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

[LandryFan]

'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

If a football move doesn't "necessarily" trump, then on what occasions does it or does it not trump? Personally, I thought a football move always meant the the catch had been made. Where am I wrong in this?

 

[speedkilz88]

If a football move doesn't "necessarily" trump, then on what occasions does it or does it not trump? Personally, I thought a football move always meant the the catch had been made. Where am I wrong in this?

That part is flat wrong. Blandino said himself that Dez did not make a enough of a football move. He said that breaking the plane of the goal would have been a football move. Despite calling other non td catches in the past catches-bengals rb as an example.

 

[percyhoward]

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.

There needs to be a reason to assume Dez was going to the ground to make the catch before you can apply that rule.

 

[percyhoward]

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.

Exactly. You get it.

"Receiver" in this sense doesn't mean "wide receiver" or "tight end;" it refers to any player who is in the process of catching a ball. In Dez's case, that process was completed well before the ball came loose, so he wasn't going to the ground as a receiver.

And yet, the entire reversal is based on an (incorrect) assumption that he was.

 

[big dog cowboy]

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.

 

[sbark]

The problem wasn't with the rule, anyway. The refs messed up the interpretation of it on review because they chose not to interpret the obvious 'football move' and a 'football move.' I don't think anything needed to be changed.

Which means they need to confirm a new rule...........that the interpretation called on the field can now be overturned not only with "indisputable visual evidence", but also another opinion by a NFL official sitting in NYC who can have a hotline to the Replay official at each game

 

[Idgit]

Which means they need to confirm a new rule...........that the interpretation called on the field can now be overturned not only with "indisputable visual evidence", but also another opinion by a NFL official sitting in NYC who can have a hotline to the Replay official at each game

Perhaps they need to revisit whatever definitions of 'indisputable' or 'football move' they're currently using. They don't seem to mean what they think they mean.

 

[percyhoward]

Perhaps they need to revisit whatever definitions of 'indisputable' or 'football move' they're currently using. They don't seem to mean what they think they mean.

They absolutely are not all on the same page. I think they didn't see a need to define all these terms because they never saw a non-football guy like Blandino rising to that position. From experience, field officials share more or less the same idea of the meaning of "going to the ground to make the catch." He was never part of that culture. As for Steratore, I don't know what his excuse is.

 

[speedkilz88]

They absolutely are not all on the same page. I think they didn't see a need to define all these terms because they never saw a non-football guy like Blandino rising to that position. From experience, field officials share more or less the same idea of the meaning of "going to the ground to make the catch." He was never part of that culture. As for Steratore, I don't know what his excuse is.

Yes man.

 

[Nightman]

Perhaps they need to revisit whatever definitions of 'indisputable' or 'football move' they're currently using. They don't seem to mean what they think they mean.

Inconceivable

 

[CF74]

Idiots don't understand their own rules...

 

[SportsGuru80]

The **** will be changed 10 years too late....

 

[KJJ]

There needs to be a reason to assume Dez was going to the ground to make the catch before you can apply that rule.

No reason is needed and no one is assuming he was going to the ground because he clearly was going to the ground which is why he ended up on the ground and it's the ground that caused the ball to come loose. If a receiver is going to the ground they have to maintain possession of the football through the contact of the ground that's the rule! Had Dez concentrated on making the catch and not tried to reach the ball over the goal line he probably would have hung on to it.

 

[DogFace]

'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

If he goes to the ground after 40 steps no. 10 no. 5?
3 sometimes.

 

[percyhoward]

No one is assuming he was going to the ground because he clearly was going to the ground which is why he ended up on the ground.

No one is disputing the fact that Dez ended up on the ground. The field judge saw that, and marked the ball inside the one. Ending up on the ground doesn't mean he was going to the ground to make the catch. If that were true, any catch and run that resulted in the ball coming out on contact with the ground after the tackle would be an incomplete pass.

 

[KJJ]

No one is disputing the fact that Dez ended up on the ground. The field judge saw that, and marked the ball inside the one. Ending up on the ground doesn't mean he was going to the ground to make the catch. If that were true, any catch and run that resulted in the ball coming out on contact with the ground after the tackle would be an incomplete pass.

Dez was CLEARLY going to the ground during the process of making the catch therefore he has to maintain possession of the ball through the contact of the ground and he didn't. Why anyone even a FAN would dispute this is beyond me. As he went up to catch the ball he immediately started going to the ground as he landed due to contact with the defender and trying to extend the ball over the goal line. His momentum was going forward from the time he landed which helped take him to the ground. This video shows the play repeatedly and it's INDISPUTABLE that he's going to the ground during the process of making the catch. Stop being in denial and accept the video evidence.

 

[RoboQB]

Butch Johnson's TD.... he went to the ground... called a catch... this is my first attempt at video embedding
so, sorry if it doesn't work.

 

[percyhoward]

As he went up to catch the ball he immediately started going to the ground as he landed due to contact with the defender.

Due to contact by the defender, yes. And there is no visual evidence that shows anything otherwise. That's not "going to the ground to make a catch." It's a catch, and then going to the ground by contact. And that's exactly how it was ruled on the field, too.

 

[KJJ]

Due to contact by the defender, yes. And there is no visual evidence that shows anything otherwise. That's not "going to the ground to make a catch." It's a catch, and then going to the ground by contact. And that's exactly how it was ruled on the field, too.

It makes absolutely no difference if contact with the defender contributed to Dez going to the ground during the process of making the catch he still has to hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground. Watching the replay Dez may have gone to the ground anyway had there been no contact with the defender because he landed at about the 5 yard line and was leaning forward attempting to dive to the end zone to extend the ball over the goal line.

 

[Doc50]

This is making my brain hurt.

I may have Post-Traumatic Overturned Call Stress Disorder (PTOCSD)