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

[CCBoy]

Yeah, I get that we all have our own versions of what happened, and that there's this rule that says certain plays are "not a catch!" and all that. Time out from that for a second.

How many steps he would have had to take for you to NOT consider this "going to the ground?"

Percy, some are just not bound to keeping to a realistic response of another's sequenced and described progression.

One can always describe the ascent and descent of a rocket as being solely dependent upon who you purchase fuel from.

I prefer your observations...

 

[KJJ]

Yeah, I get that we all have our own versions of what happened, and that there's this rule that says certain plays are "not a catch!" and all that. Time out from that for a second.

How many steps he would have had to take for you to NOT consider this "going to the ground?"

You have your own version to keep arguments going I'm well aware of your MO. I understand the RULE and although I may not like it I accept it. I don't have a set number of steps it could be several but the number of steps doesn't matter when a receiver is "going to the ground" and Dez was clearly "going to the ground."

 

[percyhoward]

The number of steps doesn't matter when a receiver is "going to the ground."

And what defines "going to the ground to make a catch?"

 

[KJJ]

And what defines "going to the ground to make a catch?"

You must really be bored to continue this nonsense. Go tweet that to Dean Blandino and see if he'll waste time with you.

 

[nathanlt]

To this point, I was looking forward to having Stephen Jones take over operations from Jerry. Now, since Stephen has said such a stupid thing, that the Calvin Johnson rule applied to DEZ's catch, I don't know if I feel so good about him taking over the organization. Dean Blandino must have tried the old, "you're stupid if you don't agree with me" technique.

Everyone knows it was a catch. KJJ, you must be an NFL schill, sent here to pacify outraged Dallas fans over Dean Blandino's tampering with the Packers Cowboys game. 6 football moves, with the ball secured over 5 yards of travel, with both elbows down before the ball contacted the ground. That, Mr. Blandino, I mean, KJJ, is a catch!!!

THE PROCESS OF GOING TO THE GROUND WAS COMPLETE WHEN HIS ELBOW TOUCHED. BOTH TOUCHED, BEFORE THE BALL MOVED. Anyone who pretends its not a catch, (including Stephen Jones, and the ACTUAL comedian turned NFL VP of officiating, Dean Blandino, is disconnected from reality) IT WAS A CATCH!!!

 

[WV Cowboy]

Everyone knows it was a catch. KJJ, you must be an NFL schill, sent here to pacify outraged Dallas fans over Dean Blandino's tampering with the Packers Cowboys game. 6 football moves, with the ball secured over 5 yards of travel, with both elbows down before the ball contacted the ground. That, Mr. Blandino, I mean, KJJ, is a catch!!!

THE PROCESS OF GOING TO THE GROUND WAS COMPLETE WHEN HIS ELBOW TOUCHED. BOTH TOUCHED, BEFORE THE BALL MOVED. Anyone who pretends its not a catch, (including Stephen Jones, and the ACTUAL comedian turned NFL VP of officiating, Dean Blandino, is disconnected from reality) IT WAS A CATCH!!!

LOL, ... I love it.

 

[nathanlt]

You must really be bored to continue this nonsense. Go tweet that to Dean Blandino and see if he'll waste time with you.

Nice non-answer. That's the point. "football move" has NO NFL DEFINITION. "Completing the process" has NO NFL DEFINITION. "Going to the ground" has no defined end, and NO NFL DEFINITION. With that precedent a player could run 20 yards, then go to the ground, and because there is no definition, the catch can be taken away with the same blatant tampering that was displayed in the Cowboys Packers game. It's meaning is whatever Dean Blandino, the Giants fan, wants it to mean.

It is still infuriating.

I'm sick of such stupidity, bias and tampering. You have no official definitions for your baseless and weak defense of taking away DEZ's catch.

 

[percyhoward]

You must really be bored to continue this nonsense. Go tweet that to Dean Blandino and see if he'll waste time with you.

Those were two fairly basic questions that anybody defending Blandino's application of that rule should have been able to answer.

 

[Everson24]

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.

I agree. I wonder what the reaction would have been if it was TY Hilton making this play and having it overturned and costing them the game against the Patriots in the AFC Championship game? I bet we never would have heard a word about deflategate.

 

[WV Cowboy]

It is still infuriating.

I hear ya.

 

[Everson24]

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.

That's because they are both in on this rigged league. It's the only reasonable answer as to why they are taking this so lightly. This league is as crooked as scoleosis.

 

[nathanlt]

That's because they are both in on this rigged league. It's the only reasonable answer as to why they are taking this so lightly. This league is as crooked as scoleosis.

Unfortunately, I think you're spot on with your conclusion. And it's too bad, I really like football, when the game is played and officiated with integrity.

Cheaters and dirty players like Brady, Suh, and other despicables, like Belicheck, disgust me. Blandino is worse than al of them combined.

 

[WV Cowboy]

That's because they are both in on this rigged league. It's the only reasonable answer as to why they are taking this so lightly. This league is as crooked as scoleosis.

Unfortunately, I think you're spot on with your conclusion. And it's too bad, I really like football, when the game is played and officiated with integrity.

Cheaters and dirty players like Brady, Suh, and other despicables, like Belicheck, disgust me. Blandino is worse than al of them combined.

This is slowly becoming my take on the whole mess too.

 

[KJJ]

Those were two fairly basic questions that anybody defending Blandino's application of that rule should have been able to answer.

All your questions are basic and I've been answering them and true to your MO you continue to follow them up with more wanting to play question and answer simply to entertain yourself and waste my time. No answer I give is going to satisfy you it just keeps this going and I don't have time for it. I spent almost 2 weeks in 3 separate threads after the season arguing this topic and I'm not about to endure another marathon over it because you have nothing else going on but to look for something to argue about.

If you're that bored go tabulate some passer rating stats there must be some angle you haven't yet explored that could keep you glued to your laptop until at least the weekend. This play has been beaten like a dead horse and FANS like you need to let it go and move on. If you don't like what I have to say then log into Twitter and tweet away to Blandino and explain to him how the rule should be interpreted according to you and play question and answer with him. LOL

 

[TheCount]

I think there's a big problem with the rule in that "going to the ground" is undefined, which means that it occur over an indefinite time and distance traveled.

How do you define distance and time in relation to a catch though?

I agree except I thought the replay did show he lost control of the ball. I think it was a catch as ruled on the field. But the way they call such plays, I could understand the replay overruling it. But I don't want to rehash it. I'm ready to move on. As they say in boxing and MMA, don't leave it in the hands of the refs.

I don't think losing control in and off itself is automatically incomplete (which I'm sure you know), Dez did re-catch it on his back without ever going out of bounds. The reason "losing control" was given as the reason in this case was because they said he lost control when the ball hit the ground which is automatically incomplete.

I never saw an angle that definitely showed the ball hitting the ground, yet they said they did. They have yet to show that indisputable angle, that only they apparently had access to, to the rest of the world.

 

[nathanlt]

All your questions are basic and I've been answering them and true to your MO you continue to follow them up with more wanting to play question and answer simply to entertain yourself and waste my time. No answer I give is going to satisfy you it just keeps this going and I don't have time for it. I spent almost 2 weeks in 3 separate threads after the season arguing this topic and I'm not about to endure another marathon over it because you have nothing else going on but to look for something to argue about.

If you're that bored go tabulate some passer rating stats there must be some angle you haven't yet explored that could keep you glued to your laptop until at least the weekend. This play has been beaten like a dead horse and FANS like you need to let it go and move on. If you don't like what I have to say then log into Twitter and tweet away to Blandino and explain to him how the rule should be interpreted according to you and play question and answer with him. LOL

Nice expansion of your non-answer.

 

[Kevinicus]

The process is complete when the ball is held onto through the contact of the ground that's what's called meeting the criteria....NEXT!

That only applies if he goes to the ground DURING the process, not after. Criteria for a catch completed before he goes to the ground = catch.

 

[KJJ]

That only applies if he goes to the ground DURING the process, not after. Criteria for a catch completed before he goes to the ground = catch.

He was going to the ground DURING the process. The process isn't complete until possession is maintained through the "contact of the ground." How many times do I have to repeat that?

 

[Hoofbite]

How do you define distance and time in relation to a catch though?

I'm not saying you define it by distance or time. Just that a playing going to the ground could be a guy who caught the ball off balance and stumbled for 10 or 15 yards before going down, which is just an absurd possibility.

In application, the rule is trumping the requirements for a completed pass and it shouldn't.

You need possession, 2 feet down, and the time necessary to complete a football move. No move needed, just afforded the time to make a move or ward off contact.

As it stands, a player could begin going to the ground and even though the entire process was drawn out to such an extent that he could have made 3 or 4 football moves, he still wouldn't get credit for the catch.

All they have to do is let the requirements for a completed pass supersede any "going to the ground" and the rule only becomes applicable when a player does not get 2 feet down, or is not afforded the time to make a football move before hitting the ground.

If it were me, I'd restrict it to plays where the player is already in the process of going to the ground. Diving, sliding, or falling while the ball is caught.

That rule has no room on plays like the Dez play. He had possession, got two feet down, and absolutely had time to ward off contact. Had a defender been coming over to hit him, he wouldn't have been lunging.

 

[KJJ]

Those were two fairly basic questions that anybody defending Blandino's application of that rule should have been able to answer.

You want an answer I'll give you an answer but this is the last question I'm addressing because I'm not going to invest the next 2-3 days or how ever long you want to dig your heels in with this question and answer session. Giving my view isn't going to change yours or anyone else's opinion of the play it's just going to keep this argument going. lol FANS belly aching over my opinion isn't going to change the rule I dislike it as much as everyone else but I understand the rule and accept it. Your question was And what defines "going to the ground to make a catch?" Here's how I see it and I believe the league views it pretty much the same way. "Going to the ground to make a catch" has to occur "during the process" of a receiver making a catch it has to be "bang bang." Watching the video the defender Sam Shields was in great position but Dez did what Dez does he went up and high pointed the ball and Shields couldn't defend it.

When Dez was in the air it was clear to me watching the play live there was no way he would be able to maintain his footing once he landed with Shields battling right there with him. I was just hoping Dez could make the catch and stay in bounds. As Dez went up and caught the ball and came down he "immediately" started losing his footing. Although he took 2 steps after landing he was STUMBLING forward as he took them heading towards the ground. He realized he couldn't maintain his footing and dove at the 5 yard line to extend the ball over the goal line and the ball briefly came loose as it contacted the ground resulting in the catch being reversed. I was on the game chat and immediately after I saw the first replay I posted the play would be reviewed and the call reversed.