Lamb’s feet were in on the touchdown

[Sydla]

His feet were in, even under the current rule. His toes were in WITH FULL POSESSION, THEN his heel hit the chalk. Thats a TD if it was any other team. the league NEVER gives Dallas the benefit of the doubt.

There is no team where that would have been called a TD. LOL, the conspiracies.

 

[Rayman70]

There is no team where that would have been called a TD. LOL, the conspiracies.

suuuuure.

 

[MarcusRock]

There is no team where that would have been called a TD. LOL, the conspiracies.

I'm trying to decide whether this thread full of conspiracy loons is worse than the Dez catch theorists. At least with the Dez play, the mechanics of the rule were multi-faceted and it's understandable that people wouldn't be able to follow along because there's more to try to poke holes in (try and fail when I'm on the job, lol). Here, this rule is as clear cut as can be, has zero problems with it and yet you still get the conspiracy folk trying to inject their haze into it to shoehorn the same victim stance. These plays mean very little in the grand scheme of things of course but it really goes to show how far things out there have declined that folks think they can argue and overturn absolutes to soothe their psyche or get their way. All while they claim to have principle too. Sad.

 

[Sydla]

suuuuure.

Yes. Sure. It was clear as day he was out of bounds and in a review, there is no way, unless the review booth was drunk or ate a bunch of edibles, that they would say it was a TD. Not everything is a conspiracy against Dallas. Sometimes it's just the clear, obvious right call.

 

[OmerV]

His feet were in, even under the current rule. His toes were in WITH FULL POSESSION, THEN his heel hit the chalk. Thats a TD if it was any other team. the league NEVER gives Dallas the benefit of the doubt.

That's not the rule. The toe drag or toe tap applies when the toes are the only part of the foot that touches before falling out of bounds or taking an additional step out of bounds. If the entire foot comes down the entire foot has to be in bounds. There is not benefit of the doubt to give because there is no doubt.

 

[Sydla]

That's not the rule. The toe drag or toe tap applies when the toes are the only part of the foot that touches before falling out of bounds or taking an additional step out of bounds. If the entire foot comes down the entire foot has to be in bounds. There is not benefit of the doubt to give because there is no doubt.

It's amazing that 23 pages in, and other threads as well, people still don't get this or worse, argue that it would have been called differently it was an opposing player against the Cowboys. LOL.

 

[DenCWBY]

The Toe drag only counts when the rest of the foot is behind you and inbounds too.

We had toe down and heel out, u don't see that a lot

This is the first explanation that makes any sense. Ultimately, it's a terrible rule as it just adds one more detail the ref needs to consider for a split-second decision, however they made the right call if this is the case.

 

[Runwildboys]

His feet were in, even under the current rule. His toes were in WITH FULL POSESSION, THEN his heel hit the chalk. Thats a TD if it was any other team. the league NEVER gives Dallas the benefit of the doubt.

No. If the foot were facing the other way and the heel came down first, then the toes, it would be out - happens all the time. Why would it be any different just because the foot's facing the other way?

 

[john van brocklin]

No. If the foot were facing the other way and the heel came down first, then the toes, it would be out - happens all the time. Why would it be any different just because the foot's facing the other way?

Make it stoppppppppppppppppppppp

 

[Runwildboys]

Make it stoppppppppppppppppppppp

I'm trying, but I can't make people understand what they don't want to understand.

 

[joseephuss]

Didn't this type of play happen one other time this season for a different team? I hadn't seen it in a while until this season. I recall learning about it in a game Dallas played against the Cardinals in Phoenix. David Boston came down, his toes hit first and then his heel landed out of bounds, so it wasn't a TD. I don't think it a great rule, but it is easy to see and was the right call on the Lamb play.

I look at it has the receiver demonstrating control of his body and a continuation of a movement. With a toe tap or a toe drag, it indicates the receiver controlled their movement within the bounds of play. You don't need a heel to land to count as catch in either instance. The heel coming down is a continuation of the feet coming down with the toes leading the way. If the heel stays in bounds the receiver again demonstrates body control and when it lands out of bounds they don't. Sucks it went against Dallas, but maybe in several years, the call will go for Dallas. It is a rather rare occurrence.

 

[AsthmaField]

Why are so many people having issues understanding this? It has always been incomplete if any part of the foot is out of bounds.

That’s it. It has been the rule forever and it is simple.

 

[MarcusRock]

Why are so many people having issues understanding this? It has always been incomplete if any part of the foot is out of bounds.

That’s it. It has been the rule forever and it is simple.

Simple? Oh, that's what the Goodell-Mara Syndicate would have you believe. You're part of the problem!!! Lol.

Seriously, they are not having issues. They have such PTSD from anything related to a disputed catch that anytime a ruling says our guys didn't make a catch that their brains compel them to oppose the ruling, evidence be damned. The only thing more poetic would be if this happened against Green Bay.

 

[OmerV]

Didn't this type of play happen one other time this season for a different team? I hadn't seen it in a while until this season. I recall learning about it in a game Dallas played against the Cardinals in Phoenix. David Boston came down, his toes hit first and then his heel landed out of bounds, so it wasn't a TD. I don't think it a great rule, but it is easy to see and was the right call on the Lamb play.

I look at it has the receiver demonstrating control of his body and a continuation of a movement. With a toe tap or a toe drag, it indicates the receiver controlled their movement within the bounds of play. You don't need a heel to land to count as catch in either instance. The heel coming down is a continuation of the feet coming down with the toes leading the way. If the heel stays in bounds the receiver again demonstrates body control and when it lands out of bounds they don't. Sucks it went against Dallas, but maybe in several years, the call will go for Dallas. It is a rather rare occurrence.

The flaw in this is viewing this play as a toe tap or toe drag. In those cases it's not merely the fact the toes touched, it's the fact the toes are the only part of the foot that touched before falling out of bounds or taking an additional step out of bounds. If the entire foot comes down it is not a tap or drag and the entire foot has to be in bounds.

 

[Rayman70]

I'm trying, but I can't make people understand what they don't want to understand.

right man. lol

 

[john van brocklin]

I'm trying, but I can't make people understand what they don't want to understand.

Sometimes you just gotta walk away
..

 

[john van brocklin]

Why are so many people having issues understanding this? It has always been incomplete if any part of the foot is out of bounds.

That’s it. It has been the rule forever and it is simple.

This is getting hilarious!
Are some posters just jerking your chain?

 

[joseephuss]

The flaw in this is viewing this play as a toe tap or toe drag. In those cases it's not merely the fact the toes touched, it's the fact the toes are the only part of the foot that touched before falling out of bounds or taking an additional step out of bounds. If the entire foot comes down it is not a tap or drag and the entire foot has to be in bounds.

I didn't view this play as a toe tap or toe drag. I kind of described the difference, just not a eloquently as you did.

 

[Cowfan75]

I thought that was the purpose of the toe tap. I guess you have to tap and fall forward. Weird rule. I don't know how they come up with some of this nonsense.

THIS. So the toe tap is a sometimes rule, apparently. That is twice this season we have had a TD wiped out because of the heal issue, something I don't remember ever being an issue ever before if you tap those toes with possession.

 

[MarcusRock]

THIS. So the toe tap is a sometimes rule, apparently. That is twice this season we have had a TD wiped out because of the heal issue, something I don't remember ever being an issue ever before if you tap those toes with possession.

If you toe tap and lift your toes off the turf before landing on the sidelines, you're good for both feet down whether forward or backwards. If you try to toe tap but your heel lands on the line, it's not a toe tap, it's a step and you stepped on the line making you out of bounds. Lamb was backwards and his trailing foot actually hit the defender and deflected downward which is why the whole foot landed. So if Lamb intended to toe tap and lift his foot up before going out of bounds, the defender hitting his foot made that impossible.