News: DMN: Rule that overturned Dez Bryant’s catch doesn’t sound like it will be changed

[Apollo Creed]

Ridiculous. You're punishing a player for making a spectacular play. Dez had made amazing catches and plays look routine throughout his career, that catch in GB was no different.

 

[speedkilz88]

The rule isn't the problem. It's the blatant disregard for what the actual rule says that is the problem. He was tripped by the Green Bay defender and he advanced the ball which, by the rule, means it is a catch as he made 'an act common to the game.' Either one of those happening (the trip or advancing the ball) means the catch happened.





YR

And I believe that is exactly what the ref on the field saw. He made a down by contact gesture at the one. Funny I don't believe he was ever interviewed about the call.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

'But at the end of the day, when a receiver is going to the ground, he’s got to hang onto the ball, and a football move doesn’t necessarily trump that. He’s got to gain possession, he’s got to get his feet down and then he’s got to retain the catch all the way through the ground."

huhhhh

He was down by contact anyway. It's convenient how they leave out that little tidbit.

 

[Dhragon]

NFL doesn't want to give up some of it's power to change outcomes of the game based on one individuals "interpretation" of the rules, which are often ambiguous. Sad.

 

[WV Cowboy]

He was down by contact anyway. It's convenient how they leave out that little tidbit.

I know a lot of NFL fans laughed and were "so very glad" that Dez's catch was overturned because of their hate for the Cowboys.

But every NFL fan should be scared by what happened that day because it just may be their team some game in the future.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

NFL doesn't want to give up some of it's power to change outcomes of the game based on one individuals "interpretation" of the rules, which are often ambiguous. Sad.

The sad thing is the officials are much maligned but when one of them made the right call on the field, it was overturned by the folks in New York who weren't even there. Then the league stubbornly refused to admit to the mistake just one week after "tainting" the victory over the Lions by declaring the wrong call was made in that game. It was an awful and heartbreaking series of events to end what could've been a magical season. I'm still proud of our Cowboys, though. I hope they are hungry next season.

 

[LatinMind]

its been a rule way before Dez's catch. Why people think it would be changed now? I think its been a rule since 2010

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

never should have been a rule in the first place. The NFL got on quite well for how many decades without it?

.

Yep.


And... It's no surprise that it won't be overturned.
It doesn't got the anti cowboy criteria.

Push off rule.
Helmet removal.
Horse collar.
Etc etc etc
There are others I don't recall at the moment.

 

[LatinMind]

Yep.


And... It's no surprise that it won't be overturned.
It doesn't got the anti cowboy criteria.

Push off rule.
Helmet removal.
Horse collar.
Etc etc etc
There are others I don't recall at the moment.

ILLUMINATI

 

[KJJ]

“It’s a very difficult rule,” Jones said. “In terms of the rule and how they applied it in its truest sense to the Dez catch, at the end of the day, is probably correct. There are a few plays that have happened over the past 5-10 years that this rule catches that you maybe wish it didn’t catch. But at the end of the day, when a receiver is going to the ground, he’s got to hang onto the ball, and a football move doesn’t necessarily trump that. He’s got to gain possession, he’s got to get his feet down and then he’s got to retain the catch all the way through the ground.

That was my exact argument immediately after the game when a receiver is going to the ground he's got to hang onto the ball and a football move doesn't necessarily trump that. Lost track of how many argued with me over this.

 

[Nightman]

It doesn't got the anti cowboy criteria.

Push off rule. Irvin Rule
Helmet removal. Emmitt Rule
Horse collar. RW31 Rule
Etc etc etc
There are others I don't recall at the moment.

Erik Williams Rule- headslap or cobra
TO Rule -props after TDs
MBIII- Stiff arm rule

 

[percyhoward]

That was my exact argument immediately after the game when a receiver is going to the ground he's got to hang onto the ball and a football move doesn't necessarily trump that. Lost track of how many argued with me over this.

Count me, for one. Even though they applied the "going to the ground" rule to overturn the catch, Dez wasn't going to the ground to make the catch.

The problem is that there is no standard definition of what constitutes "going to the ground," so there is no distinction made between a receiver diving to catch a ball; and a receiver catching a ball, taking three steps, and falling. It was correctly ruled a catch and down by contact on the field. This is why Fisher (also on the competition committee) was talking about one standard on the field, and another for the replay. That's what has to be fixed, which means--not changing any rules--but putting a definition of "going to the ground" into the rule book that is not open to interpretation.

To remove the element of subjectivity, they could make "going to the ground" not taking at least two steps heel-to-toe. IOW, if the receiver gets two feet down flat (no toe-taps, no sides of feet brushing the ground) with control of the ball, it's a catch and he's now a runner. If the ball comes loose when he hits the ground, it's a fumble. If he was contacted, he's down by contact.

That way you "idiot-proof" it, and you don't have a PR clown like Blandino inserting his own interpretations.

 

[KJJ]

Count me, for one. Even though they applied the "going to the ground" rule to overturn the catch, Dez wasn't going to the ground to make the catch.

A receiver doesn't have to be going to the ground "to make the catch" for the rule to apply. According to the rule when going to the ground a receiver must maintain possession all the way through the contact of the ground and Dez didn't. I'm not about to get into another argument over this so don't bother.

 

[percyhoward]

A receiver doesn't have to be going to the ground "to make the catch" for the rule to apply. According to the rule when going to the ground a receiver must maintain possession all the way through the contact of the ground and Dez didn't. I'm not about to get into another argument over this so don't bother.

I highlighted the important part. That rule applies only to receivers, not runners.

IOW, it doesn't apply just because the player in question happens to be a wide receiver by position. If that were the case, a wide receiver could make a catch, run 50 yards, fall down, lose the ball, and have it ruled incomplete. It applies only to players who are still "receivers" (still in the act of making the catch). Once the catch is made, the "receiver" becomes a "runner." Here's Blandino's explanation when Irvin asked him why Dez wasn't down by contact...

"Because he is not a runner yet. He has not established possession. A runner who’s established possession, absolutely. The minute his elbow hits, the minute the knee hits, he’s down by contact. Here, he’s still a receiver attempting to catch the pass so it’s treated differently."

After Dez had already taken three steps with the ball, it was Blandino's warped impression that Dez was still attempting to catch a pass. That's the only thing that allowed him to overturn the catch. He used a rule that applies to players going to the ground to make a catch. He got away with it because there wasn't (and still isn't) any definition of what constitutes "going to the ground" in the rule book.

 

[percyhoward]

They need to limit what replay over-rules. They aren't suppose to make "judgment" calls but here they did. They over-ruled the judgment of the ref on the field with their own.

They didn't put a definition of "going to the ground" into the rule book, probably because they never dreamed any replay official's judgment would be as bad as it was on this play. Now they should know better. Either spell it out so even a 5-year old can make the call, or only let competent individuals make the call.

 

[Nightman]

They didn't put a definition of "going to the ground" into the rule book, probably because they never dreamed any replay official's judgment would be as bad as it was on this play. Now they should know better. Either spell it out so even a 5-year old can make the call, or only let competent individuals make the call.

A catch is simply a catch. I may not be able to define it, but I know one when I see it.

 

[KJJ]

After Dez had already taken three steps with the ball, it was Blandino's warped impression that Dez was still attempting to catch a pass. That's the only thing that allowed him to overturn the catch. He used a rule that applies to players going to the ground to make a catch. He got away with it because there wasn't (and still isn't) any definition of what constitutes "going to the ground" in the rule book.

That's your impression not Blandino's. There's a process a receiver has to complete before a catch can be confirmed a "catch." To have a "catch" a receiver that is in the process of going to the ground must maintain possession of the ball through the contact of the ground. Dez caught the ball as did Calvin Johnson a few years ago but neither player maintained possession of the ball as they were going to the ground and as the ball contacted the ground it came loose. Blandino explained the rule and under the "rule" it was not a catch. Yes Dez caught the ball but under the "rule" he has to hang onto it all the way through the contact of the ground without the ball coming loose. That didn't happen!

 

[cowboyvic]

A lot of you are missing the point. this thing is not about changing the rules. the news here is Stephen Jones agreeing that the NFL refs made the right call on that Dez catch. and i say he is full of BS. our players deserve better than that. that was a freaking catch. Jerry and Stephen seem to take losing very well these days.

 

[burmafrd]

if they got rid of the rule everyone's life would be so much simpler. That is why such an intelligent thing will not be done.

 

[MagicMan]

The problem is they keep saying the receiver going to the ground needs to maintain possession all the way through............my issue is he has completed the catch and taken enough steps to now be considered a RUNNER not receiver, and if, for example, Murray was to lose the ball at the time he hits the ground, it would not be considered a fumble anyway. And if it was, he recovered it in the endzone anyway....... So it would not be any different. Damm, I thought I had gotten over this.

And Dez did have enough control of the ball at the time of the catch to even change hands and extend it for a possible TD.