Explain to me how that wasn't a 'football move' **Bryant Reversed Call Thread**

[tyke1doe]

Just think the famous Butch Johnson Super Bowl catch would be overturned today

It definitely would have been.

 

[Kevinicus]

ANd if both of you see it different how can that be clear and indisputable evidence to overturn??

I think it is indisputable that the ball hit the ground (though more difficult to see than Cobb's play). But I think whether or not it touched the ground is irrelevant.

 

[superonyx]

Here is the problem.



While Dez took steps, he did so while going to the ground. (he was never not going to hit the ground after going up for the ball) So, the "steps he took" were not even in play because he was still going to the ground. He lost control of the ball when he (and the ball) hit the ground.

The rules state that the ground cannot cause a fumble. That rule is also not in affect because you must first have possession before you can fumble, but the rules state (listed above) that he never actually had possession because he didn't maintain control of the ball while hitting the ground.

So, there was no catch.

You are failing to acknowledge that Dez made a football move by using his third step to lunge toward the end zone and reached out with the ball. Even Vp of officiating on NFL network said if Dez would have reached out with both hands for the end zone it would have been a catch because it would clearly be a football move. So the only argument is about this guys interpretation of a football move and why it isn't consider one if Dez reaches with only one hand instead of 2.

 

[JBS]

So now it's not 100% clear that he reached for the EZ...that's fine

But why does it have to be 100% clear that he made a move? The ruling was a catch...so it has to be 100% clear that it wasn't a football move...which it wasn't 100% clear

 

[superonyx]

The referee and the VP of officiating made a decision on that play that I find very disturbing.

They were very aware that it was extremely close and that calling it for Dallas would increase the heat they were under all week over the party bus and conspiracy theories about them helping the cowboys. They made the decision to go against the rules of indisputable visual evidence and they didn't let the play on the field stand.

I find this very disturbing and really think the NFL has a problem when they have a person in a position of power letting a call from a week ago influence a call from this week.

 

[djmajestik]

I think it is indisputable that the ball hit the ground (though more difficult to see than Cobb's play). But I think whether or not it touched the ground is irrelevant.

And I have yet to see anything clear that proves otherwise. So I still ask, indisputable?

 

[nathanlt]

Allow me to weigh in on this, I've been traveling, without internet access for the past 30 hours. It's a situation out of my control.

In the Dallas-Giants game, at AT&T stadium this year, Dez makes the exact same play at 9:40 in the 4th quarter. He catches the ball, makes 4 steps, extends the ball AFTER his knee is down, at the half yard line, and the ball comes loose after his knee was down. It was ruled down at the one yard line. He was falling throughout the catch.

In the Dallas Packers game yesterday, Dez catches the ball, takes three steps, secures and extends the ball, and his right elbow hits the ground before the ball is knocked loose. That was ruled an incompletion. He was falling throughout the catch. The NFL is not calling these consistently.

I will NEVER, for the rest of my life, consider this ANYTHING but a catch. The NFL was looking to take one away from Dallas, no one will ever convince me otherwise.

Thanks for letting me vent.

 

[EPL0c0]

Allow me to weigh in on this, I've been traveling, without internet access for the past 30 hours. It's a situation out of my control.

In the Dallas-Giants game, at AT&T stadium this year, Dez makes the exact same play at 9:40 in the 4th quarter. He catches the ball, makes 4 steps, extends the ball AFTER his knee is down, at the half yard line, and the ball comes loose after his knee was down. It was ruled down at the one yard line. He was falling throughout the catch.

In the Dallas Packers game yesterday, Dez catches the ball, takes three steps, secures and extends the ball, and his right elbow hits the ground before the ball is knocked loose. That was ruled an incompletion. He was falling throughout the catch. The NFL is not calling these consistently.

I will NEVER, for the rest of my life, consider this ANYTHING but a catch. The NFL was looking to take one away from Dallas, no one will ever convince me otherwise.

Thanks for letting me vent.

And that's the problem. We know "complete the process" but at what point is the process complete? It's an ambiguity in the rule, a total gray area based soley on opinion. SO in those cases, why not defer to the ruling on the field? That would eliminate the fuzziness of when the "process" is complete (is it 3 steps? is it 4 steps?).

 

[superonyx]

The fact that everyone is still debating this controversial judgement call proves that it shouldn't have been made. If it's not indisputable then the call on the field stands......

They need to change the rule about indisputable to add the addendum about the NFL vp of officiating can overturn the need for indisputable evidence if he is under media scrutiny over a call the previous week or getting caught on a party bus.

The fact that this rule is being targeted as something that needs to be changed also shows that it shouldn't have been called.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

And that's the problem. We know "complete the process" but at what point is the process complete? It's an ambiguity in the rule, a total gray area based soley on opinion. SO in those cases, why not defer to the ruling on the field? That would eliminate the fuzziness of when the "process" is complete (is it 3 steps? is it 4 steps?).

Complete the process = when he is done moving.

I don't like the rule. Way before this play.

 

[BigWillie]

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

It's amazing that THAT MUCH is involved in competing a catch.

Once ball appears to be secured. It should be a catch.

How did they leave the meeting with a definitive, " oh yeah that's a good rule change"


I am actually not mad about rule. If we were good enough we win that game. We weren't.

 

[djmajestik]

The rule is very simple. If the receiver is going to the ground while making a catch he has to maintain posession over the whole process. If he hits the gound and loses the ball its an incompletion. It doesnt matter how many steps he takes in that process or if he makes a football move.

They implemented that rule i think it was 2013 or 2014. Anyways it a very new rule and most people still argue by the old rule where the WR had to take 2 steps to make it a completion.

Even on Mike and Mike they BOTH changed their minds as to this being a catch, even reviewed the rule with someone on the air, and discussed for about 5-10 minutes. Initially, they didn't believe it was but after watching different angles believe it was a catch.

Based on what you are saying, I guy could be taking 15 steps and it isn't a completion until he hits the ground? Sorry, show me in the rule book. Everything I have seen in this thread and on the media explains the rule and how they got it wrong. But do carry on with your agenda.........

 

[TheDoctor]

We were screwed but there were points left on the field. There was a fumble, a bad 3rd and 1 call, and a missed fg along with the defenses' inability to give Romo one last shot. They should have easily put the Packers away but they kept them in the game.

It's over now and there's no need to act like whiny Lion fans, the more we cry about the happier the jealous fans of crappy franchises feel about it. Yes it sucks that this team worked so hard and overcame so much only to have it snatched away because the referees wanted to appeased the sad little Cowboy haters that cried "FIXED" all week.

Cowboy fans should hold their heads high still and not let the comments of irrelevant Browns, Saints, and eagles' fan get to them. The teams they root for are jokes within themselves.

I know the future isn't promised but this team can only go up from here and I hope they make everyone pay next season.

 

[Derinyar]

Its a mess. The biggest issue to me isn't the poorly written and badly interpreted rule. Now the biggest issue is the bad use of replay. Using replay, under current guidelines, for a judgement call shouldn't be able to be done. Judgement calls can't be clear and indisputable.

 

[Kevinicus]

And I have yet to see anything clear that proves otherwise. So I still ask, indisputable?

It's very clear with the picture that has been posted several times, but that's not something they would have had with review. I saw it clearly on my TV though, going frame by frame. I had to look closely, but it is clear on a few frames. But again, it's irrelevant since the catch was already made.

 

[hairic]

BTW, here's that similar play from last year:



Caught at top of reception (suddenly shiny ball), multiple feet down/knee/both elbows, contacted/down by contact, move to duck away from defender, move arm in position to protect from defender, tucked ball for better security, ball traveling 7 yards of field under control, and the ball coming loose after a period of time on the ground. Biggest incongruity was the ball came free on the ground because of the ground versus on top of him because of his shoulder pads.

 

[ThrowuptheXDez88]

Why is this not even being discussed ????? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Bryant clearly caught the ball, he was then able to transfer the ball to his left hand, HOW the he*1!*! is that not a football move? I already know he took 3 steps and then lunged forward, but besides that, it is hilarious to me that this is being overlooked.

 

[TheIceman]

Why is this not even being discussed ????? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Bryant clearly caught the ball, he was then able to transfer the ball to his left hand, HOW the he*1!*! is that not a football move? I already know he took 3 steps and then lunged forward, but besides that, it is hilarious to me that this is being overlooked.

I think the point is, as you are going to the ground, you could switch the ball back and forth from your right and left hand or hell duct tape the ball to your chest during that period and if you hit the ground and the ball comes loose, its still incomplete because at the end of the process (the hitting the ground) control was not MAINTAINED. It's NOT just full control at any point DURING the catch, but maintaining control THROUGHOUT the WHOLE process. Hitting the ground is apart of the process unfortunately. I hate the rule, but by rule it was the correct call. Sucks for us though.

 

[nathanlt]

Complete the process = when he is done moving.

I don't like the rule. Way before this play.

He didn't stop moving against Jacksonville, weaving through multiple defenders, he kept his motion going all the way through throwing up the X, and the ball was on the ground at that point. Completing the process is very wordy, but has no specific meaning if someone calls that 4th and 2 catch something other than a catch. It was and will be, FOREVER, a catch. To try to apply that NFL rule to it, is COMPLETELY IRRATIONAL. My anger is growing about this, but the COWBOYS WON THIS GAME. The refs took it away from them. This moment was completely vindictive, the NFL should replay the game from 4:09 on. Dallas should have left the field at 4:09. There's no point in even playing if the refs are going to take the game from you.