News: Goodell is now worried about the catch rule

[DogFace]

Hey, I know you and your ringleader need to make Dez an upright runner so you can avoid the going to the ground rule which you each know is lights out for your argument, but it's kinda hard to do that when Dez is falling to the ground for the entirety of his making a play on that ball. The story for catch supporters has evolved on this from the very beginning to avoid the going to the ground rule. First it was, the ball never hit the ground. Then it was Dez was indeed upright and then tripped. Then it became well Dez reached at the end (the question your ringleader refuses to answer). Now it's, "no, no, he switched hands." Every option is considered by your side except actually going to the ground, which was the basis of the call. None of you can defeat that so you avoid it at all costs, including now turning to Google for a definition instead of the rules that governed the play.

Your ringleader said Blandino "misinterpreted" then when the evidence was presented, then it became, "well, he just went to 'going to the ground' without talking about the 3-part process." That's not misinterpreting, that's cutting to the chase to those that understand. Even so, he did address the football move when asked. All of them did. Blandino did, the official Steratore did, and Pereira did during the broadcast. So all you're left with is CONSPIRACY! that men hired to be professionals somehow abandoned moral principle because they have it in for the Cowboys (collectively, mind you) whose victory would have been great for the league's ratings. So was Steratore trying to make good with the Cowboys during the Oakland game, lol?

You clearly have an inflated sense of confidence and importance. I admire that given your lack of ability to understand simple text which is clearly a symptom of larger problems that you have.

Explain to me your first and thens idea. Where and how did you come up with that? I’ve never said any of those things that you pulled from your ***. That was dumb.

I’m assuming you’re confusing this discussion with some other. Let’s just stick to what we’ve discussed.

The rule as written in 2014 states the catch process is compete after(I’ll say it again even though it’s been said) Control, 2 feet down, and time to make a football move have been competed. This is what I’ve always said.

Once those 3 steps have been completed the player is a runner. These supercedes the “going to the ground” rule. Which applies to those that haven’t met the 3 step process.

Now I’m your ringleader. Your orders are to read more carefully, listen to others that are trying to help you, learn to see football plays clearly, and don’t listen to what you tell yourself because you lack credibility.

 

[DogFace]

Again, as I've said, we've had this debate already, including your questions. Go back to the old thread. The only thing that was missing was the unanswered question. Don't know that the issue of being an honest debater is settled when it took nearly 3 weeks and shaming posts to finally get that answer. I mean, it's not like the answer was a mystery given what it took.

The modus operandi you’re trying to earn:
1. Cry over and over that someone won’t answer what you think is a very important question.
2. Criticize them over and over for not answering it.
3. Receive answer then whine it took too long
4. Use that as an excuse to be a hippocrit and not answer a question that will clearly hurt your not well thought out debate
5. Wrongly think you have the ability to shame someone with a post.

These are characteristics that possibly put your last forum of debate out of business.

 

[Aviano90]

3 years after the play...anyone change their mind on the ruling yet it does this horse with a thousand lives need more beatings?


Wrap the ball up, Dez. I won’t change my mind on that. I wish Cowboys could play smart football .

 

[percyhoward]

Again, as I've said, we've had this debate already, including your questions. Go back to the old thread. The only thing that was missing was the unanswered question. Don't know that the issue of being an honest debater is settled when it took nearly 3 weeks and shaming posts to finally get that answer. I mean, it's not like the answer was a mystery given what it took.

Hey, if you want to wait three weeks to address my questions, so we can call it even, that works too.

 

[LandryFan]

2) that Blandino addressed the catch process and concluded that there was no football move. So is it 1, 2, or both? And if both, why would 2 have been necessary if 1 were the case?

What Blandino actually stated was that, in his judgment, there wasn't "enough" of a football move which, to me, implies that there was at least some of a football move (in his opinion). He was/is just an idiot trying to cover his ***...but I digress.

 

[khiladi]

This is where I think a lot of you are just not getting it. Some intentionally, I know. I realize you were talking about the 2017 rules vs. the 2014 rules but their essence is the same. Nothing changed except adding wording so people who couldn't understand (that actually wanted to) would get that the 3-part process of a catch applies to receivers on their feet who catch a ball (i.e., "upright"). So it is an "upright rule" as you put it because if you're not upright then you're going to the ground. In 2014, Item 1 begins: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass..." It begins that way because you are either upright or going to the ground. It's yes or no. Why else do you word it that way? You are either going to the ground or you aren't. This was always true so they added the wording to explain it so people would get it. I don't think they needed to personally but maybe they were placating the conspiracy criers, lol.

So you saying that Dez was upright when he had 2 feet down is just plain wrong. He high pointed a ball and was on his way down to the ground. He's done that before. He could have gotten one foot and a knee, one foot and his elbow, but he came down to the ground while catching that ball. Y'all can try to legislate in football moves, acts common to the game all you want. He was going to the ground even if Shields doesn't touch him. This is why the catch crazies explain everything except when "going to the ground" applies because it's the end of the argument on the spot.

Uh no... I asked you where where in the rulebook it says such a thing and you provided none.

The rule says it specifically what upright means which is:

d. A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner.

And that definition is stated above, which is:

A player has the ball long enough to become a runner when, after his second foot is on the ground, he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent, tucking the ball away, turning up field, or taking additional steps (see 3-2-7-Item 2).

The upright rule is affiliated with TIME.

Ball advancement via extension like Dez is just as much an issue of YARDAGE gained as a step with feet. You can score a TD by extending without moving your feet. The very objective of football is to cross the plane, not take additional steps.

Des took his two steps and dived trying to cross the plane and extend his arm to cross the plane, but he realized it was too far.

 

[Melonfeud]

The modus operandi you’re trying to earn:
1. Cry over and over that someone won’t answer what you think is a very important question.
2. Criticize them over and over for not answering it.
3. Receive answer then whine it took too long
4. Use that as an excuse to be a hippocrit and not answer a question that will clearly hurt your not well thought out debate
5. Wrongly think you have the ability to shame someone with a post.

These are characteristics that possibly put your last forum of debate out of business.

That is a rather astute & concisely compiled observation,CarHarris2,as I've read this thread & every post since the O.P.,,,, other than an yet to be defined & discernable motive to whatever narrative the $**t stirring conducted by our esteemed fellow is hoped to illustrate,,,,,,hell if I know?,,, although, I'm a bit surprised not one single dog in the fight has posted
Dean Blandino's final butt wiping twitterism from his twit repertoire,,,, as the final passing thumb in the proverbial eye " Dez did catch it",,,,
Obviously, I've concluded its old bones that shouldn't be kicked around on,,,,

 

[G2]

3 years after the play...anyone change their mind on the ruling yet it does this horse with a thousand lives need more beatings?


Wrap the ball up, Dez. I won’t change my mind on that. I wish Cowboys could play smart football .

Exactly. Stop holding the ball like it's a loaf of bread. Dez is admired for biting and scratching for every inch, but it cost us an opportunity to win a play off game. We saw it this past season vs. Seattle. That game he came unraveled. Whining for the ball and then he lets the defender punch the ball out right in front of him. These issue to me are more important to discuss. Wrap the damn ball Mr. 8 year "Vet."

 

[blueblood70]

so they will most likely screw it up even more..im taking a wait and see attitude..the only way to make it correct is do away with the ambiguous going to ground rule..its obvious to 99% of us that when a ball is secured and than the receiver makes a move toward getting more yards whether its for basic yards, first down, or TD, a move shows control and thata catch..these are some of th best athletes in the world and have the ability to catch and move all in a single motion and if stretching the ball out for extra yardage and then hits the ground and ball moves, its basically a dead ball as ground cant cause a fumble..so if you catch a ball with one knee, two feet, a hip, butt or what ever is on ground and its clear you have it enough to turn and stretch out.. its catch..doesn't seem we need a special formula to access this, its why we have stant replay to see the ball was in fact controlled and than moved with purpose to gain yardage or score..

now the bang bang plays where a receivers running full speed and has it for second and its knocked out before he can make any real moves is tougher to evaluate but with instant replay 90% can be made correctly, most of which we see can be a fumble or incomplete is he loses it before two steps or after etc

 

[G2]

Uh no... I asked you where where in the rulebook it says such a thing and you provided none.

The rule says it specifically what upright means which is:

d. A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner.

And that definition is stated above, which is:



The upright rule is affiliated with TIME.

Ball advancement via extension like Dez is just as much an issue of YARDAGE gained as a step with feet. You can score a TD by extending without moving your feet. The very objective of football is to cross the plane, not take additional steps.

Des took his two steps and dived trying to cross the plane and extend his arm to cross the plane, but he realized it was too far.

He reached, he didn't dive. He was falling to the ground and tried to reach. I understand his attempt too. Can't blame Dez, that's his style. But, not maintaining control of the ball might be why it was overturned.
It's not like he jumped up and caught the ball (which was an extremely badass catch over the defender) and kept running, he was going to the ground.

 

[khiladi]

L

He reached, he didn't dive. He was falling to the ground and tried to reach. I understand his attempt too. Can't blame Dez, that's his style. But, not maintaining control of the ball might be why it was overturned.
It's not like he jumped up and caught the ball (which was an extremely badass catch over the defender) and kept running, he was going to the ground.

ABsoluteky not..

He took a dive after his two steps right at the two yard line and reached trying to cross the plane, which is in any definition of a book a football move, because crossing the plane, whether one takes additional steps or not is the objective of the series:

 

[G2]

L

ABsoluteky not..

He took a dive after his two steps right at the two yard line and reached trying to cross the plane, which is in any definition of a book a football move, because crossing the plane, whether one takes additional steps or not is the objective of the series:

Try watching in regular speed. He was clearly falling to the ground. On his own. If he was taking steps to be established as a runner as you say, why didn't he just keep taking steps and run into the end zone?
Answer: He was falling to the ground.

 

[khiladi]

Try watching in regular speed. He was clearly falling to the ground. On his own. If he was taking steps to be established as a runner as you say, why didn't he just keep taking steps and run into the end zone?
Answer: He was falling to the ground.

1. Who said he has to take steps to establish himself as a runner? That’s only one example thr NFL rulebook provides whether post or pre Dez catch.

And even then, it’s two steps AND a dive, the dive and extension and act to try and cross the plane.

2. You mean they rule based on regular speed when looking at instant replay? Speed doesn’t change the fact HE DIVED at 2.. you can’t get around it and now your talking about whether or not it should be ruled a dive based on slow motion or regular motion.

Try looking at the catch on regular speed and tell me the ball touched the ground..

 

[jsb357]

The ambiguity of the catch rule as well as inconsistent officiating drives casual fans away from
regular seasons games.

But really they won't make any serious headway until if affects the outcome of a Super Bowl.

RG is just trying to head it off at the pass.

 

[G2]

1. Who said he has to take steps to establish himself as a runner? That’s only one example thr NFL rulebook provides whether post or pre Dez catch.

And even then, it’s two steps AND a dive, the dive and extension and act to try and cross the plane.

2. You mean they rule based on regular speed when looking at instant replay? Speed doesn’t change the fact HE DIVED at 2.. you can’t get around it and now your talking about whether or not it should be ruled a dive based on slow motion or regular motion.

Try looking at the catch on regular speed and tell me the ball touched the ground..

He was falling to the ground. If not, he would have just ran into the end zone.

 

[CCBoy]

Two slight toe touches in bounds while falling out of bounds when catching...is enough. What does two steps demonstrate?

 

[G2]

Two slight toe touches in bounds while falling out of bounds when catching...is enough. What does two steps demonstrate?

As long as you maintain possession.

 

[DogFace]

He was falling to the ground. If not, he would have just ran into the end zone.

It doesn’t matter if he was falling to the ground as you say. He was a runner per the 2014 rules.

Again it’s:
Control of the ball—check
Two feet down—check
Time to make a football move—check
That makes him a runner and it doesn’t matter if he’s going to the ground because at that point he’s a runner. He’s no longer a receiver after those 3 requirements are met.

Which of those 3 do you think weren’t met? Tell me and I’ll expalin how it was met.

 

[khiladi]

He was falling to the ground. If not, he would have just ran into the end zone.

And? RBs fall but reach and dive all the time to cross the plane..

 

[G2]

It doesn’t matter if he was falling to the ground as you say. He was a runner per the 2014 rules.

Again it’s:
Control of the ball—check
Two feet down—check
Time to make a football move—check
That makes him a runner and it doesn’t matter if he’s going to the ground because at that point he’s a runner. He’s no longer a receiver after those 3 requirements are met.

Which of those 3 do you think weren’t met? Tell me and I’ll expalin how it was met.

Well they ruled he didn't have possession. Which is why it was reversed.