rulebook. Maintaining balance isn't there either. And you're assuming to boot. Going to the ground was for ALL of those types of catches, whether you get no feet down, coming down after a snag when you don't land on your feet and just keep running, etc. unless the catch type had its own rule. Show me where it's not. Coincidentally, sideline catches have their own rule. Here they both are and they are virtually the same:

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact​

by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field​

of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass​

is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.​

​

Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the​

process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the​

process of contacting the ground, or the pass is incomplete.​

Again, no distinction between diving or using steps as a receiver goes down. You can use steps when going to the ground on a sideline pass, can't you? I mean especially when a receiver has to get feet down to drag or 2 steps quickly before going out. Notice how steps aren't mentioned there even though steps or feet down are essential to a completed sideline catch. These are the kinds of connections the average football fan needs to make to truly understand how these rules work but most just can't so it's no wonder they want to just cry "CONSPIRACY!" because that's way easier than spending the time to educate themselves. But here we are with you making points that in order to be falling, a receiver has to fall straight down, even when they're running full speed ahead when they jump to snag a ball. Really, bro? Really? This is why I can't help YOU there.

Again, with terms that are not in the rulebook. Maintaining balance isn't there either. And you're assuming to boot. Going to the ground was for ALL of those types of catches, whether you get no feet down, coming down after a snag when you don't land on your feet and just keep running, etc. unless the catch type had its own rule. Show me where it's not. Coincidentally, sideline catches have their own rule. Here they both are and they are virtually the same:

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact​

by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field​

of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass​

is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.​

​

Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the​

process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the​

process of contacting the ground, or the pass is incomplete.​

Again, no distinction between diving or using steps as a receiver goes down. You can use steps when going to the ground on a sideline pass, can't you? I mean especially when a receiver has to get feet down to drag or 2 steps quickly before going out. Notice how steps aren't mentioned there even though steps or feet down are essential to a completed sideline catch. These are the kinds of connections the average football fan needs to make to truly understand how these rules work but most just can't so it's no wonder they want to just cry "CONSPIRACY!" because that's way easier than spending the time to educate themselves. But here we are with you making points that in order to be falling, a receiver has to fall straight down, even when they're running full speed ahead when they jump to snag a ball. Really, bro? Really? This is why I can't help YOU there.

Again, with terms that are not in the rulebook. Maintaining balance isn't there either. And you're assuming to boot. Going to the ground was for ALL of those types of catches, whether you get no feet down, coming down after a snag when you don't land on your feet and just keep running, etc. unless the catch type had its own rule. Show me where it's not. Coincidentally, sideline catches have their own rule. Here they both are and they are virtually the same:

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact​

by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field​

of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass​

is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.​

​

Item 2: Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the​

process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout the​

process of contacting the ground, or the pass is incomplete.​

Again, no distinction between diving or using steps as a receiver goes down. You can use steps when going to the ground on a sideline pass, can't you? I mean especially when a receiver has to get feet down to drag or 2 steps quickly before going out. Notice how steps aren't mentioned there even though steps or feet down are essential to a completed sideline catch. These are the kinds of connections the average football fan needs to make to truly understand how these rules work but most just can't so it's no wonder they want to just cry "CONSPIRACY!" because that's way easier than spending the time to educate themselves. But here we are with you making points that in order to be falling, a receiver has to fall straight down, even when they're running full speed ahead when they jump to snag a ball. Really, bro? Really? This is why I can't help YOU there

Here's a look at the rule as it was written for the 2014 season.

"A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds: a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.)."

quit bringing up falling to the ground. Who cares if he fell to the ground if it happened after he made a football move common to the game and became a runner! That's what we are all saying!!!!

you force me to use extreme examples because nuance is wasted on you. I don't care what Dean Blandino says and I don't care about going to the ground because his football move (moves. pick one.) makes that rule non-applicable

For the billionth time, the argument at the time was a football move common to the game. So much so THEY REMOVED IT FROM THE RULE. If you don't think Dez made a football move, fine. But you're in the minority.

 

[MarcusRock]

Here's a look at the rule as it was written for the 2014 season.

"A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds: a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.)."

quit bringing up falling to the ground. Who cares if he fell to the ground if it happened after he made a football move common to the game and became a runner! That's what we are all saying!!!!

you force me to use extreme examples because nuance is wasted on you. I don't care what Dean Blandino says and I don't care about going to the ground because his football move (moves. pick one.) makes that rule non-applicable

For the billionth time, the argument at the time was a football move common to the game. So much so THEY REMOVED IT FROM THE RULE. If you don't think Dez made a football move, fine. But you're in the minority.

I know the rule frontwards and backwards. That's why I know when someone's trying to shoehorn something into the rules that isn't there. Like the "3 steps" everyone keeps mentioning which had no place in the 2014 rules.

These are upright rules, bro. They do not apply when going to the ground situation occurs. And when it does, it supersedes these rules. That's why they're listed. Mike Pereira confirms this and even states that your list of football moves is moot because GTTG overrules them all and the ground is the thing.



I don't force you to use anything. You're using your own logic that fails to understand the mechanics of the rules and how they work. Who cares what the "argument at the time" was? The black and white rules were what mattered "at the time" because they governed the play. All teams signed up for it at the start of the season. Changing the rule afterwards means nothing.

And I don't need an army behind me to validate my opinion. I'm perfectly fine standing alone on a topic that I can back up with the rules instead of getting mad that someone else "just won't agree with me so I can be comfortable about what I believe." My only reward in this is they're wrong and I'm right, lol.

 

[locked&loaded]

I know the rule frontwards and backwards. That's why I know when someone's trying to shoehorn something into the rules that isn't there. Like the "3 steps" everyone keeps mentioning which had no place in the 2014 rules.

These are upright rules, bro. They do not apply when going to the ground situation occurs. And when it does, it supersedes these rules. That's why they're listed. Mike Pereira confirms this and even states that your list of football moves is moot because GTTG overrules them all and the ground is the thing.



I don't force you to use anything. You're using your own logic that fails to understand the mechanics of the rules and how they work. Who cares what the "argument at the time" was? The black and white rules were what mattered "at the time" because they governed the play. All teams signed up for it at the start of the season. Changing the rule afterwards means nothing.

And I don't need an army behind me to validate my opinion. I'm perfectly fine standing alone on a topic that I can back up with the rules instead of getting mad that someone else "just won't agree with me so I can be comfortable about what I believe." My only reward in this is they're wrong and I'm right, lol.

Watch the replay again. During the actual call, Gene Steratore says, "I don't think he made a football move."

Mike Pereira casually referencing the dez catch years later does nothing for me. In that moment, and the rule change after, they were looking for a football move first and foremost.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...the-dez-bryant-catch-according-to-their-rules

you'll never get me to agree that it wasn't a catch and citing an NFL ref (by either of us) doesn't move the needle. The fact is, they will tell you they ruled the catches by the letter of the law (rule) and came to different conclusions.

Let common sense rule the day.

 

[MarcusRock]

Watch the replay again. During the actual call, Gene Steratore says, "I don't think he made a football move."

Mike Pereira casually referencing the dez catch years later does nothing for me. In that moment, and the rule change after, they were looking for a football move first and foremost.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles...the-dez-bryant-catch-according-to-their-rules

you'll never get me to agree that it wasn't a catch and citing an NFL ref (by either of us) doesn't move the needle. The fact is, they will tell you they ruled the catches by the letter of the law (rule) and came to different conclusions.

Let common sense rule the day.

You know why I love that article you posted? Because it's just as uninformed as the regular football fan. But that's because that's who they wrote it for. For one, you can't use still shots and then just describe motion. You have to see it to tell if what they're telling you is accurate. What's also funny is Blandino used that exact same play to note the differences between why the Giants play was a catch and the Green Bay play wasn't. The video isn't on the NFL site anymore but what he said was that in the Giants case, he did clearly gather himself to lunge (wording from the rules) and did reach the ball all the way out versus just having his momentum carry him to the ground and cradling the ball. Look at the differences yourself. These are NOT the same types of lunges to qualify one to get out of the GTTG tag but that article was trying to say it was? Hilarious.

 

[McKDaddy]

Let common sense rule the day.

They can't get the simple concept that he didn't go to the ground to catch the ball therefore nothing about the rule applies.

 

[CowboysFever1973]

I’ll be that guy. Rodgers doesn’t score and Cowboys make the superbowl!!!

 

[Swagger]

It's quite simple.

You either think the process of the catch had been completed before Dez hit the ground or you don't.

If he didn't try lunging for the touchdown then the ball wouldn't have got loose.

Before that happened he had made several football moves by holding the ball in two hands, taking three steps and travelling 5 yards with the ball. That's long enough to complete the process of a catch. When he's lunging for the TD the ball is completely still after all of the above. It wasn't moving around. The catch was complete.

 

[nathanlt]

It's quite simple.

You either think the process of the catch had been completed before Dez hit the ground or you don't.

If he didn't try lunging for the touchdown then the ball wouldn't have got loose.

Before that happened he had made several football moves by holding the ball in two hands, taking three steps and travelling 5 yards with the ball. That's long enough to complete the process of a catch. When he's lunging for the TD the ball is completely still after all of the above. It wasn't moving around. The catch was complete.

Yep, if Dez had run 30 yards downfield, it wouldn't have been enough of a process for Blandino. The catch was confiscated by the NFL, merely to be replaced by a statement years later. "Controversial" is a word that has nothing to do with this Dez CATCH. Obvious is a better word to describe the CATCH.

 

[SteveTheCowboy]

Still don't know if it was a catch but Marcus and locked are awesome!

 

[mattjames2010]

Because it doesn't matter. All aspects of the rule must be met, not just some. The rule was poorly written. But in that poorly written rule it clearly states if he is going to the ground in the act of catching the pass and he loses control of the ball and it touches the ground, it is incomplete.

It DOES matter...per the rule at the time. There is a reason the entire Cowboys sideline, including Dez and Romo, were arguing the football move.

> poorly written
> clearly states

Make up your mind.

 

[mattjames2010]

It's quite simple.

You either think the process of the catch had been completed before Dez hit the ground or you don't.

If he didn't try lunging for the touchdown then the ball wouldn't have got loose.

Before that happened he had made several football moves by holding the ball in two hands, taking three steps and travelling 5 yards with the ball. That's long enough to complete the process of a catch. When he's lunging for the TD the ball is completely still after all of the above. It wasn't moving around. The catch was complete.

NFL already discussed this, Mara himself publicly, and stated it was a catch the issue was with the wording of the rule. The ONLY time the catch was anywhere near controversial was on the field...with the refs. It's a play we'll never get back on a pass and catch that should have been a Romo and Dez legendary highlight. F the NFL and F refball. It started, among other things, me going from a passionate fan to a casual viewer.

 

[mattjames2010]

2007. A more locked in team makes it to the Super Bowl but probably gets washed by the Patriots. At least they would have advanced to that point.

We weren't beating the Patriots that season.

 

[DogFace]

These ads are out of control.

Yes. I’ve told a mod. They said it’s out of their control. Google does it.

It has made the site really hard to navigate. Everytime you try to click and answer or god forbid go to another page to see what someone was saying—it’s an ad everytime. And not just a ad on the page you can see. It’s an Ad that covers the entire page and forces you to x it out. Then when you x out of it, the screen pauses and has to reload the page or whatever.

It’s making my internet experience worse. I was encouraged to pay for the upgrade. I’m not sure if they realize how bad it is.

 

[DogFace]

His momentum carrying him falling foward after running and jumping isn't a football move.....he didn't maintain control throughout the process of the catch......end of story!

Jumping isn’t a football move? Really. I saw Emmitt hurt his neck on a non football move once. Weird.

Simply moving the ball from above his head to his shoulder as his 2nd foot hit demonstrated the time part had been met.

There was no need to do a move that satisfies your definition of a football move. Only time. Whether you think moving the ball from two, to the shoulder, then to one hand doesn’t matter. What matters is you realize that those moves took time. Even if they are bowling moves in your eyes.

 

[DogFace]

Lets talk about Jerry Kramer being offsides

NFL films show that clearly.

 

[DogFace]

Marcos Rock’s favorite topic.

Any thread on this and gets amazingly thrilled to make 50 posts on why it wasn’t a catch.

Honestly, I’ve never anything like it in this forum

Like clockwork

It’s because he lost the debate in the old thread and can’t accept that. Any debate coach that viewed that would say he lost.

 

[DogFace]

No. All parts of the rule must be satisfied. He was in the act of going to the ground. No catch. A couple years before it's a catch. Post 2016 it's a catch. Today it's a catch. That day he caught the ball in the act of going to the ground and the ball hit the ground. No catch.

Going to the ground rule is for players going to the ground to make the catch or immediately after like the Calvin catch(maybe). Not after switching the ball from two hands and bracing it to his shoulder as his feet hit, switching it to one hand, lunging, then reaching with the ball, (which demonstrated that he was lunging) all while taking 3 steps and of course lunging off the 3rd step.

The time part was met.

No where in the rules did it say “the going to the ground rule trumps the catch rule” That’s for when you’re not ruled a runner as the ref 7 feet from the play ruled.