News: DMN: NFL VP officiating Dean Blandino on whether Dez caught the ball, running into Cowboys

[Hoofbite]

Two years later, I'm still waiting for the INCONCLUSIVE evidence that the ball ever hit the ground.

Lol, what?

Of all things, the ball touching the ground and him losing control are the least questionable aspects.

 

[Hoofbite]

Did you make this?

 

[Hoofbite]

The language used at the time was a football move, not time.

Diving and reaching the ball for the goal line is as clear of a football move as there is.

The language was time. It wasn't explicitly stated in the prerequisites for a catch like it is now, but it was made clear in the subtext just below the rule.

Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so.

http://operations.nfl.com/images/content/rules/2014rulebook.pdf

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Two years later, I'm still waiting for the INCONCLUSIVE evidence that the ball ever hit the ground.

Not only that but when the db touched the ball if you look dez still has possession as it's pinned to his body with one hand so he never even really bobbled it.

I get that the rule is written a certain way ala Calvin Johnson fine fair enough but your bolded part along with the fact he did so much catching of the damn football is ....irksome

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

Lol, what?

Of all things, the ball touching the ground and him losing control are the least questionable aspects.

Honestly no. His forearm blocks the area where you can inconclusively say it hit the ground.

 

[Don Corleone]

There was no judgement involved with the overturn, it was a deliberate act to appear to not favor Dallas...the same thing happened on the Cobb catch that gave them a FG before the half. The party bus and the controversy in the Detroit game is why the catch was overturned because there was no rule in place to back up the overturn. Everything since has been altering the rules in an effort to cover up the fact that Blandino abused his position.

That's why I'm happy we aren't facing Detroit. They seem to complain about any call that favors Dallas but have radio silence when they get bad calls against other opponents.

I loathe the Lions and their fan base.

 

[Cowboys_22]

It was ruled a catch on the field, there was not enough evidence to overturn the call...so based on that it was a catch.

Great Catch Dez! Great Pass Romo!

Go Cowboys!

 

[percyhoward]

The language was time. It wasn't explicitly stated in the prerequisites for a catch like it is now, but it was made clear in the subtext just below the rule.



http://operations.nfl.com/images/content/rules/2014rulebook.pdf

That only applied when the player had no reason to try to advance the ball (CJ in the end zone, for example). Since Dez was in the field of play, the requirements for a catch were control, two feet, and a football move. Blandino never denied that the football move was the 3rd requirement, and the missing element on this play. His stance was that Dez didn't make a football move. Blandino was forced to claim that there was no football move, because that's the only thing that made the "going to the ground" rule applicable to the play. If he'd admitted Dez was a runner, they'd have had to rule him down by contact -- the way it was ruled on the field.

 

[TheSport78]

Lol, what?

Of all things, the ball touching the ground and him losing control are the least questionable aspects.

Overturned calls are not based on how questionable or likely it is; it must be CONCLUSIVE evidence. I can't find any view that confirms the ball hit the ground.

 

[Crown Royal]

Did you make this?

No, I think it was Blogging the Boys. I just found it off Google Images when this thread comes up, because I remember watching that game and thinking that Fitz had just done EXACTLY what happened the year before, and I was convinced it would get overturned. When it didn't I lost my ****.

 

[Everson24]

The real point is......when NFL's instant replay was set up: the premise was the Ref on the feild at the spot opinion had priority--unless overwhelming evidence showed otherwise on a replay. The NFL totally forgot that thought on that play...in fact opinion via phone to NFL in NYC took over. Instant Cred meltdown.

Yep, This has been my main beef all along. The NFL VP of officiating had no business overturning that ruling on the field when the "football move" part of the catch was a judgment call by side judge Terry Brown. And then Blandino has the nerve to cite the bogus "Calvin Johnson" play that was deemed a bad call by every official except Blandino.

I sure wish the NFL had investigated this blatant abuse of the rules with the same intensity that they put into deflate-gate. Deflate-gate didn't cost anyone a chance to win the Super Bowl but the "Dez no catch" call may have.

 

[Hoofbite]

That only applied when the player had no reason to try to advance the ball (CJ in the end zone, for example). Since Dez was in the field of play, the requirements for a catch were control, two feet, and a football move. Blandino never denied that the football move was the 3rd requirement, and the missing element on this play. His stance was that Dez didn't make a football move. Blandino was forced to claim that there was no football move, because that's the only thing that made the "going to the ground" rule applicable to the play. If he'd admitted Dez was a runner, they'd have had to rule him down by contact -- the way it was ruled on the field.

It doesn't make any such distinction as far as I can tell.

 

[Hoofbite]

No, I think it was Blogging the Boys. I just found it off Google Images when this thread comes up, because I remember watching that game and thinking that Fitz had just done EXACTLY what happened the year before, and I was convinced it would get overturned. When it didn't I lost my ****.

Was just curious why Fitzs actual first step was omitted. He caught the ball above his head and got a foot down prior to the still frame of step 1.

Just thought it was odd to ignore part of what actually happened. Seeing it's from BTB though clears it all up.

 

[percyhoward]

It doesn't make any such distinction as far as I can tell.

a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
b) touches the ground in bounds 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.).​

If all that were needed were a certain amount of time, there would have been no reason to go into examples of football moves. It was worded this way so that they wouldn't have to make a separate rule for end zone catches -- where no football move would follow (a) and (b), and so the official is forced to use his/her judgment to determine whether enough time has passed. Obviously, since any player who is short of the goal line will try to advance the ball, officials know they can look for the football move as an observable standard in the field of play.

Since the Dez play happened in the field of play (outside the end zone) they were ostensibly looking for a football move to complete the catch process. That's why Blandino said Dez needed to "extend his arm or reach with two hands," instead of simply saying he needed to hold the ball longer.

​

 

[CCBoy]

a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
b) touches the ground in bounds 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.).​

If all that were needed were a certain amount of time, there would have been no reason to go into examples of football moves. It was worded this way so that they wouldn't have to make a separate rule for end zone catches -- where no football move would follow (a) and (b), and so the official is forced to use his/her judgment to determine whether enough time has passed. Obviously, since any player who is short of the goal line will try to advance the ball, officials know they can look for the football move as an observable standard in the field of play.

Since the Dez play happened in the field of play (outside the end zone) they were ostensibly looking for a football move to complete the catch process. That's why Blandino said Dez needed to "extend his arm or reach with two hands," instead of simply saying he needed to hold the ball longer.

​

As if one handed catches never occur...

 

[Hoofbite]

a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
b) touches the ground in bounds 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.).​

If all that were needed were a certain amount of time, there would have been no reason to go into examples of football moves. It was worded this way so that they wouldn't have to make a separate rule for end zone catches -- where no football move would follow (a) and (b), and so the official is forced to use his/her judgment to determine whether enough time has passed. Obviously, since any player who is short of the goal line will try to advance the ball, officials know they can look for the football move as an observable standard in the field of play.

Since the Dez play happened in the field of play (outside the end zone) they were ostensibly looking for a football move to complete the catch process. That's why Blandino said Dez needed to "extend his arm or reach with two hands," instead of simply saying he needed to hold the ball longer.

​

The note just below those prerequisites doesn't say anything regarding situations in which the time factor is applicable and when it isn't. It just says the move isn't necessary so long as the time required to have made such a move was afforded. There are situations in which a player may not make a football move in the field of play while he was afforded the time to do so. A crossing route where the WR doesn't see a defender coming and is hit a little after he completes the first 2 requirements. Wouldn't necessarily be a football move or trying to ward off contact because he doesn't know there's an imminent hit. These plays are ruled fumbles all the time and they've been ruled fumbles since forever.

I see no reason to believe the element of time wouldn't apply in the field of play. If the league intended for different areas of the field to have different prerequisites for a catch they would have written it into the rule. Instead they wrote that control must be maintained long enough to perform an act even if the act isn't actually performed.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

Hello fellow Cowboy fans! This is my first post on this site. I only have one thing to ask, because this play ticked me off so bad, and I still haven't cooled off over it.

I think someone as arrogant and stupid as Dean Blandino deserves a nickname. I say arrogant, because he trolled Cowboy fans during the first game against Philly this season.

My question is. Is BLANDONKO a fitting nickname for Dean?

 

[percyhoward]

I see no reason to believe the element of time wouldn't apply in the field of play.

The time element absolutely applies in the field of play. The football move is the observable standard that shows that the time requirement has been met. The whole point of the football move was to have some overt physical act that completed the catch process, instead of relying on a stopwatch in an official's head.

Never having been a field official, Blandino didn't see the importance of the football move, and had it taken out of the rules. He didn't realize (or didn't care about) the value of basing a call on something you can actually see. Just about anyone who ever played, coached, or officiated knew better, which is why the football move was put back into the rule book one year later.

As we see over and over again, a loose ball on a crossing route is exactly the kind of bang-bang play that gets ruled incomplete if the receiver doesn't have time to take a third step or tuck the ball away. Dez caught the ball, got two feet down, then had time to switch the ball to his dominant hand, take a third step, and reach to try to break the plane.

On the day of the play, league officials were asked to explain the reversal. No league official said Dez didn't hold on long enough. They had to prove no football move, so they said he didn't reach far enough, or should have reached with two hands.

 

[Scotman]

The time element absolutely applies in the field of play. The football move is the observable standard that shows that the time requirement has been met. The whole point of the football move was to have some overt physical act that completed the catch process, instead of relying on a stopwatch in an official's head.

Never having been a field official, Blandino didn't see the importance of the football move, and had it taken out of the rules. He didn't realize (or didn't care about) the value of basing a call on something you can actually see. Just about anyone who ever played, coached, or officiated knew better, which is why the football move was put back into the rule book one year later.

As we see over and over again, a loose ball on a crossing route is exactly the kind of bang-bang play that gets ruled incomplete if the receiver doesn't have time to take a third step or tuck the ball away. Dez caught the ball, got two feet down, then had time to switch the ball to his dominant hand, take a third step, and reach to try to break the plane.

Again, no league official said Dez didn't hold on long enough. They said he didn't reach far enough, or should have used two hands.

The fact that it is still being argued 2 years later shows that the heart of the official replay was ignored. It was, as you've pointed out, meant to overturn calls that were obviously wrong. It was intended to be a way of keeping an obvious mistake from impacting the game.

And they turned it into a monster.

 

[percyhoward]

The fact that it is still being argued 2 years later shows that the heart of the official replay was ignored. It was, as you've pointed out, meant to overturn calls that were obviously wrong. It was intended to be a way of keeping an obvious mistake from impacting the game.

And they turned it into a monster.

Having to account for a football move made for a very sloppy explanation of the Dez overturn, which is almost certainly the reason Blandino had the football move taken out of the rules the next season. Trouble is, even though the football move made these plays harder for him to explain after the fact, the football move also made these plays a whole lot easier for field officials to call. And yet they had to go through one entire season with no football move before common sense intervened.