I do not see any difference between that play and the Dez play in 2014 *merged*

[KJJ]

I said, "Dez scored standing up on this play. Is he upright?"

Clearly, you knew I was talking about the play in the photo and not the play in Green Bay, because Dez didn't score standing up in Green Bay.

No he wasn’t upright he was falling. A receiver can score when they’re falling but under the rule they have to survive the ground.

 

[percyhoward]

No he wasn’t upright he was falling. A receiver can score when they’re falling but under the rule they have to survive the ground.

That photo was from Dez's 32-yard TD in the 4th qtr vs. the Eagles in 2013, when he scored standing up. He never went to the ground.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/video/2013/12/23/dez-bryant-td-vs-eagles-122313

 

[KJJ]

That photo was from Dez's 32-yard TD in the 4th qtr vs. the Eagles in 2013, when he scored standing up. He never went to the ground.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/video/2013/12/23/dez-bryant-td-vs-eagles-122313

I wasn’t talking about that play I was referring to the one in Green Bay. What’s the correlation between that play and the one in Green Bay? They’re not remotely similar.

 

[blindzebra]

That photo was from Dez's 32-yard TD in the 4th qtr vs. the Eagles in 2013, when he scored standing up. He never went to the ground.

http://www.dallascowboys.com/video/2013/12/23/dez-bryant-td-vs-eagles-122313

It was all momentum Percy, Blandino said so and that is all the proof anyone needs. I mean after all it isn't like NFL officiating became a complete dumpster fire under his watch or anything.

 

[MarcusRock]

Many professionals say Dez's play should have been ruled a catch.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2639506-how-the-nfls-catch-rule-became-the-worst-rule-in-sports

LOL. Pereira's a professional. Oh wait, he didn't have the "right" opinion on the matter so he's not.

 

[rkell87]

It’s not an assumption he was clearly going to fall based on his momentum/body lean. Even though he made contact with the defender his momentum was still taking him to the ground prior to the contact. This is all very clear on replay.

No it isn't because that's not how it happened at all, again go to the doctor, get a cat scan, get better.

 

[blindzebra]

LOL. Pereira's a professional. Oh wait, he didn't have the "right" opinion on the matter so he's not.

Funny since the guy he mentored got fire...I mean resigned...he has done a 180, saying it needs to go back to control, two feet, and a move and like it used to be and Dez play would be a catch, well gues what markie, that was the rule in 2014.

 

[Kevinicus]

Stop. They were NOT doing the same thing. Stop making BS up. Nothing about the two players was the same. Dez jumped higher and caught the ball with 2 hands. Dez came down on one foot (which is NOT a step) and then the second (also NOT a step). Shields reaches up with one hand. He comes down on two feet. Dez had different momentum which is what carried him to the ground. Clearly. Yes he tried to reach out during and after he was going to the ground. But it doesn't matter unless he maintains possession. Which he did not. The ball clearly hit the ground.
They were NOT practically doing the same thing, at all. It does explain why you're not an official though. To suggest they were the same to support your narrative is unreasonable at best.

What exactly do you think a "step" is? Even using a very strict definition where the first foot is just "landing," the 2nd foot down would absolutely qualify as a step. And why are you getting caught up in the stupid semantics nonsense with "step" like others? It's irrelevant. Three feet, three steps, it's all the same when it comes to making a catch.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

That's my point. He didn't go to the ground on this play.

#2 was the same moment from a different angle.

This totally refutes "body lean" or "not upright enough" as credible evidence someone is absolutely going to the ground. Someone needs to ask the league about this.

 

[nathanlt]

LOL. Pereira's a professional. Oh wait, he didn't have the "right" opinion on the matter so he's not.

I'll let Pereira respond to you on this one.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/new...bowl-52-nick-foles/10uqqda9bqvty1k4957stot43b

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has previously signaled the league's intent to revisit the catch rule this offseason, and Pereira has made it clear that changes must be made.

"Under my proposal,” said Pereira, “and what I think the rule ought to change to be, then I think Dez Bryant’s catch was a catch."

 

[Bleedblue1111]

Dez performed a number of football moves during that catch but he didn’t complete the process through the ground.

If you agree Dez made a football move, or act common to the game, then you should agree (according to the rule) that Dez should have been declared a runner.

 

[nathanlt]

If you agree Dez made a football move, or act common to the game, then you should agree (according to the rule) that Dez should have been declared a runner.

You have to realize, KJJ bases his determination on his feelings about Blandino's feelings, during press conferences. He thinks the rule book is not the guide, but the post game NFL comments rule the day. Press conferences have replaced the written rules, according to him.

Once you understand that, it all makes sense. However, nice job getting him to admit Dez made a football move. That's big if you're into rule books and such.

 

[MarcusRock]

I'll let Pereira respond to you on this one.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/new...bowl-52-nick-foles/10uqqda9bqvty1k4957stot43b

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has previously signaled the league's intent to revisit the catch rule this offseason, and Pereira has made it clear that changes must be made.

"Under my proposal,” said Pereira, “and what I think the rule ought to change to be, then I think Dez Bryant’s catch was a catch."

In what bizarro world does a proposal about how a rule could look someday invalidate that he declared the Dez play as correctly ruled back in 2014? Heck, even in 2017 he linked Jesse James' no catch directly with Dez' no catch when he stated that going to the ground trumps the 3-part process but what would you rules "gurus" even know what to do with that? I guess ex-post facto proposal validation is a thing now, lol.

 

[DogFace]

Braces is used in one, regains balance is used in another. Simply maintains possession long enough is used in yet another. It is the one that simply says maintains possession long enough that I was getting hung up on as being in contradiction with the actual going to the ground rule. But it you put the three into the same context, IMO the intent is that if the player starts to go to the ground, but yet "gathers" themselves in a meaningful way for long enough, and then performs a lunge, then they will make an exception to the going to the ground and deem it a catch, assuming at the point of the lunge. So its not make a football move while falling. It's making an act to interrupt the fall or gather that actually completes the catch process. But the ambiguous addition in the case plays of performing a lunge is present in all. Not one case plays refers to any other act. And this additional act is clearly not called out as part of the process. Why is that? What are they trying to communicate here by defining it that way?

You can question whether or not other things qualify other than a lunge. The case plays only refer to a lunge as being the act. I believe they chose lunge because it is the only act a runner can do. They could also protect themselves or ward off contact. That would also tie into them having the ability to gather themselves. A reach is an act anyone can do. You don't have to be a runner to reach. You can reach while in mid air. Can you protect or ward off contact while in mid air? Possibly. But far more of a judgement call.

The case plays do bring into question whether those specific scenarios only deal with players who have been forced into the ground via contact. The language is certainly in the case plays to suggest that.

A catch can be completed while on the ground. That is obvious. That is becoming a runner.

What's at question here is if a player can complete the catch while falling. The first part of this is a judgement call if the player is actually falling in the first place. If he is deemed to be falling, then IMO, the case plays elude to if the player can regain their balance or gather themselves enough to act as a runner and then perform the lunge ( the only act clearly defined as fulfilling this requirement ), then it becomes a catch and therefore does not require the player to maintain control through contacting the ground.

The determination on the Dez call was that he was clearly going to the ground and at NO point regained his balance or gathered himself in a demonstrable way PROCEEDING the "lunge" he made. And its even disputable that the action he made was a lunge, or a reach or all just a jumbled bunch of actions he made. But the key here is that it doesn't matter what "football" move he made. He never regained balance or gathered himself first.

I respect your thoughtful analysis. Your polite tone is appreciated and others, including myself, could learn from that. You do make a good argument about an act interrupting the fall. It’s possible that’s what they were intending, but that’s reading a lot into what they may have been thinking when selecting these caseplays. I also agree many of these rules madness caseplays could’ve been written better.

I still do feel Dez gathered himself when he was switching hands and preparing for falling, lunging, preparing to reach for the goialine or whatever else someone says he was doing that it satisfied the time element of the process.

The rule states if the player has time to pitch the ball he satisfies the time element. After switching hands I feel he did gather himself, as you say, and could’ve pitched the ball at that instant rather than reaching. Which could’ve satisfied the time element.

 

[DogFace]

Reminds me of some of the crazy conspiracy theories that were started in the 0T section on that. They were almost as ridiculous as some of the comments that the moon walk was staged. This fan base has a few space cadets.

Use of the term space cadets speaks of who you are.

 

[DogFace]

The NFL attempted to clarify the rule but they certainly haven’t changed the rule. Same rule but they’re trying to add clarity to it.

Your fanboy attitude about the nfl league office and the refs that represent the nfl has hindered your ability to be impartial about the questioning of them.

 

[DogFace]

makes sense because it's such a general term. Literally anything during a game is a football move.

Is thinking?

Try it and tell me.

 

[G2]

Would you prefer, "become a player in possession of a live ball?"

A football move is anything a player in possession of a live ball does on purpose.

Yeah, I know what it is. We don't have to keep re-hashing this. Anything that is left to an officials judgement can get

Oh lord, here we go. Here's the difference. Dez jumped up to highpoint the ball and Ertz caught the ball while on his feet taking 3 steps and then executed a proper lunge/reach. Dez did not do the last part so the going to the ground rule applied. Just stop.

Yeah but he took 17 steps, do you even know what a step is?

 

[G2]

Is thinking?

Try it and tell me.

I would but you wouldn't comprehend.

 

[DogFace]

That's my point. He didn't go to the ground on this play.

#2 was the same moment from a different angle.

@OmerV what do you think of this? If Shields made no contact Dez appears to be able to pull out of that loss of balance.