Did the Refs Rob the Commanders of a Gutsy Road Win?

[Kwyn]

It was an incompletion. The ball was moving in the receivers hands as his body started touching out of bounds. Very easy call to make. Correctly made: INCOMPLETION.

Only people calling that an incompletion are some Cowboy fans.

 

[DarkVader33]

A knee is equvalent to 2 feet......that's what the rule book says.......right? On the other hand, not our problem.

The other part of the rule is you have to maintain control throughout the catch.

 

[cmoney23]

I know what a catch is. After explaining it to you all over the years, you know what a catch is. Apparently, this ref crew (and replay crew) don’t know what a catch is. Was the fix in here? This play changed the whole complexion of the game. Dak, who was looking pretty shaky, seemed to settle in once he knew the game was in the bag (wink, wink). I mean, congrats to him on the All-Time Cowboys TD record but will he be able to sleep tonight knowing how he got it? Probably. He has a Sleep Number bed afterall.

Here’s the video. Look at the assuredness of the Commanders fan here, only to be disappointed moments later and watch his innocence go down the drain along with the Commanders' chances. I’m sure he doesn’t believe in anything anymore after this highway robbery.

Go to a skins board. Jfc.

 

[America's Cowboy]

Only people calling that an incompletion are some Cowboy fans.

Shut up and go play with your jacks. Or go paint with your crayons.

 

[Rayman70]

NO. We won the game. That td could have went either way but felt he caught it, That said, the commodes had ample opportunity to win but dropped easy tds. No excuses for them, they got beat. We played better but can build on it. We better, we got the Ravens next.

 

[Jarntt]

You can't reference "other calls" as a basis on a completely independent call. The rulebook is the standard in every case. Slight movement but was controlled the whole way. If the ball left his hands, a la Dez, then sure. But here he had a hold of it the whole way.

False. You absolutely reference the standard they have set and that is THE way to judge it. It isn't black and white did the toes touch or did the ball move, it's how much did the ball move. That's all we have to go by. IMO no catch as per the angle I just posted. Ball moved enough to say it wasn't slight at all IMO

 

[Cowboysheelsreds053]

LOL, you guys are killing me. Remember in elementary school playing jacks brought back memories from the early 70’s.

 

[MarcusRock]

In this video, you can see he let go of the ball with his right hand. There’s another video where you can see he momentarily lets go with his left at the same time. That is not control

Then you'll need to produce that angle then because here it looks just like that Seahawks INT in the NFL opener where the player moved the ball from two hands to one. Here it looks like from one hand to the other. You need control of the ball to do that.

 

[805BoysInBlue]

Didn’t see the end on TV during the game, just from the replay posted and it cuts off quickly.

At this point who knows what they consider a catch to be honest

 

[DarkVader33]

Then you'll need to produce that angle then because here it looks just like that Seahawks INT in the NFL opener where the player moved the ball from two hands to one. Here it looks like from one hand to the other. You need control of the ball to do that.

Unfortunately I saw it live on TV

 

[MarcusRock]

False. You absolutely reference the standard they have set and that is THE way to judge it. It isn't black and white did the toes touch or did the ball move, it's how much did the ball move. That's all we have to go by. IMO no catch as per the angle I just posted. Ball moved enough to say it wasn't slight at all IMO

What's false? That he had hold of the ball the whole way? Because he did. I mean, if the ball did a 270 degree turn, maybe. But it didn't. It was slight movement after hitting the ground, as one would expect, and the receiver's hand was on the ball the whole way, whether right or left.

 

[Jarntt]

What's false? That he had hold of the ball the whole way? Because he did. I mean, if the ball did a 270 degree turn, maybe. But it didn't. It was slight movement after hitting the ground, as one would expect, and the receiver's hand was on the ball the whole way, whether right or left.

No, "that you can't reference "other calls" as a basis". Those other calls are what we have as the standard to judge the amount of movement normally allowed

 

[MarcusRock]

No, "that you can't reference "other calls" as a basis". Those other calls are what we have as the standard to judge the amount of movement normally allowed

So if a ref clearly fails to call a facemask, should we use that as an evidence standard that another called facemask actually shouldn't have been called because it was allowed previously? The standard is the rulebook on this play, here and now, no matter what someone else called in a game 2 years ago.

 

[jaythecowboy]

He didn’t have full control. The tweet clip stops before the ball hits the ground lol.

 

[erod]

That was absolutely a touchdown. Still didn't know what they think they saw.

But the Washington secondary is hot garbage, and the loss was inevitable. They had no chance against Lamb.

Going to be a long season for them.

 

[aikemirv]

I love how we are comparing movement of the ball while going directly to the ground to comparing movement of the ball after you catch it with two hands move it to one hand , cuff it and dive for the end zone-quite remarkable comparison here.

 

[Silverz1972]

It looked like a catch but it wasn’t.

He caught the ball but when he went out of bounds and hit the lost control of the ball.

It was also ruled not a catch on the field which made overturning it even harder.

 

[aikemirv]

They'll just repeat what the broadcast crew & rules guys already said. Catch. (cause they can't actually give you vision, they would rely on what the internet told them)

Why don't you post it here for everyone to watch & we'll all vote on it?

Way too much effort to find the backside view of the catch that showed it. Not worth the trouble for me. I saw it-guess you did not see that view but that view was clear that the ball moved in his hands after contact with the ground and the roll

 

[Jarntt]

So if a ref clearly fails to call a facemask, should we use that as an evidence standard that another called facemask actually shouldn't have been called because it was allowed previously? The standard is the rulebook on this play, here and now, no matter what someone else called in a game 2 years ago.

A ref, No, but if every face mask called over the past couple of years has given us the de facto definition of what a face mask is...YES

 

[CowboysLakerBamaFan]

They missed the call. It happens

Mariota wasn’t going to outscore Dak either way

Why do we never use that rational when WE are the recipient of this type of bad call?

WE would of said: "this would have changed the game's trajectory at this point of the game! You can’t just subtract the final score"

Errrrrrr..... lemme translate for the Zaney Zoners: " Waaaahhhhhhhh the Refs screwed us again!!!