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

[percyhoward]

Looks kinda like a lunge. Maybe a reach. A stumble and reach?

Doesn't matter because he never regained his balance or gathered himself while going to the ground.

Lunging and reaching were both established football moves in 2014. Might want to call it something else.

 

[big dog cowboy]

Clearly a lunge.

Watch his left leg. Pushed off with his left foot.

 

[MarcusRock]

Lunging and reaching were both established football moves in 2014. Might want to call it something else.

But you admitted that Dez' reach or lunge clearly did not compare to other demonstrative lunges that were shown. This was the first question of mine to you that you avoided answering. 4 times in fact. From that point on you never mentioned the reach/lunge again so I hope you aren't trying to reclaim it now.

 

[KJJ]

Clearly a lunge.

Watch his left leg. Pushed off with his left foot.

He’s clearly going to the ground all in one piece. It’s indisputable! I posted a video with Mike Pereira saying the call has been officiated the same way since 2010. Exchanging the ball from one had to the other and lunging while stumbling to the ground taking steps doesn’t matter if the receiver is going to the ground. They have to complete the process. Everyone here keeps ignoring it.

 

[MarcusRock]

Clearly a lunge.

Watch his left leg. Pushed off with his left foot.

Sure, when you slow it down. At real speed, is it as "clear" or a straight line to the ground?

 

[khiladi]

See the casebook example below in bold and underlined. Oh, and it does not say "football move". Oh, and Dez only took one step (first two weren't steps, they were just feet landing after the leap), and even the one step was while in the act of "going to the ground".


A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS


First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out.

Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.

A.R.

That is NOT the rule and ‘football’ move was used by Blandino and its ‘any act common to the game’:

The rule is:

A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds: a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).

What you have provided is an example of the rule, which doesn’t even fit the Dez scenario because BOTH his feet were down, if you were even going to consider Smith mass incidental contact which is disputable.

In your case, it’s considered a hit by the defender before the WR even sets his other foot down.

And none of that has to do with the ruling as even Blandino said, who tweeted he doesn’t think the arm extension with the extra step was enough to be considered a football move.

 

[BlindFaith]

Lunging and reaching were both established football moves in 2014. Might want to call it something else.

Doesn't matter. Think gather and regain balance. If that doesn't happen I don't care what he does while falling. Except for hold on to the ball through contacting the ground.

 

[blindzebra]

Sure, when you slow it down. At real speed, is it as "clear" or a straight line to the ground?

That is the dumbest thing I have heard since not enough of a football move. So he did it, but it was so athletic that at real speed it wasn't...just brilliant.

 

[MarcusRock]

Police take statements from witnesses at crime scenes, and if the witness changes his story, they know he's not a credible witness. That video is from Total Access, the day after the game. As the host told him, "You've been looking at this all day long, so you've got your explanation down pat." Wink, wink.

Before Blandino had had a full day to prepare an explanation, when he was first interviewed by Eisen on Game Day Final, he was specifically asked about the football move. He didn't say one word about the lunge.

"In order for it to be a football move, it’s got to be more obvious than that, reaching the ball out with both hands, extending it for the goal line. This is all part of in our view, all part of his momentum in going to the ground."

Who knows why he actually overturned the catch? An hour afterward, it was because the reach wasn't obvious enough. 24 hours later, it was because the lunge wasn't as good as a better lunge they'd found. In any case, he says all Dez did was fall. He has to say that, because if Dez did anything to advance the ball, by definition it's a football move and it completes the catch.

What 2 different things was Blandino asked about? With Eisen, they asked him about the "reach for the goal line" and he said it had to be more obvious. On Total Access, he talks about the football move needing to be a lunge where he gathers himself and it needs to be clear and obvious, extending the ball. One instance he says it needed to be more obvious and the other place he says the move needed to be clear and obvious, extending the ball. In one place he's asked about a reach that needed to be more obvious and in the other place he mentions lunge that needed to be more obvious. TMZ suppositions aside, what is the big difference? They are all under the header of football move that he mentioned in both places.

 

[KJJ]

If anyone can locate the game chat from the Green Bay game in 2015 post the link. It would be interesting to read the comments immediately after the Dez catch. I instantly knew it was like the Calvin Johnson play. I knew the rule then as well as I know it now. Once I saw the first replay and saw the ball come loose I knew it was going be a no catch. Must have received at least a dozen alerts from angry fans that said I would be wrong. All I’ve been able to locate so far is the pregame thread.

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/cowboys-vs-packers-pre-game-thread.312617/page-8

 

[MarcusRock]

If anyone can locate the game chat from the Green Bay game in 2015 post the link. It would be interesting to read the comments immediately after the Dez catch. I instantly knew it was like the Calvin Johnson play. I knew the rule then as well as I know it now. Once I saw the first replay and saw the ball come loose I knew it was going be a no catch. Must have received at least a dozen alerts from angry fans that said I would be wrong. All I’ve been able to locate so far is the pregame thread.

https://cowboyszone.com/threads/cowboys-vs-packers-pre-game-thread.312617/page-8

Why would you want to locate a thread of mega whining? Does this one not have enough?

 

[KJJ]

Why would you want to locate a thread of mega whining? Does this one not have enough?

I think it would be really interesting to see what everyone was saying right at the time of the play. At least it’s something different from what we’ve been doing on this topic. After all these pages it’s become incredibly monotonous. The real whining didn’t start until after the game.

 

[MarcusRock]

I think it would be really interesting to see what everyone was saying right at the time of the play. At least it’s something different from what we’ve been doing on this topic. After all these pages it’s become incredibly monotonous. The real whining didn’t start until after the game.

I can tell you how the whining has gone from then until right now. Catch theorists' stories have changed about 7 times complete with rebuttals. Observe:

1. “The ball never hit the ground”
Check the reverse angle

2. “No, no, Dez was running and got tripped”
Contact from a defender is irrelevant in going to the ground

3. “No, no, Dez reached or lunged or something”
He intended to lunge but did not execute

4. “No, no, Dez performed a bajillion football moves before that though”
Going to the ground trumps the 3-part process (unless they do something other than fall per A.R. 8.12 & 15.95)

5. “No, no, the replay wasn’t conclusive. The call should have stood.”
Replay confirmed that going to the ground should have been applied instead

6. “No, no, they took away the A.R. rule enabling an act on the way to the ground after the fact”
The rule was there in 2014 and 2015.

7. “No, no, they changed the catch rule in 2015 so refs can’t look for football moves”
A ref can judge that one has performed acts or had time to “clearly become a runner.” Same as before. Same rule, different wording.

8. "Oh yeah? Well, CONSPIRACY!"
Of course! How did we miss that?

 

[KJJ]

I can tell you how the whining has gone from then until right now. Catch theorists' stories have changed about 7 times complete with rebuttals. Observe:

1. “The ball never hit the ground”
Check the reverse angle

2. “No, no, Dez was running and got tripped”
Contact from a defender is irrelevant in going to the ground

3. “No, no, Dez reached or lunged or something”
He intended to lunge but did not execute

4. “No, no, Dez performed a bajillion football moves before that though”
Going to the ground trumps the 3-part process (unless they do something other than fall per A.R. 8.12 & 15.95)

5. “No, no, the replay wasn’t conclusive. The call should have stood.”
Replay confirmed that going to the ground should have been applied instead

6. “No, no, they took away the A.R. rule enabling an act on the way to the ground”
The rule was there in 2014 and 2015.

7. “No, no, they changed the catch rule in 2015 so refs can’t look for football moves”
A ref can judge that one has performed acts or had time to “clearly become a runner.” Same as before. Same rule, different wording.

8. "Oh yeah? Well, CONSPIRACY!"
Of course! How did we miss that?

The day after the game someone started a thread with a picture of Dez holding the ball above the ground. Despite blown up pictures of the ball clearly on the ground everyone was in denial over it. One fan claimed the ball appearing to be on the ground was an optical illusion due to the camera angle. It’s comments and threads like those that make me question the intelligence of this fan base.

 

[KJJ]

I can find every darn game chat but that one. We must have burned it. lol I know some hate to see what they said three years ago especially during the heat of the moment but I have no fear in looking back at anything I said. I love my archives.

 

[KJJ]

This is an interesting shot of Dez warming up in pregame just prior to the Packers game. Appears he and Romo were practicing that play. Wonder if Dez completed the process on that one?

 

[KJJ]

Sure, when you slow it down. At real speed, is it as "clear" or a straight line to the ground?

He goes up, makes the catch and started falling to the ground. It’s all in one piece. He obviously turns his body back toward the goal line after looking in the pass but he's clearly going to the ground. Those who dispute that are completely in denial. If they refuse to concede that they’re not going to concede anything.

 

[Soth]

Sure, when you slow it down. At real speed, is it as "clear" or a straight line to the ground?

This is real speed? Man you are delusional.

 

[Soth]

The most annoying thing about this thread is that the posters that believe it was catch are called conspiracy theorists. Nobody is talking about a conspiracy here, we are talking about whether a call was right or wrong. Officials make a ton of bad calls all the time, so why is it so crazy to think they made a mistake here. The NFL has amended this rule multiple times, announcers keep getting confused about it, etc. There is no way someone could say this rule is clear or straightforward.

 

[KJJ]

The most annoying thing about this thread is that the posters that believe it was catch are called conspiracy theorists. Nobody is talking about a conspiracy here, we are talking about whether a call was right or wrong. Officials make a ton of bad calls all the time, so why is it so crazy to think they made a mistake here. The NFL has amended this rule multiple times, announcers keep getting confused about it, etc. There is no way someone could say this rule is clear or straightforward.

Some who believe it was a catch are being called conspiracy theorists because they believe the Cowboys were intentionally robbed. Some have posted that officiating crews are being paid off. Just look at some of the threads that are posted right before games worrying about the officiating crew. Some think the NFL is fixed. A thread was started in the OT section with some thinking the moonwalk was staged. That’s what you’re dealing with here. Those who say the call was butchered or wrong don’t know the damn rule. When you say the call was confirmed by the league the conspiracy theorists start claiming the NFL is against the Cowboys. Some of the things that are posted here are absolutely ludicrous!

This call was no mistake it was confirmed by the league to be correct and it’s still being officiated the same way. If the call was a mistake the league would’ve admitted it and you wouldn’t continue to see it being officiated the same way. There’s obviously going to be some judgment involved in it. The rule is pretty darn clear as far as what a receiver is required to do when they’re going to the ground. It’s very simple they must hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground. That’s far from rocket science. There are some things about the rule that are a little confusing but a receiver going to the ground is pretty obvious as is the ball touching the ground and coming loose. You have those that are in denial about that.