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

[percyhoward]

It is accurate to say that the ball came loose AFTER Dez was down by contact. The runner receiver distinction makes no difference since "down by contact" is synonymous with "completing the process of going to the ground."

Receivers going to the ground have to maintain control of the ball after going to the ground (rule 8, section 1, article 3, item 1).

Runners don't. So there's a huge difference.

I haven't heard or read "completing the process of going to the ground" anywhere. I have heard "completing the process of the catch." That refers to the three-part process of control, then both feet down, then holding onto the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game. When Blandino says Dez didn't complete the process of the catch, he means that after he had control with both feet down, he didn't do anything else besides fall down on his own, and that the only thing that happened between the second foot coming down and the ball coming loose was just Dez continuing to fall.

IOW, no third step, no contact that made him fall, no lunge or "obvious enough" reach for the goal line. Which is all a crock, naturally.

 

[KJJ]

I've come to understand why the term "football move" is important. It's a line of demarcation. It's what officials use to determine when a receiver establishes himself as a runner.

The term may be important but if it isn't interpreted the same way by those who officiate games it's going to result in more controversial calls that draw more attention to the officiating than the game played on the field. A "football move" or a "move common to the game" which just adds to the confusion comes down to judgement. You have your own interpretation of what a "football move" is as do many which is why the term needs to be redefined or eliminated when making certain calls.

It's actually not at all a matter of opinion. These are precise terms.

Say what you will but a "football move" comes down to ones own interpretation and judgement which is why so many aren't squared away on it. Blandino initially claimed Dez didn't make a "football move" which was a mistake. He quickly changed course and started steering away from a "football move" and focused on Dez going to the ground and not completing the process of the catch through the ground. Every controversial call that's been made this past season Blandino during his review segment on NFLN always explains that the call came down to the officials interpretation and judgment. Some of the calls that were reviewed last season he admitted poor judgement was used because not everyone sees things the same way. A "football move" or a "move common to the game" comes down to ones own interpretation and judgement there's simply no way around it.

When Blandino is questioned on some of these controversial calls he's giving his opinion and admits when crews make mistakes. He can't even explain some of the calls the PI that was picked up during the Cowboys/Lions playoff game he said was debatable. He's admitted a lot of these calls come down to the crew and their judgement which is why the league decided to have 2 sets of eyes reviewing these plays in 2014. That change was a clear indication mistakes were being made.

 

[KJJ]

It's actually not at all a matter of opinion. These are precise terms. A "receiver" is a player who hasn't yet completed the catch process. In the video of the Thomas catch, you can see that he's going to the ground the whole time. But the moment he extended the ball toward the goal line (a "football move"), he established himself as a "runner." Blandino explains this clearly at about the 2:00 mark here.

I highly recommend that everyone watch that entire video from 1:30 on. It's as close as you'll come to getting a tutorial of the so-called "Calvin Johnson rule." In it, Blandino explains that the catch process has three parts: Control, two feet down, and then have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game. "If you perform all three parts in that order," he says, "you have a catch." IOW, to be considered a catch, there is a series of acts that have to be checked off. Here's what he says about the Thomas play:

"Watch what Julius does. He's gonna get control, take two steps...and now reach for the goal line. He has established himself as a runner."

Just watched the Julius Thomas catch and the one Calvin Johnson made where his rule came into play again. I explained in an earlier post that the Calvin Johnson rule usually only comes into play when a receiver "leaves the ground" to make a contested catch. The first Calvin Johnson play from a few years ago and the second Johnson play along with Dez's play all have one thing in common both players "leaped" into the air to make a contested catch and were going to the ground as they were coming down. Thomas never left the ground to make his catch that's the big difference in those 3 plays.

Once a receiver leaps into the air to make a catch and appears to be going be going to the ground as their feet contact the turf they have to complete the process through the contact of the ground. I have yet to see a receiver catch the ball who's feet are on the ground then lose it after taking a few steps while going to the ground and have the Calvin Johnson rule applied to it. By Thomas having his feet on the ground when he made the catch he was able to establish himself as a runner immediately after he made the catch just prior to him stumbling into the end zone.

 

[mmohican29]

A missing aspect of this play is whether or not the ball ever touched the ground. The way Dez was curling the ball inward while lunging toward the goal line, upon his ARM's contact with the ball, the ball pops free momentarily, but goes upward towards Dez's shoulder pad. I'm not sure any part of the ball EVER touches the ground. Dez recollects the ball in the end zone.

To me, the offical's call on the field was correct: Down by contact at the 18inch line or so. IMO, the only other call possible would that the ball was still live for never having touched the ground and recaught in the end zone for a TD.

It's amazing to me that almost every way you look at this play- its a catch except for ONE- which only God would know happened (ball hitting ground)- and removing all the other aspects catch, feet, football move, etc...

And then a man in a white hat from Pittsburgh, after talking with some native NY'er in the league office- centers himself in the middle of Lambeau Field- and tells the entire world what they just witnessed didn't really happen.

That's gutsy. That my friend, takes some serious, serious gonads.

 

[percyhoward]

The term may be important but if it isn't interpreted the same way by those who officiate games it's going to result in more controversial calls that draw more attention to the officiating than the game played on the field. A "football move" or a "move common to the game" which just adds to the confusion comes down to judgement. You have your own interpretation of what a "football move" is as do many which is why the term needs to be redefined or eliminated when making certain calls.

The football move means that something else happened, besides the player simply falling to the ground. It doesn't even have to be an act by the receiver himself, which is why the wording is "must hold the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game." Being tackled isn't him performing any kind of act, but we know from Blandino's explanation of the Gresham play in the 2013 playoffs that it satisfies part three of the catch process.

This is a great shot of three of the four things that happened after Dez got both feet down with control, but before the ball came loose. Any one of these three things constitutes completion of the catch process. First, notice that Dez has taken his right hand off the ball so that he can use that hand to brace himself for a lunge toward the goal line. No one in his right mind who is still trying to gain control of a football is going to take one hand away from the ball. Second, notice that he is taking a third step. Third, he's obviously being tripped by the defender here. Note how Dez's left knee is pointed straight down field, where he was originally headed, while the rest of his body has just been thrown toward the sideline to his left because his right leg has been taken out from under him.

Maybe the step was just Dez falling, I guess you could say the hand just fell off the ball on its own (a stretch), but there's no way you could say the change in direction due to the trip was just Dez falling. That's part three of the catch process right there. Then there's the obvious reach for the goal line that occurred later, and that both you and Blandino mention as something Dez shouldn't have done. That he "should have just secured possession of the ball" instead. That reach that Dez is being criticized for actually completed the catch process.

Say what you will but a "football move" comes down to ones own interpretation and judgement which is why so many aren't squared away on it. Blandino initially claimed Dez didn't make a "football move" which was a mistake. He quickly changed course and started steering away from a "football move" and focused on Dez going to the ground and not completing the process of the catch through the ground.

Those comments reveal that either you didn't watch Blandino's explanation and comparison of the Thomas play and Johnson play from 2013, or that you didn't understand it. It's impossible to "change course" from discussion of a football move to discussion of completing the process because they're two sides of the same coin. A football move is the main thing that completes the process of the catch. A football move is part three of Blandino's three-part process that means you don't have to maintain control of the ball after you hit the ground.

 

[tideh20heel]

A missing aspect of this play is whether or not the ball ever touched the ground. The way Dez was curling the ball inward while lunging toward the goal line, upon his ARM's contact with the ball, the ball pops free momentarily, but goes upward towards Dez's shoulder pad. I'm not sure any part of the ball EVER touches the ground. Dez recollects the ball in the end zone.

To me, the offical's call on the field was correct: Down by contact at the 18inch line or so. IMO, the only other call possible would that the ball was still live for never having touched the ground and recaught in the end zone for a TD.

It's amazing to me that almost every way you look at this play- its a catch except for ONE- which only God would know happened (ball hitting ground)- and removing all the other aspects catch, feet, football move, etc...

And then a man in a white hat from Pittsburgh, after talking with some native NY'er in the league office- centers himself in the middle of Lambeau Field- and tells the entire world what they just witnessed didn't really happen.

That's gutsy. That my friend, takes some serious, serious gonads.

Don't forget letting the time that ran off stand

 

[KJJ]

Those comments reveal that either you didn't watch Blandino's explanation and comparison of the Thomas play and Johnson play from 2013, or that you didn't understand it. It's impossible to "change course" from discussion of a football move to discussion of completing the process because they're two sides of the same coin. A football move is the main thing that completes the process of the catch. A football move is part three of Blandino's three-part process that means you don't have to maintain control of the ball after you hit the ground.

Your comments are revealing that you don't see the difference between the 2 Calvin Johnson plays, the Dez play and the Julius Thomas play. Thomas caught the ball while his feet were firmly planted on the ground which established control and the catch. This enabled him to become a runner just prior to him stumbling into the end zone. Under the RULE a receiver can't establish a catch and control while in the air they have to complete a process when going to the ground. I understand the rule which is why I'm not the one who's asking questions.

 

[percyhoward]

Your comments are revealing that you don't see the difference between the 2 Calvin Johnson plays, the Dez play and the Julius Thomas play. Thomas caught the ball while his feet were firmly planted on the ground which established control and the catch. This enabled him to become a runner just prior to him stumbling into the end zone.

It's not our impressions of those plays that matter, but Blandino's explanations of them. Blandino outlined a three-part catch process, then explained the difference between the two plays (Johnson 2013 and Thomas 2013).

Blandino: "Calvin did not have both feet down prior to reaching for the goal line. So this is all one process. This is an incomplete pass. Now I'll show you the difference. Let's go to Julius Thomas against the Giants. Watch what Julius does. He's gonna get control, take two steps...and now reach for the goal line. He has established himself as a runner."

That information comes from Blandino himself. Where did you get your information? "Thomas caught the ball while his feet were firmly planted on the ground which established control and the catch. This enabled him to become a runner?" That's you, isn't it. You're making this up.

Notice that Blandino doesn't say anything about Thomas' feet being planted firmly on the ground as being what established him as a runner. No mention of "feet being planted firmly on the ground" as part of the three-part catch process either. Those are your impressions and your words, my friend. Blandino is looking for control, two feet down, and an act common to the game. In that order. I know that because I went and found out. That's the value of research over speculation, and informed opinion over the other kind.

 

[KJJ]

It's not our impressions of those plays that matter, but Blandino's explanations of them. Blandino outlined a three-part catch process, then explained the difference between the two plays (Johnson 2013 and Thomas 2013).
Blandino: "Calvin did not have both feet down prior to reaching for the goal line. So this is all one process. This is an incomplete pass. Now I'll show you the difference. Let's go to Julius Thomas against the Giants. Watch what Julius does. He's gonna get control, take two steps...and now reach for the goal line. He has established himself as a runner."

That information comes from Blandino himself. Where did you get your information? "Thomas caught the ball while his feet were firmly planted on the ground which established control and the catch. This enabled him to become a runner?" That's you, isn't it. You're making this up.

Notice that Blandino doesn't say anything about Thomas' feet being planted firmly on the ground as being what established him as a runner. No mention of "feet being planted firmly on the ground" as part of the three-part catch process either. Those are your impressions and your words, my friend. Blandino is looking for control, two feet down, and an act common to the game. In that order. I know that because I went and found out. That's the value of research over speculation, and informed opinion over the other kind.

Blandino's explanations change depending on the backlash these calls create. His initial explanation of Dez's catch changed once he realized he couldn't explain to everyone's satisfaction what a "football move" is so he turned his attention to Dez going to the ground and not possessing the ball through the contact of the ground. My information comes from the experts who are paid to make these calls and from how I've seen the RULE enforced. I try and see things from the officials vantage point to see if I can come up with a good reason why they ruled the way they did. Can you find a play where a receiver caught a pass "while their feet were planted on the ground" and lost the ball while going to the ground and the Calvin Johnson rule was applied? Anytime we see a receiver go up after a pass and come down and immediately lose the ball either by hitting the ground on their own or by a defender hitting them in mid air causing the ball to pop out after the receiver hits the ground it's ruled an incomplete pass.

It makes no difference that they clearly caught the ball in mid air and had control of it if they hit the ground and the ball pops loose it's incomplete. There's not much of a process a receiver who catches the ball with their feet firmly planted on the ground has to go through. A "catch" becomes pretty instant in that situation unless a receiver gets hit by a defender just as they catch the ball and in that case the ruling will be that the receiver didn't have full control prior to the hit and the pass will be ruled incomplete. Once a receiver who's feet are planted on the ground catches the ball and takes a couple of steps it's an undisputed catch regardless if they start going to the ground and the ball comes loose when it contacts the ground.

Once a catch is established which takes less than a second when a receivers feet are on the ground it's a catch! Blandino has never mentioned anything about a receivers feet being firmly on the ground when making a catch as being a factor in this ruling but having never seen the Calvin Johnson rule come into effect when a receiver is making a catch while they're feet are on the ground tells me that it has to be at least somewhat of a factor. Receivers that go up after a contested ball aren't going to be given a catch regardless how secure they have the ball while in the air they''re required to complete a process before a "catch" is established. From listening to Blandino and how this call is being ruled he's looking for control which isn't established under the RULE until the receivers feet or firmly on the ground and they're not in the process of going to the ground.

Thomas didn't start going to the ground until he had a clear reception then as he was reaching for the end zone he started stumbling and lost the ball after it had already crossed the plane of the goal line. It was Thomas not having to "leap" into the air to battle a defender for the ball that caused him to quickly establish a catch and control while turning into a runner. Feel free to see if you can find a play where a receiver has both feet on the ground while making a clean uncontested catch where the Calvin Johnson rule came into play.

 

[cowboyvic]

Blandino should be fired. and Stephen Jones needs to either fight for his team, or shut the hell up.Dez caught that ball. and for Stephen to suggest otherwise is just stupid.

 

[percyhoward]

"Blandino's explanations change depending on the backlash these calls create. His initial explanation of Dez's catch changed once he realized he couldn't explain to everyone's satisfaction what a "football move" is so he turned his attention to Dez going to the ground and not possessing the ball through the contact of the ground."

Blandino's first five words in his first public statement about the catch were, "Bryant going to the ground."

My information comes from the experts who are paid to make these calls and from how I've seen the RULE enforced...Blandino has never mentioned anything about a receivers feet being firmly on the ground when making a catch as being a factor in this ruling, but having never seen the Calvin Johnson rule come into effect when a receiver is making a catch while they're feet are on the ground tells me that it has to be at least somewhat of a factor.

It clearly isn't, but at least you admit that you're just trying to read something into it. If you're going to keep emphasizing "RULE," you should probably start using the words "MY INTERPRETATION OF THE RULE." Again, we don't have to speculate on this topic. There's a three-part process involved in making a catch, and "feet firmly on the ground" is not part of that. The NFL is looking for these things in this order.

1. control of the ball
2. then, both feet down
3. then, hold onto the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game

Dez had 1 and 2. If he performs part 3, it's a catch. Blandino says, "We looked at that, and it's all his momentum. It's all one process."

If what you're saying were true, that the player needed to have feet firmly on the ground to complete the process, that explanation would be easier to accept because it's a clear difference between the Thomas play and the Dez play. It's natural to look for clear differences. But we already know, because it's on record, what the requirements for a catch are, and why Thomas' catch stood -- the football move completed the process. If Thomas doesn't reach for the goal line, it's ruled incomplete. Feet firmly planted or no feet planted. If Johnson (2013) gets his feet down before he reaches, it's a catch. Leap or no leap.

This is where the NFL runs into the problem of inconsistency, because the reason Thomas' catch stood is the same reason Dez's catch also should have stood. We've got explanations on record where the contact by the defender and the reach for the goal line do make a difference, and the league can't explain why neither of those things made a difference on the Dez play. The reach is described as "not obvious enough" and the contact is ignored completely.

 

[cowboyvic]

The reason that catch by Dez was overturned was because of the refs picking that flag up in the Lions game. and the week long outrage from ESPN and other media. and the outrage of cowboys haters every where. THAT's WHY THAT CATCH WAS OVERTURNED.

 

[KJJ]

Blandino's first five words in his first public statement about the catch were, "Bryant going to the ground."

His first public statement about the catch was on Twitter where he's allowed only 140 characters. The following day on NFLN where he could elaborate and be questioned he said Dez didn't make a football move or a move common to the game and then said he was going to the ground and didn't hold onto the ball through the contact of the ground. When the replay was analyzed and he was asked on how did Dez not perform a football move when he clearly caught the ball, took 2 steps and extended it towards the goal line Blandino didn't have a clear answer. He simply said "in our judgment he didn't make a move common to the game." As the play was again being replayed he was asked what exactly is a "football move" and he couldn't give a definitive answer again using the word "judgement." He moved away from it and focused on the ball coming loose as Dez extended it.

In the video during his interview with Rich Eisen and Michael Irvin on Gameday Final he said "in our view" TWICE when talking about an act common to the game or the so called "football move." He said it has to be more obvious which makes a "football move" an interpretation of ones own personal judgement and according to Blandino and Steratore's judgement Dez didn't make a "football move.". Many experts thought Dez made a "football move" but in Blandino and Steratore's view he didn't because they felt it wasn't obvious enough due to Dez's momentum taking him to the ground which threw out Dez's elbow hitting the ground which would have made him down by contact. Many FANS here have tried to spin this play was nothing like the Calvin Johnson play but Blandino himself said it was very similar to the Johnson play.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-gameday/0ap3000000457053/Dean-Blandino-on-Dez-Bryant-call

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I didn't think it needed to change. I thought the rule itself shouldn't have even factored to what Dez did.

 

[KJJ]

It clearly isn't, but at least you admit that you're just trying to read something into it. If you're going to keep emphasizing "RULE," you should probably start using the words "MY INTERPRETATION OF THE RULE." Again, we don't have to speculate on this topic. There's a three-part process involved in making a catch, and "feet firmly on the ground" is not part of that.

It clearly is but nothing has been clear to you throughout this entire discussion which is why we're still arguing after 3 days. Blandino and Steratore used their interpretation to determine Dez didn't perform a "football move." Blandino himself said "in our view" when explaining that Dez didn't make a move common to the game. He said it wasn't obvious enough in his and Steratore's view. Every rule comes down to interpretation and judgement. Unless something is obvious most calls come down to interpretation and judgement. We see calls all the time that are disputed due to interpretation and judgement. I mentioned how the Networks are using former officials to weigh in and give their opinion on calls and even they disagree with some of the calls made. Mike Carey always seems to disagree with the calls that are made after replay. If a receiver who's gone up in the air to catch a ball doesn't come down with firm footing and their momentum is taking them to the ground they have to hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground. Hopefully one of these days that sinks in with you.

Dez had 1 and 2. If he performs part 3, it's a catch. Blandino says, "We looked at that, and it's all his momentum. It's all one process."

If what you're saying were true, that the player needed to have feet firmly on the ground to complete the process, that explanation would be easier to accept because it's a clear difference between the Thomas play and the Dez play. It's natural to look for clear differences. But we already know, because it's on record, what the requirements for a catch are, and why Thomas' catch stood -- the football move completed the process. If Thomas doesn't reach for the goal line, it's ruled incomplete. Feet firmly planted or no feet planted. If Johnson (2013) gets his feet down before he reaches, it's a catch. Leap or no leap.

I never said a receiver having their feet firmly on the ground completes the process. If a receiver goes up in the air to make a contested catch they have to show they have complete control of the football as they come down and firm footing keeps their momentum from taking them to the ground. Dez never had firm footing which is why he immediately started stumbling. His momentum was taking him to the ground which required him under the RULE to hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground. The clear difference between the Thomas, Dez and Calvin Johnson plays is Thomas never left the ground to make his catch it wasn't contested. He caught the ball with his feet firmly planted on the ground then began to stumble AFTER he made the catch and established control of the football which made him a "runner" at that point. Like I said go find a play where a receiver caught the ball with their feet "on the ground" then lost the ball as they were going to the ground and the Calvin Johnson rule came into effect.

This is where the NFL runs into the problem of inconsistency, because the reason Thomas' catch stood is the same reason Dez's catch also should have stood. We've got explanations on record where the contact by the defender and the reach for the goal line do make a difference, and the league can't explain why neither of those things made a difference on the Dez play. The reach is described as "not obvious enough" and the contact is ignored completely.

The NFL runs into a problem not being able to clearly define what a "football move" or "move common to the game" is that meets everyones satiation. No one is clear on it and Blandino said in "our view" twice referring to he and Steratore's view that Dez didn't make a "football move" when a lot of people some of which are experts think he made. Put 2 different sets of eyes on that play and they may have determined "in their view" that Dez did make a "football move" because it comes down to interpretation and judgement. The league can't explain a lot of things which is why a lot of these rulings come down to interpretation and judgement and it results in controversy. I watch the review segments every week on NFLN and Blandino as did Mike Pereira before him uses the words "interpretation/judgement practically every week trying to explain why the officials made the call they did. Even on HD super slo-mo replay it's hard to tell certain things so it comes down to judgement and the officials interpretation.

 

[jobberone]

I'm closing this thread because some appear to be unable to stay objective. I think some are going to get into trouble. And primarily because it has been adequately litigated and it's served its purpose well.

 

[tyke1doe]

He did. It was.

You mean they gave it to the Cowboys on the one yard line?

 

[percyhoward]

The clear difference between the Thomas, Dez and Calvin Johnson plays is Thomas never left the ground to make his catch it wasn't contested. He caught the ball with his feet firmly planted on the ground then began to stumble AFTER he made the catch and established control of the football which made him a "runner" at that point.

Do you realize that if Dez had reached out with two hands instead of one, they say it would have been a catch?

And do you know why they had to say that?

 

[tyke1doe]

You have said that twice now, .. what difference does it make whether I still watch or not?
It doesn't change the fact that they keep making more and more ridiculous rule changes. To the point that we now need 4 camera angles, a magnifying glass, replay officials in another city, and three paragraphs from a rule interpretation to determine a catch or a "ruling of a no-catch".

I said it twice because it points to an objective measurement. What difference does it make that you think that lawyers, et. al., are ruining the NFL? How do we measure that OBJECTIVELY? By your feelings?
Well, you measure that by movements that measure decline.
If the NFL isn't declining in viewership, then it certainly isn't being ruined.
You want to make this a subjective exercise so your opinion can be the standard. I'm making this an objective exercise so we can measure "ruin" by an observable and quantifiable standard.

You are making a good case for what I am saying, .. the game has changed because they have implemented new rule after new rule. Which have only made it more complicated.
Players from those era's laugh at most of the new rules.

First, no I'm not making your case. The game has changed. And that game is more popular than ever.
Second, so what if players from those era's laugh at the new rules? Those players from that era also envy the popularity and money being made in the game today.

 

[KJJ]

Do you realize that if Dez had reached out with two hands instead of one, they say it would have been a catch?

And do you know why they had to say that?

This thread was supposed to be locked. I told you I'm not answering anymore questions I've invested far too much time on this topic and our views aren't going to change. The ban button looks like it's about to be pushed so I'm done!