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

[KJJ]

You must like getting schooled, you keep coming back for more. I will not let you convince anyone that Dez's catch didn't happen.

The only one who's been schooled is you. Done wasting anymore time with you and good luck finding anyone else who will.

 

[DFWJC]

My point is, it's been covered to death. Dwelling on it doesn't change the outcome. It accomplishes nothing.

Just talking about anything football related--past or present--accomplishes nothing.
Our talk here controls no outcomes past, present, or future.

 

[Vocalmushroom]

My issue with it is that the refs aren't able to exercise common sense. Common sense would tell us he caught the ball. We all saw him go up and grab it with two hands and bring it in to his body with full control. It was an amazing play. However, BY RULE it wasn't a catch because he was going to the ground and lost control.

The refs had to dissect the rule word for word and overturn it. Some loophole in the rule book shouldn't negate an incredible play. This is the NFL, not a court of law.

 

[DogFace]

The only one who's been schooled is you. Done wasting anymore time with you and good luck finding anyone else who will.

You embarrass yourself.

The win streak will be even better next year because you won't post. Continuing your win streak pattern.

 

[KJJ]

My issue with it is that the refs aren't able to exercise common sense. Common sense would tell us he caught the ball. We all saw him go up and grab it with two hands and bring it in to his body with full control. It was an amazing play. However, BY RULE it wasn't a catch because he was going to the ground and lost control.

The refs had to dissect the rule word for word and overturn it. Some loophole in the rule book shouldn't negate an incredible play. This is the NFL, not a court of law.

It's not about common sense it's about following a RULE and the RULE states because he was "going to the ground" he must hang on to the ball through the contact of the ground. The officials had been very consistent with this. No one is disputing Dez caught the ball, not even the league but under the RULE because he was "going to the ground" he must complete the process by hanging onto the ball through the contact of the ground for it to be a legal catch and he CLEARLY didn't.

 

[nathanlt]

My issue with it is that the refs aren't able to exercise common sense. Common sense would tell us he caught the ball. We all saw him go up and grab it with two hands and bring it in to his body with full control. It was an amazing play. However, BY RULE it wasn't a catch because he was going to the ground and lost control.

The refs had to dissect the rule word for word and overturn it. Some loophole in the rule book shouldn't negate an incredible play. This is the NFL, not a court of law.

There was no loophole, the NFL did not describe anything more than "contact with the ground" of "going to the ground", which the first step after the catch meets both descriptions. So the NFL just plainly overruled their own rulebook and tampered with a playoff game when doing so. BY RULE, (written rule) it was a catch.

 

[percyhoward]

 

[Floatyworm]

A game never comes down to one play

Tell that to the Green Bay kicker....that knocked us out of the playoffs

 

[LandryFan]

Yep.
1. He caught the ball and controlled it.
2. He got two feet down (three, actually).
3. He made a football move.
That completed the process of the catch which made the argument of whether the ball touched the ground a moot point (I personally think the ball did touch the ground).
At the very least, it is debatable that he made a football move (I don't think there's any question that he did).
Somehow, blandino determined that he didn't make "enough" of a football move (his words, not mine), and used that determination to overrule the call on the field. Where in the rule as it was written at the time did it say anything about how much of a football move had to be made? The rule simply stated that one had to be made or that the player had to control the ball through going to the ground. Him saying that not enough of a football move had been made implied that at least some of a move had been made. I have never bothered arguing the ball touching the ground because it has no bearing on anything, IMO. The catch process had been completed. At the very least, there was inadequate evidence to say that Dez didn't make a "football move", thus the ruling on the field should have stood. To say there was indisputable evidence to the contrary is absurd.
Blandino just felt the heat from being on JJ's party bus combined with what many felt was a bad noncall in the Detroit game. He was trying to show the world that he was nonpartisan. Ironically, he did the opposite. He has no integrity.

 

[percyhoward]

Once a player is deemed "going to the ground" steps don't matter.

Item 1 only applies when a player "goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass."

Rule 8-1-3-Item 1: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass, he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground."

Once the catch has been made, you can't then apply a rule that's based on a catch not yet having been made. That's why there's a three-part catch process, and why they had to prove Dez didn't perform all three parts before he went to the ground. It's why Blandino talked about Dez's reach for the goal line. Charles Woodson is right when he says, "I don't know how the ball sticks to your forearm if you don't have control of the ball. He caught the ball." Woodson's talking about part 3, the football move.

1. He caught the ball and controlled it.
2. He got two feet down (three, actually).
3. He made a football move.
That completed the process of the catch which made the argument of whether the ball touched the ground a moot point.

Kudos to you for thinking your way through it and getting it, because there are so many people who aren't willing or able to do so.

 

[CCBoy]

Item 1 only applies when a player "goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass."

Rule 8-1-3-Item 1: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass, he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground."

Once the catch has been made, you can't then apply a rule that's based on a catch not yet having been made. That's why there's a three-part catch process, and why they had to prove Dez didn't perform all three parts before he went to the ground. It's why Blandino talked about Dez's reach for the goal line. Charles Woodson is right when he says, "I don't know how the ball sticks to your forearm if you don't have control of the ball. He caught the ball." Woodson's talking about part 3, the football move.


Kudos to you for thinking your way through it and getting it, because there are so many people who aren't willing or able to do so.

Stupid is as stupid does...and they do it a lot, now.

 

[percyhoward]

My issue with it is that the refs aren't able to exercise common sense. Common sense would tell us he caught the ball. We all saw him go up and grab it with two hands and bring it in to his body with full control. It was an amazing play. However, BY RULE it wasn't a catch because he was going to the ground and lost control.

It was actually a catch by virtue of Dez having completed the catch process. That's Rule 8-1-3. You're talking about a subsection called Item 1, which only applies when the catch hasn't yet been made and the player is still considered a receiver. Since the field official obviously saw the ball pop up, he had ruled Dez a runner down by contact. There had to be indisputable evidence that Dez had not yet become a runner before he hit the ground.

If you look at the 2014 rule book, you won't see "going to the ground" (read "falling") in any of the language.

(see p 35) Item 1: If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass, 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.

That's about a player contacting the ground. The part about a player falling toward the ground wouldn't be added until 2015, after the Dez play.

(see p 30) Item 1: A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass, 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.

That one extra sentence added to the front of Item 1 changed the emphasis from "contacting the ground" (which is easily discernible in a replay) to "falling toward the ground" (which is completely subjective). Now, instead of simply looking for a football move to complete the catch process, officials had a 100% judgment call to make. Huge problem for 2015. How do you determine the point when an elite athlete begins a fall from which he can't regain his balance? And even if you could pinpoint that exact moment, how long is "upright long enough?" Chaos. Thankfully, this only lasted one year.

In December 2015, they decided to put the focus back on Rule 8-1-3 -- before Item 1 would even apply. "The league formed a committee charged with creating more awareness among officials, coaches, players and fans about Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, which sets the parameters of a catch. Jordy Nelson, Randy Moss, Chad Lewis, Cris Carter, Steve Largent, Fred Biletnikoff and Tim Brown met with the committee to examine the rule’s language and review catch/no-catch plays." This is what they came up with for 2016:

(see p 31) A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps.

The extra sentence that Blandino put into Item 1 is still there, but before it even gets to that point, the catch process -- specifically the 3rd part (the football move) -- is more clearly defined. Blandino either grossly misinterpreted or ignored the rules by applying Item 1 ("going to the ground") without first showing that it was even applicable to the Dez play. He added language to the rule book about being "upright" which had no basis in logic, then, in what amounted to the league hitting him on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper, the catch process was spelled out more clearly for him, using language that could have easily described the Dez play.

 

[percyhoward]

My point is, it's been covered to death. Dwelling on it doesn't change the outcome. It accomplishes nothing.

At this point, the play itself is secondary to people's understanding of the play and the rule.

You're required to hold onto the ball after going to the ground in order to complete the catch process -- but it's a requirement that only applies if the catch process hasn't already been completed.

The "powers that be" have made sure everybody gets that first part, because it seems to support their overturn of Dez's catch. They aren't nearly as enthusiastic about explaining the second part, for obvious reasons. As the result, there's a lack of understanding, and it's not in the best interest of the league's senior PR guy to do anything about it.

So any discussion that helps somebody's understanding is worthwhile.

 

[Cmac]

It wasn't funny the first time.

....and it ain't funny the second time.