Done with the NFLs officiating

I wana know what happened to the rule of reviewing where if evidence isn't indisputable, you stay with the call on the field. In my biased eyes, that should have been a catch, but how can anybody say there was definitive video evidence justifying one call or the other? There wasn't. It was called a catch on the field and should have remained one just like the Cobb call

Exactly! This is the second playoff loss for us in the Romo era where a booth review was inconclusive and the reversed the call. My opinion of the Dez catch is it arguably could have been called incomplete by the rule but since they called it a catch on the field, then they need indisputable proof to overturn it. I feel lunging to the goal line is a football move. But with the replay I don't feel there was indisputable proof the call needed to be reversed. But that's not the play that lost it for us. I would rate the Murray fumble as #1, bailey miss#2 and then the call reversal as #3.
 
Yeah I feel you there.

Like I said I don't believe they got the call right because I believe he made more than one football move after the catch. But I do believe this is how the league is going to explain it and spin it cause they're simply not going to admit on back to back weeks to blowing two hugely controversial calls.

What does it say when Pereira says he made a dive for the end zone, but it was not enough of a dive. So he made a football move, but not enough of a football move? Either he made a football move or he didn't.
 
We had a chance to win also....Murray fumble....poor tackling.....WR's can't get open

And I didn't direct it towards you only. Just the board as a whole

We didn't have a chance after the Dez call. Didn't get the ball back. Crawford tipped pass, finds its way to cobb. Nah, didn't think you were addressing me. I was just saying.
 
I've seen Pereira disagree with plenty of calls he's been pretty objective. These are judgement calls and not everyone is going to see them the same way. The NFL is going to have to figure out a way to better define the rule or calls like this will continue to be controversial.

Ruling on field should stand if it's not 100% clear.
 
This is correct. They knew DAMN well he had possession. They skewed the call and the rule to fit their narrative. Hell yes it was payback for last week. They didn't want anyone thinking the league favors Dallas, which is what millions of EFFtarded whiners were saying after last week's game.

Absolutely there was too much crying and complaining that the Cowboys were favored by the league that this needed to happen to show they weren't, absolute makeup call. We're left knowing we were robbed and other fans are laughing saying karma. Meanwhile seattle will repeat for another boring Super Bowl. NFL is becoming so predictable.
 
What does it say when Pereira says he made a dive for the end zone, but it was not enough of a dive. So he made a football move, but not enough of a football move? Either he made a football move or he didn't.

Exactly man. My wife who knows NOTHING about the game said: "What constitutes a FOOTBALL MOVE?"....then I showed her the replay and she said, he caught it and ran for a couple steps and lunged...ball hit the ground. Ground can't cause a fumble. She's never watched a full game in her life and SHE got it right.
 
We didn't have a chance after the Dez call. Didn't get the ball back. Crawford tipped pass, finds its way to cobb. Nah, didn't think you were addressing me. I was just saying.

Well I'm talking before that.

To many times Romo danced back there for 5+ seconds and nobody got open. We had chances.
 
Absolutely there was too much crying and complaining that the Cowboys were favored by the league that this needed to happen to show they weren't, absolute makeup call. We're left knowing we were robbed and other fans are laughing saying karma. Meanwhile seattle will repeat for another boring Super Bowl. NFL is becoming so predictable.

Also remember Dean Bladino was seen on JJ's party bus. NICE move JJ. That probly didnt' help either.
 
It was a missed call and Pereira said it was a missed call. The Cowboys scored on the play so it didn't have an impact on the game.

Would've been enforced on the kickoff. Would've saved 10 yards field position
 
But he shifts the ball as part of the catch. He's not running and then switches hands. I don't like the rule anymore than you do, but based on the letter of the law, it wasn't a catch. :(

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying. Pay attention to his right elbow that hits the ground. The left hand clearly clutches the ball approximately 1 foot above the ground. The ball was in his right hand and now is in his left hand while contacting the ground. Bryant then extending his left hand clearly cradling the ball has the ball shift up as he rolls into the end zone. Bryant never loses control of the ball.
 
Absolutely ridiculous. It's almost no fun being a fan anymore with this blatant contradiction.

Yeah, I KNEW at the time that was a BS call...really pissed about that. That got them three pts. before the half. Wanna bet they 'apologize' to Dallas this week for that? Hey....doesn't matter now. They will lose by 30+ to Seattle
 
Would've been enforced on the kickoff. Would've saved 10 yards field position

Still wouldn't have impacted the game very much. Had the Cowboys not scored a TD on that play and had to settle for 3 then that would have been a different story.
 
The ball is allowed to touch the ground if the player maintains control. It looks like Dez has control the entire mili-second the ball touches the ground. He then loses control briefly while the ball is in the air, but regains control before it hits the ground.

10917848_1018650824817932_8894611889191357089_n.jpg
 
Calvin Johnson rule. The call was correct but it's a really stupid rule and we're not the first team to get screwed by it

How was the call correct? If he was bobbling it on the way to the ground I would understand. He had clear possession, took 3 steps, and lunged for the end zone. So are you telling me the "rule" is that any ball that hits the ground, regardless of if the receiver has possession or not, is automatically an incomplete pass? With that logic you're saying that a receiver can catch a short pass, run 50 yards and trip, but if the ball hits the ground as he's going down, the entire pass is incomplete. Doesn't matter if they run 50 yards or take 3 steps (like Dez did)... all that matters is if he had possession before the ball hits the ground, which he clearly did.
 
How was the call correct? If he was bobbling it on the way to the ground I would understand. He had clear possession, took 3 steps, and lunged for the end zone. So are you telling me the "rule" is that any ball that hits the ground, regardless of if the receiver has possession or not, is automatically an incomplete pass? With that logic you're saying that a receiver can catch a short pass, run 50 yards and trip, but if the ball hits the ground as he's going down, the entire pass is incomplete. Doesn't matter if they run 50 yards or take 3 steps (like Dez did)... all that matters is if he had possession before the ball hits the ground, which he clearly did.

bingo....gonna have to accept the fact they KNOWINGLY boned us guys. Just like the Cobb catch...they knew damn well that wasn't a catch. Not even CLOSE.
 
Don't worry. The Packers turn to get jobbed is next week. Terrible that the league has come to this and can't let two good teams duke it out.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
464,054
Messages
13,786,152
Members
23,771
Latest member
LandryHat
Back
Top