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

[BlindFaith]

You've just made an incredible mistake. You can't be foolish enough to equate Blandino, a former standup comedian WHO NEVER OFFICIATED a single NFL game... as a professional.

I don't care what NFL officials intend or agree with, they violated their own rulebook to take away Dez's catch.

Do you know what "initial contact with the ground" means???

Post this rule of "initial contact with the ground" you keep referring to. Me thinks you have taken that way out of context.

Without having the rulebook looked up, I'm fairly certain it refers to the ball making contact to the ground as a player is falling. Not that a player's foot has to make contact with the ground as they are falling.

Maybe?

 

[BlindFaith]

You've just made an incredible mistake. You can't be foolish enough to equate Blandino, a former standup comedian WHO NEVER OFFICIATED a single NFL game... as a professional.

I don't care what NFL officials intend or agree with, they violated their own rulebook to take away Dez's catch.

Do you know what "initial contact with the ground" means???

Oh, and no. Blandino is an idiot. I said it then and I'm sure he's no more intelligent today. But come on now. There were many, many folks involved with the NFL who said it wasn't a catch. Including the head referee who called the game who stated so in the post game press release.

 

[Doomsay]

The big difference is Dallas v. Any team the NFL wanted to prevail. The nuances of the catch are irrelevant.

 

[percyhoward]

Steps are not a football move if you're going to the ground. That is the rule. Taking 1 hand off the ball is just that. It's no more a football move than catching a pass and scratching an itch with 1 hand.

It's funny that you promote that article by Pereira that states replay is becoming too technical while trying to oppose a call using replay to get technical when the lunge/reach was taken away.

Something tells me Pereira was talking about the league's replay organization becoming too technical, rather than referring to the actual recorded images themselves. (Although you can certainly try to discuss the play without looking at it, if you want.) "Taking additional steps" was one of the three football moves spelled out in 2016, so there would be no reason to think it wouldn't have been considered a football move in 2014, and in the decades prior, for that matter.

And players catch passes and take one hand away in order to run with the ball on a regular basis, which probably makes it more of a football move than scratching.

 

[KJJ]

Oh, and no. Blandino is an idiot. I said it then and I'm sure he's no more intelligent today. But come on now. There were many, many folks involved with the NFL who said it wasn't a catch. Including the head referee who called the game who stated so in the post game press release.

How did Blandino get that job and the current TV job he has if he’s an idiot? Mike Pereira also thought it wasn’t a catch under the rule, is he also an idiot? The entire league confirmed it wasn’t a catch under the rule. So they’re all idiots? There’s fans on this board that are still arguing that the ball never touched the ground despite blown up pictures clearly showing more than half the football on the ground. Those are the idiots in my book. I can understand fans who don’t agree with the call or still can’t come to grips with it but when someone claims the ball never touched the ground and didn’t come loose those are idiots!

You have fans on this board claiming the refs made up the rule and that the NFL is fixed. Anyone who thinks that is an idiot! You have fans who are making up their own rule. They’re explaining the way the Dez play should have been called. Sifting through this thread seriously makes you question the sanity of a few. This play has literally driven some fans nuts.

 

[BlindFaith]

How did Blandino get that job and the current TV job he has if he’s an idiot? Mike Pereira also thought it wasn’t a catch under the rule, is he also an idiot? The entire league confirmed it wasn’t a catch under the rule. So they’re all idiots? There’s fans on this board that are still arguing that the ball never touched the ground despite blown up pictures clearly showing more than half the football on the ground. Those are the idiots in my book.

I can understand fans who don’t agree with the call or still can’t come to grips with it but when someone claims the ball never touched the ground and didn’t come loose those are idiots! You have fans on this board claiming the refs made up the rule and that the NFL is fixed. Anyone who thinks that is an idiot! You have fans who are making up their own rule. They’re explaining the way the Dez play should have been called. Sifting through this thread is like traveling through Nutsville.

Umm, I agreed that it wasn't a catch. I don't care if Blandino agreed or not. He's still an idiot. He did nothing but take an already poorly written rule and muddied things up even more.

 

[KJJ]

Umm, I agreed that it wasn't a catch. I don't care if Blandino agreed or not. He's still an idiot. He did nothing but take an already poorly written rule and muddied things up even more.

Despite Blandino being gone the rule is still being officiated the same way. When he resigned everyone in Cowboys Nation was screaming hallelujah as if all of a sudden the rule would be changed or officiated differently. This isn’t Blandino’s rule, he didn’t create it. The rule was created by a number of people and voted in by a committee.

 

[percyhoward]

1. So add even more officials judgment to determining a play? Not.

"Add?" That's already how it worked for years in the case of end zone plays.

2. So keep the going to the ground when going out of bounds, except if in the end zone, in which case it's the judgement of the official. Well that simplifies things.

Look for a football move when there's time or a reason for one. Think about it.

Think intent here. The going to the ground rule is to allow the receiver to gather and secure the catch.

No. The going to the ground rule is nothing more than a time requirement. It's used when a player doesn't have time to perform a football move.

You do say that the still need to be a runner or make a move common to the game, except regarding points 1 and 2 above. So yeah, what do you consider qualifications of this if a player is falling down while catching the ball? Number of steps? Tucking the ball away? Reaching out with the ball? These are yet even more judgment calls.

Old way was to count steps, (or count the number of hands on the ball), look for a reach, etc. but in any case, something observable. Current way means deciding how upright is upright enough and making guesses about how long is long enough to be upright. Old way not perfect, but much better.

You could easily make the Dez catch a catch this way. And the two or three examples we are talking about the receiver retained possession of the ball after the ball contacted the ground. But let's just say in the Dez play that he wasn't touched down and the ball got away from him and squirted through the end zone. Are you ready to call that a fumble?

What else would you call it?

And I do think there will be more fumbles.

Why would returning to the old rule result in any more fumbles than there were back when the old rule was still in place?

Not sure of the two standards you are talking about.

There are two contradictory standards for becoming a runner. One is being "upright long enough..."

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.

The other is (after control and two feet) having the ball long enough to perform one of these four acts common to the game (football moves)...

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

That first standard was put in after Dez's overturn, in 2015. The second one is just a more specific version of the pre-2015 standard, which required that the player be capable of performing any act common to the game (football move).

Hope that's clearer for you.

 

[DogFace]

Confidenceless.

That was brilliant!! Though extremely hurtful

How long did it take to come up with that routine?

I’m guessing it’s one you two mastered at dic.com and now we’re all lucky enough to have your ingenuous wit and humor here.

 

[DogFace]

I guess I'm a bigger A-hole than you...

You’re not, but it appears you’re trying. And that’s all that matters.

Keep it up champ!!!

 

[G2]

You’re not, but it appears you’re trying. And that’s all that matters.

Keep it up champ!!!

Thank you for your unsolicited endorsement! Unlike the Dez, I'm complete now.

 

[DogFace]

Thank you for your unsolicited endorsement! Unlike the Dez, I'm complete now.

You’re !!

 

[TheSport78]

Ertz had established himself as a runner and Dez did not. That's pretty much it.

 

[OmerV]

Yeah, I'm waiting for a source too. There was never a year given so I'm not even sure it was from 2014. Where is it?

That's what I'm wondering. As far as I can find this was the governing rule in 2014.

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the passis incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

 

[G2]

That's what I'm wondering. As far as I can find this was the governing rule in 2014.

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the passis incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.

Seems like they got it right.

 

[DFWJC]

That play at Green Bay changed me to some degree.
I still love the game and, to a lessor degree, the NFL.
But not like I used to.
I'm sure it was after a long list of things, but that one really hurt.

 

[hornitosmonster]

Roger should have waited until after the Superbowl to announce they are looking at the "catch" rule. I do think that had an outcome during the Eagles game. So inconsistent to the way it has been called (both those are not catches under the current rules).

Now I think Dez caught it, Jesse James caught it, and Ertz caught it. The Eagles running back probably didn't catch it

 

[JustChip]

Roger should have waited until after the Superbowl to announce they are looking at the "catch" rule. I do think that had an outcome during the Eagles game. So inconsistent to the way it has been called (both those are not catches under the current rules).

Now I think Dez caught it, Jesse James caught it, and Ertz caught it. The Eagles running back probably didn't catch it

IMO, the only reason the Eagles' (Clements I think) didn't catch the ball is his toe was on the line. That was his 2nd foot down after regaining control. I thought it was on the line, but I for one couldn't say absolutely that it was or wasn't so the call had to stand.

 

[OmerV]

In that example, the act that completed the catch process happened while the player was falling. There is nothing in Item 1 that says it only applies to players who weren't contacted by a defender. In fact, just the opposite. It specifically states "with or without contact by an opponent."

"If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground."​

A player who goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass has to hold onto the ball when he hits the ground.

A player who goes to the ground after completing the catch process is a runner down by contact.

Actually, the casebook example you provided talked about one foot landing with the ball being secure, and then a defender hits the receiver and knocks him to the ground. What you quoted in this post isn't the casebook example, its the actual wording in the rulebook, which, by the way it is worded would negate Dez's catch because there was never a point where he came down from his leap and wasn't going to the ground. From the time his first foot landed he was stumbling to the ground.

Again, if you don't mind, could you provide a link to the 2014 casebook. I feel like I need to look that over to be fair, and I haven't been able to find it online.

 

[OmerV]

Roger should have waited until after the Superbowl to announce they are looking at the "catch" rule. I do think that had an outcome during the Eagles game. So inconsistent to the way it has been called (both those are not catches under the current rules).

Now I think Dez caught it, Jesse James caught it, and Ertz caught it. The Eagles running back probably didn't catch it

Ertz clearly made his catch. It was not a leaping catch, he was fully upright and fully in control as he made a cut toward the end zone after taking three hard steps before the defender took his knees out. The catch by Clements in the back of the end zone I thought was VERY iffy though.