News: ESPN: NFL owners OK new catch rule by 32-0 vote

[blindzebra]

Explain why Blandino never talked about two feet down with Dez? All he kept talking about was that Dez was going to the ground during the process of making the catch, despite the fact he both feet down, took three steps and reached for the endzone. Again, you keep focusing on the wording Blandino used in the Calvin Johnson video. You continue going back to that video and that particular explanation he gave. The point I’m trying to make is that if Calvin Johnson got two feet down and it would have been a catch then how come Dez’s wasn’t a catch even though he got two feet down?

Dez got both feet down prior to his reach. Do you see what I’m saying? Blandino’s comment on the Calvin Johnson play doesn’t make sense when you apply it to the Dez play because he did what Johnson didn’t do prior to his reach but it was still ruled not a catch. It was all because he was going to the ground during the process of making the catch.

Explain it, it is simple he blew the call in GB and made up BS to cover his butt. You just said that a football move could end going to the ground in 2013 per the Johnson explanation, there was no rule change in 2014 so what happened?

Blandino 2013 contradicts Blandino post Dez, no rule change, so what does it mean? I have been correct all along and you have been wrong.

 

[KJJ]

By all means everyone watch the link and see which of us is telling the truth.

Dude, I quoted him. You can’t come to grips with anything...WOW!

 

[KJJ]

Explain it, it is simple he blew the call in GB and made up BS to cover his butt. You just said that a football move could end going to the ground in 2013 per the Johnson explanation, there was no rule change in 2014 so what happened?

Blandino 2013 contradicts Blandino post Dez, no rule change, so what does it mean? I have been correct all along and you have been wrong.

 

[percyhoward]

Blandino has explained the play numerous times and his explanations have varied but he remained consistent that if a receiver is going to the ground during the process of making a catch they must maintain possession through the contact of the ground.

Nobody disputes that the rule said that "if a receiver is going to the ground during the catch process they must maintain possession through the contact of the ground." Not every player who goes to the ground does so during the catch process. As Blandino said, control, two feet, and a football move means the process has been completed. That's why Thomas and Cruz were both considered runners. Even though both were going to the ground, they went to the ground as runners -- not receivers -- because they had control, two feet down, and a football move of reaching for the goal line.

You didn't comment on the Cruz play in the video I posted, which is an even clearer example of the kind of proof you'd been asking for.

Go to :23 and you'll see a player complete the catch process while falling, lose the ball when he goes to the ground, and it's a catch.

 

[blindzebra]

Dude, I quoted him. You can’t come to grips with anything...WOW!

No you did not. He explained the difference between what Johnson and Thomas did. Both were going to the ground and Johnson did not complete the catch process and needed to survive the ground, Thomas completed the process WHILE GOING TO THE GROUND and became a RUNNER.

 

[percyhoward]

No you did not. He explained the difference between what Johnson and Thomas did. Both were going to the ground and Johnson did not complete the catch process and needed to survive the ground, Thomas completed the process WHILE GOING TO THE GROUND and became a RUNNER.

Are you familiar with the Cruz play in the video in my previous post? It's a great example for explaining to people how a player can complete the catch process and "become a runner" even when he's just falling.

 

[DogFace]

Explain why Blandino never talked about two feet down with Dez? All he kept talking about was that Dez was going to the ground during the process of making the catch, despite the fact he both feet down, took three steps and reached for the endzone. Again, you keep focusing on the wording Blandino used in the Calvin Johnson video. You continue going back to that video and that particular explanation he gave. The point I’m trying to make is that if Calvin Johnson got two feet down and it would have been a catch then how come Dez’s wasn’t a catch even though he got two feet down?

Dez got both feet down prior to his reach. Do you see what I’m saying? Blandino’s comment on the Calvin Johnson play doesn’t make sense when you apply it to the Dez play because he did what Johnson didn’t do prior to his reach but it was still ruled not a catch. It was all because he was going to the ground during the process of making the catch.

Yes, that’s right. His explanation was inconsistent with the Dez ruling. He made a mistake.

After the catch he changed his story several times. Percy provided the timeline of his changing explanations.

Thank you. That’s all I was trying to get you to see. The overrule was not in line with the rules as they were explained previously.

 

[DogFace]

Yes. Please watch the Cruz play percy posted. Cruz jumped, barley landed, reached and lost the ball when it hit the ground.

 

[blindzebra]

Are you familiar with the Cruz play in the video in my previous post? It's a great example for explaining to people how a player can complete the catch process and "become a runner" even when he's just falling.

Yeah I remember the play, and they will just ignore it, because it again proves that we are correct and Blandino blew the call in GB and then changed the rule.

 

[percyhoward]

Yeah I remember the play, and they will just ignore it, because it again proves that we are correct and Blandino blew the call in GB and then changed the rule.

The term "runner" confuses a lot of people. Even though Thomas was going to the ground, he was making strides, so it's easy for people to think that's what made him a runner, instead of his reach. On the other "falling reach" play, Cruz never even made strides. Pereira tweeted this before he watched the play again later and realized Cruz never got his second foot down. Here he's clearly saying Cruz didn't have to hold onto the ball because he was a runner.

 

[blindzebra]

The term "runner" confuses a lot of people. Even though Thomas was going to the ground, he was making strides, so it's easy for people to think that's what made him a runner, instead of his reach. On the other "falling reach" play, Cruz never even made strides. Pereira tweeted this before he watched the play again later and realized Cruz never got his second foot down. Here he's clearly saying Cruz didn't have to hold onto the ball because he was a runner.

Even more proof that the rules were ignored that day in GB.

Percy, I just noticed the U2 quote in your sig line. It's from the movie Rattle and Hum.

 

[KJJ]

No you did not. He explained the difference between what Johnson and Thomas did. Both were going to the ground and Johnson did not complete the catch process and needed to survive the ground, Thomas completed the process WHILE GOING TO THE GROUND and became a RUNNER.

You continue to get it wrong. He first analyzed the Johnson play. He said Johnson was going to the ground during the process of making the catch. Johnson didn’t survive the ground therefore his catch was nullified. He then analyzed the Julius Thomas play. Julius Thomas caught the ball and established himself as a runner PRIOR to going to the ground. The catch process was completed BEFORE he started going to the ground. Blandino said so himself. His EXACT words were “he was not going to the ground in the process of making the catch.” It couldn’t be more clear than that but you keep trying to twist what he said. Lol

 

[blindzebra]

You continue to get it wrong. He first analyzed the Johnson play. He said Johnson was going to the ground during the process of making the catch. Johnson didn’t survive the ground therefore his catch was nullified. He then analyzed the Julius Thomas play. Julius Thomas caught the ball and established himself as a runner PRIOR to going to the ground. The catch process was completed BEFORE he started going to the ground. Blandino said so himself. His EXACT words were “he was not going to the ground in the process of making the catch.” It couldn’t be more clear than that but you keep trying to twist what he said. Lol

He never said that in that video, stop lying.
Your description of the Thomas is not even accurate, nor what Blandino said.

 

[KJJ]

By all means everyone watch the link and see which of us is telling the truth.

They will see who’s telling the truth. I quoted what Blandino said and you twisted what he said.

 

[KJJ]

He never said that in that video, stop lying.
Your description of the Thomas is not even accurate, nor what Blandino said.

Dude, I QUOTED what he said! What is wrong with you?

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...00000246515/Calvin-Johnson-rule-strikes-again

 

[KJJ]

Yes. Please watch the Cruz play percy posted. Cruz jumped, barley landed, reached and lost the ball when it hit the ground.

I watched the video and they blew the call according to the way they’ve been ruling all of those plays. Cruz was going to the ground during the process of making the catch and didn’t survive the ground. I’m sure Blandino said the officials botched the call because it was just like both Calvin Johnson plays, the Dez play and the Jesse James play.

Had Blandino said the Cruz play was ruled correctly and both Johnson plays existed along with the Dez and Jesse James plays, he wouldn’t have been able to explain why those catches were negated and the Cruz catch wasn’t. This is just more of why they got rid of the rule. It was the dumbest rule since the tuck rule.

 

[blindzebra]

Dude, I QUOTED what he said! What is wrong with you?

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...00000246515/Calvin-Johnson-rule-strikes-again

I will try to make this simple for you.

The video is introduced as the Calvin Johnson rule correct?

Blandino talks about understanding the catch process control, two feet, and time to do an act common to the game. correct?

He then describes the Johnson dive, and that he did not complete the process so he had to survive the ground. Note that this is saying that completing the catch process ends the going to the ground requirement, and that had Johnson got two feet down before the reach, it would have been a catch, correct?

He then describes the Thomas catch, and even though Thomas was going to the ground in the catch process, he successfully completed it before he hit the ground. He became a RUNNER, correct?

That is why he said he did not go to the ground in the process of a catch, it was because he became a runner while he was in the process of the catch and that ended going to the ground. It does not mean what you are claiming.

Both were going to the ground in the process of the catch. Johnson did not complete part B, two feet, so he was bound by Item 1 to survive the ground. Thomas did complete part B while in the process of going to the ground, so when he reached he completed the process of the catch and became a runner. That is exactly what the case book play means when it says the lunge was not part of the catch process, because the process was over and the player was now a runner.

It is common sense, why would you be discussing the confusion about going to the ground, and then show a play that was not covering going to the ground? That is the claim you are making here by saying Thomas was not going to the ground. Otherwise, why even discuss the catch process with Johnson? He'd have just said none of that matters he was going to the ground, he had to keep control.

 

[blindzebra]

I watched the video and they blew the call according to the way they’ve been ruling all of those plays. Cruz was going to the ground during the process of making the catch and didn’t survive the ground. I’m sure Blandino said the officials botched the call because it was just like both Calvin Johnson plays, the Dez play and the Jesse James play.

Had Blandino said the Cruz play was ruled correctly and both Johnson plays existed along with the Dez and Jesse James plays, he wouldn’t have been able to explain why those catches were negated and the Cruz catch wasn’t. This is just more of why they got rid of the rule. It was the dumbest rule since the tuck rule.

It was confirmed as correct by the league, so you are once again incorrect.

 

[KJJ]

It was confirmed as correct by the league, so you are once again incorrect.

Provide some documentation as to how they explained the Cruz call. That call happened prior to the Dez play. Had the Cruz play happened after the Dez play, no way they rule that a completed pass. More scrutiny was placed on the rule after the Dez play.

 

[KJJ]

I will try to make this simple for you.

The video is introduced as the Calvin Johnson rule correct?

Blandino talks about understanding the catch process control, two feet, and time to do an act common to the game. correct?

He then describes the Johnson dive, and that he did not complete the process so he had to survive the ground. Note that this is saying that completing the catch process ends the going to the ground requirement, and that had Johnson got two feet down before the reach, it would have been a catch, correct?

He then describes the Thomas catch, and even though Thomas was going to the ground in the catch process, he successfully completed it before he hit the ground. He became a RUNNER, correct?

That is why he said he did not go to the ground in the process of a catch, it was because he became a runner while he was in the process of the catch and that ended going to the ground. It does not mean what you are claiming.

Both were going to the ground in the process of the catch. Johnson did not complete part B, two feet, so he was bound by Item 1 to survive the ground. Thomas did complete part B while in the process of going to the ground, so when he reached he completed the process of the catch and became a runner. That is exactly what the case book play means when it says the lunge was not part of the catch process, because the process was over and the player was now a runner.

It is common sense, why would you be discussing the confusion about going to the ground, and then show a play that was not covering going to the ground? That is the claim you are making here by saying Thomas was not going to the ground. Otherwise, why even discuss the catch process with Johnson? He'd have just said none of that matters he was going to the ground, he had to keep control.

It’s laughable you trying to explain what Blandino said. Lol I quoted him. If want to continue wasting your time arguing go ahead. It’s no mystery why these threads keep going and going and going. Once this one is finally done you’ll disappear until the next one.