John Mara says league needs to look at catch, PI rules: PFT

[BotchedLobotomy]

Both of those rules do need some clarity and simplification. Take the freaking judgement out it. If you catch and secure the ball and have full control (not bobbling it) with two feet in bounds, it should be a catch. If it pops out while going to the ground it's a fumble.

Simple solutions are not in the NFL's DNA. They kind of subscribe to the IRS's methods of solving problems.

 

[LandryFan]

What good is review if after the review they STILL get it wrong??

Thank you! The media, etc. are focusing on the wrong thing in regards to this particular play (Dez catch/over rule). There were two components of that play that were questionable: First, was the catch itself. Did he maintain control throughout the "process"? If you look only at that component, they called it correctly insofar as the rule is written right now. The second component (which if it occurred, renders the first a moot point) is the "act common to football" or a "football move". This is where Blandino got it wrong, IMO. Did Dez make a "football move"? Many say yes. He caught the ball, shifted from both hands to his left hand, and attempted to reach for the goal line. If any of those things are considered a "football move", then Dez didn't have to hold the ball when it hit the ground. He had already caught the ball (which nobody, including Blandino disputes). Once he caught the ball, if he makes a football move, the act is complete. This is where Blandino screwed up, but no one is calling him on it. In regards to Dez stretching for the goal line, Blandino said "it's gotta be more obvious than that". Those are his exact words on his NFL Network appearance after the game. Well, if you're looking to change the on-field call from incomplete to complete, then he might be right. But to overturn a call, you need indisputable evidence that the on-field call was incorrect. Blandino's very own words ("more obvious") says to me that it was disputable. That's the kind of play that you don't change no matter whether it was initially ruled complete or incomplete. The question of whether he made a "football move" was certainly disputable. That's the part of this whole thing that has really bothered me and nobody outside of some fans are questioning them on it. Rant over...maybe.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I agree. The most important thing is to get that rule changed.

Yep.

This says it all

Mara admitted he was “very uncomfortable” with the ruling that Bryant did not complete a football move. He admitted it was “probably” the right decision, but cast doubt as to whether the rule needed to be enforced that way.

“We have to look at that,” Mara said, via the New York Daily News. “That was very uncomfortable for me watching that play and having it ruled as an incomplete pass. I think it was probably the right call technically, according to the language that was in the rule book, but I really think we need to look at that. . . .

 

[MRV52]

Wouldn't it be funny if a similar play like the Dez catch happens again in the playoff, but this time they rule in favor of the receiver. The egg on the face of the NFL would be hilarious

 

[cowboyjoe]

Thank you! The media, etc. are focusing on the wrong thing in regards to this particular play (Dez catch/over rule). There were two components of that play that were questionable: First, was the catch itself. Did he maintain control throughout the "process"? If you look only at that component, they called it correctly insofar as the rule is written right now. The second component (which if it occurred, renders the first a moot point) is the "act common to football" or a "football move". This is where Blandino got it wrong, IMO. Did Dez make a "football move"? Many say yes. He caught the ball, shifted from both hands to his left hand, and attempted to reach for the goal line. If any of those things are considered a "football move", then Dez didn't have to hold the ball when it hit the ground. He had already caught the ball (which nobody, including Blandino disputes). Once he caught the ball, if he makes a football move, the act is complete. This is where Blandino screwed up, but no one is calling him on it. In regards to Dez stretching for the goal line, Blandino said "it's gotta be more obvious than that". Those are his exact words on his NFL Network appearance after the game. Well, if you're looking to change the on-field call from incomplete to complete, then he might be right. But to overturn a call, you need indisputable evidence that the on-field call was incorrect. Blandino's very own words ("more obvious") says to me that it was disputable. That's the kind of play that you don't change no matter whether it was initially ruled complete or incomplete. The question of whether he made a "football move" was certainly disputable. That's the part of this whole thing that has really bothered me and nobody outside of some fans are questioning them on it. Rant over...maybe.

No, its very clear on the video review on chargers/bengals where blendino talks about football move, dez by that statement from blandino in bengals game makes a football move. even john mara admits that looked wrong, even 2 former packer wrs and farve says was a catch.

 

[LandryFan]

No, its very clear on the video review on chargers/bengals where blendino talks about football move, dez by that statement from blandino in bengals game makes a football move. even john mara admits that looked wrong, even 2 former packer wrs and farve says was a catch.

I think you are missing my point, Joe. I'm saying at the very least, it was questionable whether he made a football move. If there's ANY question, then the on-field call should not be reversed. That's where I think he was wrong.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

I think you are missing my point, Joe. I'm saying at the very least, it was questionable whether he made a football move. If there's ANY question, then the on-field call should not be reversed. That's where I think he was wrong.

I don't even think it's questionable whether or not he made a football move. You saw him change hands with the ball after catching it. You saw sod kicked up where he intentionally lunged for the end zone. You saw his forearm move forward which is why the ball popped out in the first place. All of those were football moves because he was CLEARLY attempting to advance the ball. They just made the wrong call and won't admit it.

 

[LandryFan]

I don't even think it's questionable whether or not he made a football move. You saw him change hands with the ball after catching it. You saw sod kicked up where he intentionally lunged for the end zone. You saw his forearm move forward which is why the ball popped out in the first place. All of those were football moves because he was CLEARLY attempting to advance the ball. They just made the wrong call and won't admit it.

You are correct, IMO. I don't think there's any doubt that he made at least two football moves. My point was, it was at the very least "debatable" whether he did, which should have been reason enough not to change the call that was made on the field. What the hell Blandino saw that could lead him to say that it was "indisputable that Dez DID NOT make a football move" (which he did say on NFL Network) is beyond me. That was an abuse of officiating power in the grossest sense and nobody outside of some fans on a website are holding him accountable. That just baffles me.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

Wouldn't it be funny if a similar play like the Dez catch happens again in the playoff, but this time they rule in favor of the receiver. The egg on the face of the NFL would be hilarious

The NFL is already looking rather foolish, they need to get a handle on the situation, make some rule changes aimed at simplification and at least show everyone they are trying to fix the problem.

 

[Seven]

"tweaking" the rules is the problem........not the answer.

Go bury your head Mara.

IMO - Conjuring up new rules, to save face, is extortion. Period.

Calvin Johnson rule, Tom Brady rule, Roy Williams rule..............Seriously?

What about a incompetent Ref rule?

 

[Direwolf63]

He only wants it changed now that his team has a receiver capable of making acrobatic catches.

I don't care what his reasoning is behind it. I'm just glad that it looks like the rule may be reviewed. It needs to be tweaked.

 

[GermanJohn]

These helmet to helmet, defenseless hits on WR's and QB's, personal fouls, PI;s are so critical and game changing that they have got to be reviewable.

Don't get carried away. High-scoring games generate more viewers, more fans, and in turn, more revenue. PI calls should be looked at, but don't expect the NFL to go any lighter on personal fouls.

 

[DandyDon1722]

Excellent point.

It's 4 days later and I'm still stuck on the fact that the ref two feet away from the play ruled it correctly on the field.

Exactly and then they decided there was irrefutable evidence to overturn it. It's just disgraceful. Much like The Catch, I don't think I will ever get over this one.

 

[Seven]

I don't care what his reasoning is behind it. I'm just glad that it looks like the rule may be reviewed. It needs to be tweaked.

That just gives them more room to 'spin' the 'tweak', IMO.

Kind of like they did/do.

 

[mahoneybill]

That's as close to an admission of guilt as we're ever going to see.

And he realizes Beckham has some of those acrobatic catches that would potentially become " incompletions" under the weasel eze of the current rules....

 

[Direwolf63]

"tweaking" the rules is the problem........not the answer.

Go bury your head Mara.

IMO - Conjuring up new rules, to save face, is extortion. Period.

Calvin Johnson rule, Tom Brady rule, Roy Williams rule..............Seriously?

What about a incompetent Ref rule?

Are you saying it's a good rule and the league should keep it?

 

[AsthmaField]

John Mara can go **** himself.

 

[Direwolf63]

That just gives them more room to 'spin' the 'tweak', IMO.

Kind of like they did/do.

Tweak it. Change it. Adjust it. Redo it. Rewrite it.

Call it whatever you want. The rule cannot stay as it is currently written.

 

[EST_1986]

Don't get carried away. High-scoring games generate more viewers, more fans, and in turn, more revenue. PI calls should be looked at, but don't expect the NFL to go any lighter on personal fouls.

I didn't ask for them to go lighter on them just to be able to review them.

 

[Cas2800]

Thank you! The media, etc. are focusing on the wrong thing in regards to this particular play (Dez catch/over rule). There were two components of that play that were questionable: First, was the catch itself. Did he maintain control throughout the "process"? If you look only at that component, they called it correctly insofar as the rule is written right now. The second component (which if it occurred, renders the first a moot point) is the "act common to football" or a "football move". This is where Blandino got it wrong, IMO. Did Dez make a "football move"? Many say yes. He caught the ball, shifted from both hands to his left hand, and attempted to reach for the goal line. If any of those things are considered a "football move", then Dez didn't have to hold the ball when it hit the ground. He had already caught the ball (which nobody, including Blandino disputes). Once he caught the ball, if he makes a football move, the act is complete. This is where Blandino screwed up, but no one is calling him on it. In regards to Dez stretching for the goal line, Blandino said "it's gotta be more obvious than that". Those are his exact words on his NFL Network appearance after the game. Well, if you're looking to change the on-field call from incomplete to complete, then he might be right. But to overturn a call, you need indisputable evidence that the on-field call was incorrect. Blandino's very own words ("more obvious") says to me that it was disputable. That's the kind of play that you don't change no matter whether it was initially ruled complete or incomplete. The question of whether he made a "football move" was certainly disputable. That's the part of this whole thing that has really bothered me and nobody outside of some fans are questioning them on it. Rant over...maybe.

Those same people also claim that "if" he would have just caught the ball and went down then it wouldn't be an issue and they would have have the ball 1st and goal. So by saying this they are admitting that by reaching for the goal line he did make a making a "football move" and was trying to score. Too much was was left for one persons interpretation and should have never been enough evidence to over rule the original referees call who was standing two feet away.