Jerry Jones hit the nail on the head

[Starstruck22]

NO.

YES

 

[CowboyFrog]

Any attempt to win by subverting the rules is cheating. This was an obvious attempt to prevent dallas from knowing the eligible reciever. What are you not getting???

It was a grey area for sure but not from a rules standpoint just integrity maybe... this deception can not work becaue the Refs HAVE TO declare to the D who is eligible, there is no grey in that. I think some are trying to say that..I get what your saying that as far as integrity of the game goes it was for sure an attempt at trickery.

 

[Starstruck22]

Fixed it for you.

He obviously didn't get away with any cheating.

It does no mean he did not try to cheat. Thank God for the officials.

 

[MarcusRock]

Thank God for the officials.

The same ones who are CORRUPT and CHEAT against the Cowboys? Oh how rich! LOL.

 

[pentatwirl]

this i agree on, the concept of it is flawed because the D does not have to guess at who is eligible they are told by the refs...they tried deception but again with how the rules are it would take the D completley ignoring what the refs said for it to work...throwing the ball to an OL who was clearly not announced was pretty dumb.

Yep definitely seems like a flawed concept. DC's explanation at 0:42 is just strange...



He's "hoping the Defense happens to not hear" as if the ref isn't going to specifically go tell them... and ironically the Lions are the ones who apparently did not hear. (I'm assuming he erroneously said "that it's 70" instead of 68, rather than that being a Freudian slip)

 

[Starstruck22]

It was a grey area for sure but not from a rules standpoint just integrity maybe... this deception can not work becaue the Refs HAVE TO declare to the D who is eligible, there is no grey in that. I think some are trying to say that..I get what you’re saying that as far as integrity of the game goes it was for sure an attempt at trickery.

do you think no deception would have been involved if Sam Bankman Fried and Bernie Madoff had not bee caught? Campbell attempted to subvert a clear rule. Call it what you want. Deception and trickery that does not involve rule subversion is not cheating.

 

[MarcusRock]

I agree. It’s only cheating if the rules say only the player reporting as eligible can approach or be within x feet of the official. We need a rules expert like @MarcusRock to chime in.

Nope, no cheating. The rules only say that the player changing positions has to report to the officials. Says nothing about having a buddy or two with him. Honestly, it was a good try. I'd use a form it in the playoffs before they might change the rule in the offseason. 70 was announced as eligible and Bell stayed with him even after Detroit's line shift made him ineligible. If you can take away a defender like that because they fail to recognize he had become ineligible, I'll take that.

 

[Starstruck22]

Yep definitely seems like a flawed concept. DC's explanation at 0:42 is just strange...



He's "hoping the Defense happens to not hear" as if the ref isn't going to specifically go tell them... and ironically the Lions are the ones who apparently did not hear. (I'm assuming he erroneously said "that it's 70" instead of 68, rather than that being a Freudian slip)

Campbell is now in damage control. Im not buying his bs because he is who his actions say he is. And what he did Saturday does not suggest a scrupulous person. Not buying any hogwash.

 

[Jumbo075]

You attempt to cheat...you're guilty. Nothing further than that. Their head coach confessed to as much. Now play with words to make cheating correct.

Ain't NO right way to do the WRONG thing....ever. Ever grow up?

Attempted deception is NOT the same as attempted cheating.

 

[Starstruck22]

Nope, no cheating. The rules only say that the player changing positions has to report to the officials. Says nothing about having a buddy or two with him. Honestly, it was a good try. I'd use a form it in the playoffs before they might change the rule in the offseason. 70 was announced as eligible and Bell stayed with him even after Detroit's line shift made him ineligible. If you can take away a defender like that because they fail to recognize he had become ineligible, I'll take that.

Evidently you are not aware of the rules. The rule says plain and simple the other team has a right to know the eligible receiver. This was an obvious attempt to subvert that rule. There are none so blind than those that refuse to see.

 

[Starstruck22]

Attempted deception is NOT the same as attempted cheating.

Follow the post dude asked and answered. Deception (fake punt, misdirection, play action, etc.). No attempt to subvert and rule. Cheating (preventing dallas from knowing who is eligible which is their right by rule). Attempt to subvert the rule.

 

[OmerV]

Im positive he tells both teams and also anounces it over the PA, again i get your point but i would be shocked if literally no one on the Lions side heard the call, that to me is just as illogical.

Of course, keep in mind if the Lions thought they had conveyed the right player there would be no reason for them to stop everything they are doing and focus on an announcement that tells them info they already knew. It's easy to look at this after the fact sitting at a computer, but there is all sorts of activity and noise going on the sideline, and to them that part of the plan was already behind them..

 

[MarcusRock]

Yep definitely seems like a flawed concept. DC's explanation at 0:42 is just strange...



He's "hoping the Defense happens to not hear" as if the ref isn't going to specifically go tell them... and ironically the Lions are the ones who apparently did not hear. (I'm assuming he erroneously said "that it's 70" instead of 68, rather than that being a Freudian slip)

Yeah, that was an error on his part. The ruse they tried was tri-fold. They wanted 68 to be eligible but sent him along with 58 to report. 58 sounds like 68 when announced over the PA. Then 70, who usually reports comes in. In the alignment, they wanted 68 to be eligible on the left, 58 lined up eligible on the right (in case the defense heard it wrong) and 70 was also on the right, who usually lines up as eligible but did not. So they wanted the defensive eyes to be on their right, which is where 58, 70 and the majority of the other receivers were, plus playaction that way, and then throw back to the left where 68 was. Not a bad plan, just messy reporting execution that confused the refs.

 

[JustChip]

Nope, no cheating. The rules only say that the player changing positions has to report to the officials. Says nothing about having a buddy or two with him. Honestly, it was a good try. I'd use a form it in the playoffs before they might change the rule in the offseason. 70 was announced as eligible and Bell stayed with him even after Detroit's line shift made him ineligible. If you can take away a defender like that because they fail to recognize he had become ineligible, I'll take that.

Yep. Frankly, in my opinion, Campbell screwed up using it in this game. There was very little to be gained by winning the game. I would’ve held it under wraps until it was possibly needed in the playoffs.

 

[OmerV]

See bernie madoff and same bankman fried! Lamo!!!!!
i have argued cogently there is a difference between deception plays (motion, change of direction, fake punts, play action) and plays to subvert the rules by deception. There are none so blind than those that refuse to see.

First, mostion, etc, is an entirely different situation from declaring an ineligible player as eligible, so you aren't even talking apples to apples.

Second, sending multiple players over to the ref when they declare is deception that does not include motion, play action etc, but it is not illegal. That alone disproves your point. There clearly can be deception in other circumstances that is not illegal.

 

[Starstruck22]

Yep. Frankly, in my opinion, Campbell screwed up using it in this game. There was very little to be gained by winning the game. I would’ve held it under wraps until it was possibly needed in the playoffs.

So save the cheating for another day…..be sure….there will be more.

 

[CowboyFrog]

Yeah, that was an error on his part. The ruse they tried was tri-fold. They wanted 68 to be eligible but sent him along with 58 to report. 58 sounds like 68 when announced over the PA. Then 70, who usually reports comes in. In the alignment, they wanted 68 to be eligible on the left, 58 lined up eligible on the right (in case the defense heard it wrong) and 70 was also on the right, who usually lines up as eligible but did not. So they wanted the defensive eyes to be on their right, which is where 58, 70 and the majority of the other receivers were, plus playaction that way, and then throw back to the left where 68 was. Not a bad plan, just messy reporting execution that confused the refs.

in that video it seems as if they heard the call and tried to "Low key" re report, thats my question did they not know that if they did change it the refs would re announce everything to everyone.. just seems like they ran the play hoping the refs would say "My bad we announced the wrong guy here is your 2 points" when there is no way they can do that.

 

[CCBoy]

Attempted deception is NOT the same as attempted cheating.

Why attempt? No, go back to law school or even smart school. Compliance can't be faked.

 

[Starstruck22]

First, mostion, etc, is an entirely different situation from declaring an ineligible player as eligible, so you aren't even talking apples to apples.

Second, sending multiple players over to the ref when they declare is deception that does not include motion, play action etc, but it is not illegal. That alone disproves your point. There clearly can be deception in other circumstances that is not illegal.

You are confusing deception and cheating. I am sorry you cannot get it. The play was designed to obfuscate and prevent dallas from knowing who was eligible. I dont care if it was 3 lineman, 5 clowns, or 10 water boys. It was designed to subvert the rule. What motion play or fake punt, or misdirection is designed to subvert any rule???? There are none so blind than those that refuse to see.

if you are saying that Detroit was not trying to prevent dallas from knowing who was eligible, you are insane. That was the intent. That is rule subversion.

 

[MarcusRock]

in that video it seems as if they heard the call and tried to "Low key" re report, thats my question did they not know that if they did change it the refs would re announce everything to everyone.. just seems like they ran the play hoping the refs would say "My bad we announced the wrong guy here is your 2 points" when there is no way they can do that.

Nah, that would be a dumb strategy. They threw a flag like 10 seconds after the play anyway so the refs can always do that even after signaling the try was good. The questions to be answered here are, did 68 verbally report and the ref assumed it was 70 because it's usually 70 and did the offense and Campbell hear that the refs actually announced 70 when they know they wanted 68 to be the one?