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

[lostar2009]

It doesn't matter any more. Let the past stay in the past.

 

[DogFace]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...rule-and-it-might-actually-be-more-confusing/

http://static.nfl.com/static/conten...pdfs/11_Rule8_ForwardPass_BackPass_Fumble.pdf

Read the part highlighted in Red.

Among other things he clearly had time to pitch the ball.

1. Caught with two hands
2. Lands with two feet
3. Switches ball from right shoulder/chest to left hand.
4. Lunges with his third step.

 

[DogFace]

How many suckers does Percyhoward have to own?

My guess is at least 3 more.

 

[Kevinicus]

Ertz became a runner before going to the ground with his lunge. You can't say that he would have definitely gone to the ground if he didn't lunge, so the going to the ground rule didn't come into play. It's quite possible that he could have just kept running after his 3 steps.

With Dez you can't says that . He was going to the ground from the second he touched the ball . There's zero chance he could have remained on his feet. He was almost parallel to the ground when his 2nd and 3rd "steps" occurred.

This is not accurate. He was perpendicular to the ground when his 2nd foot landed. Then almost immediately he was tripped. It was this contact that caused him to go to the ground. I think it's very likely he remains upright without that tripping contact.

 

[MarcusRock]

This is not accurate. He was perpendicular to the ground when his 2nd foot landed. Then almost immediately he was tripped. It was this contact that caused him to go to the ground. I think it's very likely he remains upright without that tripping contact.

The going to the ground rule states, "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent)..."

 

[Hoofbite]

You shouldn't expect to see a difference. The rule is written such that any outcome is justified and it's completely up to the interpretation of the official.

Ertz was ruled to have established himself as a runner, and Dez wasn't. Regardless of the similarities and differences in how the two plays look, the rule is ambiguous so the outcome is dependent on the guy making the call.

 

[CPanther95]

This is not accurate. He was perpendicular to the ground when his 2nd foot landed. Then almost immediately he was tripped. It was this contact that caused him to go to the ground. I think it's very likely he remains upright without that tripping contact.

Watch it again and try to say that with a straight face.

Freeze it the split second his 2nd foot touches... even if you remove the Packer from the equation, there's still zero chance he isn't going to the ground.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Yes, there's a leg whip that trips Dez. That happens after control and two feet down, but long before Dez finally goes to the ground and loses the ball. In the meantime, he tucks the ball, takes a 3rd step, and reaches to try to break the plane. Those are all things runners do.

It sounds like you're trying to apply "upright long enough" to a play that happened before "upright long enough" became a rule.

Percy, first, go to youtube and click on the gear and slow this to half speed.

Sequence

1. Dez goes up over Shields 1:40
2. Gets both hands on the ball - still in the air 1:41 - has the ball by the closest tip
3. Shields gets a hand in and the ball is loose at the 1:41/1:42 mark Dez's hands separate
4. Dez comes down and pulls ball to shoulder pad 1:43
5. Dez gets first foot down 1:43
6. Dez brings second foot down and simultaneously touches down and Shields legs hooks Dez's leg 1:44
7. Dez's left leg reaches out - not touching ground at this point - then plants and he pushes forward 1:45

It is at this point, while Dez is pushing with his left foot and reaching for the goal line, his body is moving horizontally to the ground. Now look at his right leg, which is over Shields' butt.

At this point tell me how Dez will get his feet under him so this is not one continuous motion to the ground. You can't because at this point Dez is flying toward the goal line. He has his left leg planted, but this is a continuous motion.

There is no moment that establishes a catch at this point which supersedes the control to the ground because he is going to the ground. It is now established the rules of going to the ground are in play.

This is where the football move would need to come in. However, there wasn't a football move in the eyes of the reviewers because his momentum was clearly throwing him toward the ground as he was tripped by the defender. Thus he had to ride the catch out to the ground and complete the sequence to make it a catch.

If he had not tried to lunge toward the goal line, this would still have required him taking it to the ground because of the contact by Shields which tipped him toward the ground. The two feet down means nothing because of forward momentum. It is just like a sidelines catch where the receiver heads face first toward the out of bounds. The feet get down but the catch has not been completed until the receiver gets to the ground and maintains control. The catch had to be completed under control. It was not.

Then if you go back to the 14th page of this thread and look for KJJ's blow-up of the ball on the ground, which was short of the goal line making it not a TD because of the same contact, you will note Dez had his hand on the top point of the ball but the ball itself was in contact with the ground. The ball then moved, popped up, Dez reached out and snagged it, but maintaining control was lost therefore - NO CATCH, PACKERS BALL.

 

[MarcusRock]

Watch it again and try to say that with a straight face.

Freeze it the split second his 2nd foot touches... even if you remove the Packer from the equation, there's still zero chance he isn't going to the ground.

As you can see, Dez had time to make the 6 different football moves people claimed he did, lol. Not going to the ground at all. Oh, heaven's no, lol.

 

[percyhoward]

Wrong. As I've said before we don't know if the field official ruled that a football move happened. If the field official didn't see the ball hit the turf from his angle, and who could at real speed, then all that needed to be evident for it to be a catch was that the ball did not touch the turf. Dez didn't need a football move if he had kept the ball off the ground, even if he bobbled it after his body hit the ground. Is this correct? The angles that showed it did touch the turf including the picture I posted in this very thread as did KJJ, were reverse angles that the field official was obstructed from. That's why I say I don't blame the field official. He couldn't see everything. So if he applied the wrong rule, replay is there to make sure the right one is applied. That is what happened.

Don't think so. The normal reaction of the field official when there is some doubt about whether a catch has been made -- and there would have been doubt if he was waiting to see whether Dez maintained control when he hit the ground -- is to make the "catch" signal (elbows bent, pulling both arms in toward his body). That's not what Terry Brown does though. He reacts as any official would when there is no question about the catch and he just wants to spot the ball. Note how he runs up to the spot with one hand raised.

You can repeat it but it doesn't make it true. There was no tuck. For one, he had to double clutch just to grasp the ball because Shields hits Dez' forearm and then he took one hand off the ball in preparation for his fall as he was going to the ground.

You don't take one hand off a ball you haven't caught yet. On the contrary, if you gain control of the ball with one hand, you'll bring in the other hand to make sure you gain possession. Here, the opposite is happening. Just like on any of a thousand plays every season when a player catches the ball with two hands then carries it in one. That's why, when they spelled out the football moves in 2016, they included "tucking the ball away."

I can't stress this enough: You have to think about what the purpose of the football move is. It's there for a reason. It's to let you know that enough time has passed (after control and two feet down) for the player to become a runner. I would really like you (or anyone else who says all Dez did was fall down) to talk about what the football move is and why it ever existed in the first place.

When you say "choosing to take 1 hand off the ball," you're talking about an act that runners perform on a regular basis. You're right, Dez voluntarily took one hand off the ball. It was not his momentum taking him to the ground that did it, it was Dez. That's how you know he wasn't still trying to catch it. That's a football move.

Go way back up to my first response here. Dez could have established himself as a runner after he hit the ground too. That occurs by confirming that the ball didn't touch the ground. In that instance you don't need an act common to the game. Isn't that right?

Yes, absent any prior football move, Dez could have established himself as a runner after he hit the ground, provided he maintained control of the ball. That's what Item 1 is for, diving catches. It's not applicable unless the player goes to the ground before he completes the catch process. That's what the catch process is for, to determine the point at which a receiver becomes a runner. Although in this case, the catch process was subverted.

 

[Direwolf63]

This debate on one of the dumbest rules in sports history is only one if the reasons why my apathy is at an all-time high.

 

[Gator88]

It's funny how so many people trying to argue the NFL got the Dez call right don't understand the rulebook. Back in 2014 the "going to the ground" was meant primarily for catches in the end zone like the original Calvin Johnson catch where players can't extend the ball trying to get extra yardage. They have to possess it going to the ground because there isn't a football move they could make (like switching hands to extend the ball closer to the end zone) once they are already in the end zone.

Please don't bring up Pereira/Blandino's opinions like they are relevant. There is a reason both got fired from their cushy job of being in charge of the refs.

 

[Hoofbite]

It's funny how so many people trying to argue the NFL got the Dez call right don't understand the rulebook. Back in 2014 the "going to the ground" was meant primarily for catches in the end zone like the original Calvin Johnson catch where players can't extend the ball trying to get extra yardage. They have to possess it going to the ground because there isn't a football move they could make (like switching hands to extend the ball closer to the end zone) once they are already in the end zone.

Please don't bring up Pereira/Blandino's opinions like they are relevant. There is a reason both got fired from their cushy job of being in charge of the refs.

The rule specifically stated that it didn't matter where it occurred. Field or play or the endzone.

 

[percyhoward]

There is no moment that establishes a catch at this point which supersedes the control to the ground because he is going to the ground. It is now established the rules of going to the ground are in play. This is where the football move would need to come in.

First of all, I really appreciate your taking the time to put all of that together.

I quoted the part of your post that's causing most of the confusion. The football move doesn't need to happen before the player starts to go to the ground. It only needs to happen before he goes to the ground. The rule has to work like that, or else it doesn't work at all.

If you had 10 people watch that video, and assigned them the task of recording the exact time at which Dez "started to go to the ground," you'd get at least three different answers, probably closer to four or five. If instead, you had them record the time Dez actually "went to the ground," the answers wouldn't vary much, if at all. Think about how impossible it would be for an official to have to decide the point in time at which a player started falling.

Here's Item's 1 wording again: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass..."

Please think about this also. If Item 1 really meant "If a player starts to go to the ground," then all Blandino would have had to do was say, "Dez started to go to the ground before he reached, so the reach didn't matter." There would never have been any discussion of the reach needing to be "more obvious."

Ask yourself these two questions:

1. Why would an official draw the line at "starts to fall" instead of "goes to the ground?" What advantage would that give him?
2. If "starts to fall" is where officials draw the line, why did Blandino say he "absolutely" looked for a football move that obviously happened after Dez's fall had started?"

 

[Gator88]

The rule specifically stated that it didn't matter where it occurred. Field or play or the endzone.

Yeah, obviously it could happen anywhere on the field if the receiver didn't have a chance to make a football move such as on a diving catch, but that wasn't the case for this play.

 

[CPanther95]

It's funny how so many people trying to argue the NFL got the Dez call right don't understand the rulebook. Back in 2014 the "going to the ground" was meant primarily for catches in the end zone like the original Calvin Johnson catch where players can't extend the ball trying to get extra yardage. They have to possess it going to the ground because there isn't a football move they could make (like switching hands to extend the ball closer to the end zone) once they are already in the end zone.

Please don't bring up Pereira/Blandino's opinions like they are relevant. There is a reason both got fired from their cushy job of being in charge of the refs.

What's really funny is when someone criticizes others for not understanding the 2014 rule book, then they make up something like 'the going to the ground rule only applies to the end zone' that is nowhere to be found in the 2014 rule book.

 

[Gator88]

What's really funny is when someone criticizes others for not knowing the 2014 rule book, then they make up something like 'the going to the ground rule only applies to the end zone' that is nowhere to be found in the 2014 rule book.

It's a good thing I said meant primarily instead of always applies. Obviously there are exceptions.

 

[CPanther95]

It's a good thing I said meant primarily instead of always applies. Obviously there are exceptions.

No exceptions. It applies to any catch anywhere on the field.

You're suggesting applying it to Dez's catch shows a lack of understanding of the rule book. Why do you think his catch is some unwritten exception to the rule book?

 

[ScipioCowboy]

What's really funny is when someone criticizes others for not understanding the 2014 rule book, then they make up something like 'the going to the ground rule only applies to the end zone' that is nowhere to be found in the 2014 rule book.

You know what’s not funny? Your rapist quarterback.

 

[Gator88]

No exceptions. It applies to any catch anywhere on the field.

You're suggesting applying it to Dez's catch shows a lack of understanding of the rule book. Why do you think his catch is some unwritten exception to the rule book?

*Sigh* It applies to any catch anywhere on the field where there wasn't a football move made to demonstrate possession before going to the ground (being on the ground). Most of the time that will only happen on catches in the end zone because you can't advance the football when you are already in the end zone. Another example, and one that could be anywhere on the field, would be diving catches.

Dez's catch shouldn't have been an exception to the rule book, but it was when they ruled it not a catch because they disregarded the part about making a football move before you've gone to the ground being sufficient to gain possesion.