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

[BlindFaith]

You think it is impossible for Dez to not regain his balance 7 yards later. It would take about 3 stumbling steps and less than a second. It is absolutely possible.

Give me one example of this ever happening throughout the entire history of the NFL and we can then talk about the "hypothetical". A player is not going to stumble for 7 yards and magically regain their balance. Did Dez? No.

If Dez would have regained his balance while taking those two stumbling steps, then it would have been a catch. Try shifting your argument to that. Unless you don't think he was ever going to the ground to begin with. I can't keep up with the various misunderstandings being promoted hear.

 

[OmerV]

You need to reread what I said initially. Your facts are wrong. You read what you wanted to read, not what I said.

This is what you said at 10:13 am on Monday .... "You think one foot down and contact means someone is a runner apparently. It's beyond absurd. 100% trolling.

And this is what you said at 4:04 pm on Monday ..... I didn't read the case play? I know it well. You haven't made a single coherent argument concerning it yet. You're right, the case play does specifically reference a player getting one foot down and subsequently going to the ground.

You contradicted yourself, first disputing the entire idea that a foot down and then being tackled to the ground was even a factor - and in fact calling me a troll for mentioning it - and then later the same day admitting that the case play actually does discuss that as a factor, and at the same time claiming you know the case play well. I suppose you must have read the case play somewhere between 10:13 am and 4:04 pm and felt you could treat that knowledge as if it were retroactive.

 

[Kevinicus]

Did he regain his balance? No, he fell to the ground and did not maintain possession.

H Y P O T H E T I C A L

 

[Kevinicus]

This is what you said at 10:13 am on Monday .... "You think one foot down and contact means someone is a runner apparently. It's beyond absurd. 100% trolling.

And this is what you said at 4:04 pm on Monday ..... I didn't read the case play? I know it well. You haven't made a single coherent argument concerning it yet. You're right, the case play does specifically reference a player getting one foot down and subsequently going to the ground.

You contradicted yourself, first disputing the entire idea that a foot down and then being tackled to the ground was even a factor - and in fact calling me a troll for mentioning it - and then later the same day admitting that the case play actually does discuss that as a factor, and at the same time claiming you know the case play well. I suppose you must have read the case play somewhere between 10:13 am and 4:04 pm and felt you could treat that knowledge as if it were retroactive.

LOL. You just showed you lied or can't read.

There is zero contradiction between my posts.

One foot down and contact does not equal a catch. A 2nd foot and a football move is required (in that order and before hitting the ground), or they must keep control throughout.

 

[OmerV]

H Y P O T H E T I C A L

You can spell. I knew you could. It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood.

 

[OmerV]

LOL. You just showed you lied or can't read.

There is zero contradiction between my posts.

lol - you are truly a bizarre individual. I'm convinced you could type 20 consecutive posts claiming the sky is a turquoise color and then claim you never wrote that at all. Well, except for the fact the claim that the sky is colored tuquoise would be an original thought, and I'm getting more and more convinced you don't have those.

But, as usual (oops, I meant as always), you can't say why your words are true, or what I lied about or misread, you just type empty words and make empty claims. I'm still waiting for an explanation, or analysis, or attempt at logic for anything you post. When you learn how any of that works, let me know.

 

[G2]

H Y P O T H E T I C A L

Zzzzzzzz

 

[TwoDeep3]

I fail to see how anyone can look at the video and not see Dez have both hands on the ball, then it is jarred loose by Shields and Dez's feet hit the ground. Dez pins the ball between his arm and chest at this point.Then Shields' leg wraps around Dez's leg and Dez takes a step and beings to fall. Which constitutes going to the ground that requires control be maintained throughout the catch sequence.

His elbow touching first does not negate the the going to the ground aspect. The ball gripped between the crook of his arm and the point of the ball CLEARLY touches the ground and pops out.

The video is clear. All the other, "But what about" doesn't matter. All the rule book garbage is simply wrong because of the nature of the catch. There was no real football move because he was falling, pushing off to score or not.

The video answers all excuses. And YouTube has the option to slow the video down to half speed and see each element as it truly is. No conspiracies. No the league is out to get the Cowboys. Just simply video evidence that contradicts all the It's a catch people.

 

[percyhoward]

There is no way that 7 yards transpire without knowing if he is either upright or going to the ground. .

7 yards is like, 1 second.

 

[Bleedblue1111]

His elbow touching first does not negate the the going to the ground aspect.

It really should though. Any body part after two feet and control should rule you down with control after 1st contact with ground. Imo.

It's one of the things I would like to see written into the new rule, assuming they're going to change it.

 

[Kevinicus]

lol - you are truly a bizarre individual. I'm convinced you could type 20 consecutive posts claiming the sky is a turquoise color and then claim you never wrote that at all. Well, except for the fact the claim that the sky is colored tuquoise would be an original thought, and I'm getting more and more convinced you don't have those.

But, as usual (oops, I meant as always), you can't say why your words are true, or what I lied about or misread, you just type empty words and make empty claims. I'm still waiting for an explanation, or analysis, or attempt at logic for anything you post. When you learn how any of that works, let me know.

It's right there in what you quoted. And I already clarified what I did and did not say...which you ignored.

Please explain the contradiction. Better yet, please post where I said the case play did not mention one foot followed by contact.

Your actions are like me saying the sky is blue and you quoting that and saying I said it was orange.

 

[Kevinicus]

7 yards is like, 1 second.

I've already been told that's impossible by these experts.

 

[OmerV]

It's right there in what you quoted. And I already clarified what I did and did not say...which you ignored.

Please explain the contradiction. Better yet, please post where I said the case play did not mention one foot followed by contact.

Of course it is right there - odd you can't identify it though. It's just another form of you saying "you're wrong and I'm right" again without any even a token effort at reason or facts. You're an adult equivalent of a child on a playground whose comeback is "nuh, uh" or "because I said so". If you want to send your dad to beat up mine, don't bother - mine's not still with us. You can take your ball and go home though if you want.

 

[TwoDeep3]

It really should though. Any body part after two feet and control should rule you down with control after 1st contact with ground. Imo.

It's one of the things I would like to see written into the new rule, assuming they're going to change it.

I agree the rules need changing. But then I believe the ground does cause the fumble and should go back to that. Both running and passing.

 

[Kevinicus]

Of course it is right there - odd you can't identify it though. It's just another form of you saying "you're wrong and I'm right" again without any even a token effort at reason or facts. You're an adult equivalent of a child on a playground whose comeback is "nuh, uh" or "because I said so". If you want to send your dad to beat up mine, don't bother - mine's not still with us. You can take your ball and go home though if you want.

So you can't point to me saying that (hint: it's not in what you quoted)? Until you can, you're a liar.

You seem to think me saying the contact was irrelevant to the ruling in the case play and that one foot and contact doesn't equal a catch is somehow the same as me saying the case play didn't mention one foot and contact...which is absurd.
The entire quotes identify it. You said I said something I didn't. You quote me saying somethimg different from what you said. How else do I identify except by pointing to the entirety of the quotes which are absent of what you say I said?

 

[percyhoward]

This thread is still alive..wow.. The plays were not that similar really, but I had to see why this thread was still going and be part of it.

People are suddenly interested in talking about the catch rule. One needs more than a fair grasp of the rules and terms -- and how they've changed -- in order to understand how changes in the rule have affected the game and brought us to this point where nobody knows what a catch is anymore. But many of these people haven't been following the issue very closely the last three years, and need to be brought up to speed. Predictably, they're having trouble taking it all in, and just as predictably, it's trying their patience as well as the patience of those who are trying to inform them.

 

[percyhoward]

It really should though. Any body part after two feet and control should rule you down with control after 1st contact with ground. Imo.

It's one of the things I would like to see written into the new rule, assuming they're going to change it.

I disagree with this, but then I'm a proponent of control + 2 feet + time, and the "time" part has to be the football move. The time element can't be "upright long enough," because a player can catch and advance a ball without being upright.

I think if Dez doesn't have enough time to do anything after control + 2 feet, he's got to maintain control after he hits the ground. The football move(s) should have completed the catch process, but the replay official and head of officials obviously blew it, then came up with at least two different explanations as to why it wasn't enough of a football move before they finally just changed the rule so that the football move didn't matter.

I don't think there was any problem with the rule in 2014. The problem was that it wasn't followed, and then Item 1 ("going to the ground") was applied when it should not have been. Then the much, much bigger problem was that the rule was changed, at least in part to justify the overturn.

 

[BlindFaith]

7 yards is like, 1 second.

Time is irrelevant. As I asked for before, show me one example where it took 7 yards for someone who appeared to be falling to actually get their balance and remain on their feet.

Im not even sure I know what your point here is that you're trying to make.

 

[BlindFaith]

People are suddenly interested in talking about the catch rule. One needs more than a fair grasp of the rules and terms -- and how they've changed -- in order to understand how changes in the rule have affected the game and brought us to this point where nobody knows what a catch is anymore. But many of these people haven't been following the issue very closely the last three years, and need to be brought up to speed. Predictably, they're having trouble taking it all in, and just as predictably, it's trying their patience as well as the patience of those who are trying to inform them.

Not really, there are plenty of folks who know what the rule is and has been.

 

[percyhoward]

LOL. Are you running out of people to talk to and now want to try to rope some of the same people back in? It's over. At least go back and address the posts you've ignored that directly disprove the lie you repeat about the rules changing in 2015. Even your wingmen aren't chiming in to cheerlead that one, lol. The fruits of being a dishonest debater.

You may not even be interested in knowing this, but that's why Blandino never used terms like "upright," "balance," or "on his feet" in any of his explanations of these types of plays prior to 2015, and why he always emphasized the catch process instead. Because at that time, control + 2 feet + the football move is what established a player as a runner. It's what completed the catch process.

"Upright long enough" didn't come along until later.