McCarthy Says Dez Didn’t Catch It?

[glimmerman]

There's always a question of whether the WR has actually established possession or not. Half the time, they get it right and half they don't. They should have left it as it was before this became such a cause of confusion. This is exactly why people are getting disenchanted with the game. It's gotten completely out of hand with all the confusion now. Even the officials can't decide correctly many times.

And it gives the impression the refs are using the rule to control the game.

 

[OmerV]

I know they supposedly changed the rule last year or the year before but not sure if they reverted back. They still say that they must control the ball all the way to the ground. I think if they have control and 2 feet in bounds it’s a catch. The ground can’t cause a fumble. If the ball comes out when it hits the ground then they are down there.

The part of the rule they changed applies to determining if possession had been established before going to the ground, but it’s still the same about having to maintain control if possession hasn’t been established before going to the ground.

 

[Bullflop]

I know they supposedly changed the rule last year or the year before but not sure if they reverted back. They still say that they must control the ball all the way to the ground. I think if they have control and 2 feet in bounds it’s a catch. The ground can’t cause a fumble. If the ball comes out when it hits the ground then they are down there.

They call it incomplete. Yes, it's not a fumble but it is incomplete. If a RB can get away with it not being a fumble and the offense retains the ball, good for them. If a WR loses the ball when it hits the ground, even though he has possession, it's incomplete. All I'm saying is that if it's ok for a rb to lose the ball, it should be the same for a WR to have it called complete. As I understand it, that's what still happens. If a rb does it, he's down at the spot. What's good for one should be good for the other. It's why so many folks object to it. Even the officials aren't sure what to do any more. It's become way too complicated.

 

[OmerV]

There's always a question of whether the WR has actually established possession or not. Half the time, they get it right and half they don't. They should have left it as it was before this became such a cause of confusion. This is exactly why people are getting disenchanted with the game. It's gotten completely out of hand with all the confusion now. Even the officials can't decide correctly many times.

But that’s the key. They don’t call it differently for RBs and receivers. On a pass both positions have to either establish possession before going to the ground, or maintain control through the the play. That’s th rule for all receivers whether Wr, slot receiver, TE or RB.

And no, it’s not 50/50 on every pass play. Far and away most plays there is no question with anyone. Even of the ones that get challenged most end up ruled where everyone agrees. There is just the occasional borderline play where it is really hard to tell that ends up being questioned, and sometimes blown by the officials

 

[Aviano90]

No it wasn’t ruled a TD. It was ruled a catch down inside the 1.

I stand corrected. Very good observation. After looking at the replay I immediately knew it wasn’t a catch and went outside in frustration.

 

[Aviano90]

That’s because the few that won’t change their minds ignore or offer explanations of Dean’s tutorial on the rule like “that wasn’t the nfl’s explanation.” Well, sure it wasn’t after they ****ed up that call. But before the call it was explained extremely clearly in these two videos. I’ll continue provide them for anyone that is interested in the facts.
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...00000246515/Calvin-Johnson-rule-strikes-again
“Let’s look at the play from week one, the Minn. Det. Game where Calvin is GOING TO THE GROUND in the PROCESS of MAKING THE CATCH.
The process of the catch is a 3 part process-control, 2 feet down, and then have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game. If you can perform all 3 parts, in that order, you HAVE a catch. If not AND you’re GOING TO THE GROUND you must control the ball when you hit the ground. Watch what happens when Calvin hits the ground, the ball comes loose. He did not have BOTH FEET DOWN prior to THE REACH (R-E-A-C-H) for the goaline SO this is all one process. This is an incomplete pass.”



That’s his explanation and Dez very clearly had both feet down prior to the reach.

Yes, I refuse to change my mind. There is no amount of discussion that will make me believe that was a catch under the rules at that time. I simply don’t care to continue beating a dead horse. The sides have been drawn, no new information will be presented and nobody will change their mind. Why continue repeating the same arguments? Just link back to a previous thread and relive it.

 

[glimmerman]

I stand corrected. Very good observation. After looking at the replay I immediately knew it wasn’t a catch and went outside in frustration.

I thought and still think the ref had it right but told my wife they would screw us.

 

[EST_1986]

I stand corrected. Very good observation. After looking at the replay I immediately knew it wasn’t a catch and went outside in frustration.

I remember thinking this can only be a catch and down or a catch and touchdown. That ruling made me want to break everything in the house lol

 

[glimmerman]

I remember thinking this can only be a catch and down or a catch and touchdown. That ruling made me want to break everything in the house lol

That was the game. After that I knew we were done for. They had plenty of time and rogers likely brings them back anyways but we were robbed of seeing a epic ending to a game.

 

[shabazz]

Wow, 10 pages on this stuff. Wonder how many it would be now if he said it was a catch?

 

[glimmerman]

Wow, 10 pages on this stuff. Wonder how many it would be now if he said it was a catch?

1...

 

[Bullflop]

But that’s the key. They don’t call it differently for RBs and receivers. On a pass both positions have to either establish possession before going to the ground, or maintain control through the the play. That’s th rule for all receivers whether Wr, slot receiver, TE or RB.

And no, it’s not 50/50 on every pass play. Far and away most plays there is no question with anyone. Even of the ones that get challenged most end up ruled where everyone agrees. There is just the occasional borderline play where it is really hard to tell that ends up being questioned, and sometimes blown by the officials

Even if a WR establishes possession before he goes down in the end zone, it's incomplete. He must retain possession upon hitting the ground. If the ball squirts away upon hitting the ground, it's incomplete. No touchdown. That shouldn't be the case, imho. It should be complete, whether it squirts out or not. Bad rule.

 

[glimmerman]

Even if a WR establishes possession before he goes down in the end zone, it's incomplete. He must retain possession upon hitting the ground. If the ball squirts away upon hitting the ground, it's incomplete. No touchdown. That shouldn't be the case, imho. It should be complete, whether it squirts out or not. Bad rule.

If he catches and has possession with both feet hitting the ground in the end zone then it should be a TD. Just like if you have possession and the ball crosses the plain it’s a TD. But I saw a play where the WR was going down and extended and crossed the plain but when the ball hit the ground (in the end zone) it came loose, was no catch or TD.

 

[OmerV]

Even if a WR establishes possession before he goes down in the end zone, it's incomplete. He must retain possession upon hitting the ground. If the ball squirts away upon hitting the ground, it's incomplete. No touchdown.

That’s not accurate. Once a receiver establishes possession under the rules that means a catch has been determined and he becomes a runner and not a receiver. Note the words “under the rules”. If it hasn’t been ruled a completed pass then possession was never established “under the rules”.

And this applies to any receiver, even if they are a listed on the roster as a RB or come out of the backfield to catch a pass. The rule doesn’t change based on where a player lines up on the field.

What you are talking about is a receiver going to the ground when possession has not been established under the rules and a catch has not yet been determined.

 

[aikemirv]

That’s all good and dandy but you’re basically making it all up. I don’t see anything in the rule that positively supports your stance.

Making it up....This whole football move is made up. So who and when and how do they decide what a football move is - Making it up -smh!

The act of the "catch": never involves reaching out with the ball to reach the goal line. There is nothing made up about that. Nobody catches the ball and reaches out as part of a catch. If there is a football move, stretching it out for the line to gain is definitely one!

 

[EST_1986]

That was the game. After that I knew we were done for. They had plenty of time and rogers likely brings them back anyways but we were robbed of seeing a epic ending to a game.

was huge momentum shift as well but I don't know if we would have won, they still had a chance and blew it.

The catch/non-catch was a huge swing.

 

[glimmerman]

was huge momentum shift as well but I don't know if we would have won, they still had a chance and blew it.

The catch/non-catch was a huge swing.

Yeah you never know. It could habe been the momentum we needed to win the game. But knowing Marinelli he would have went prevent and let them march down the field..

 

[G2]

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...00000246515/Calvin-Johnson-rule-strikes-again
“Let’s look at the play from week one, the Minn. Det. Game where Calvin is GOING TO THE GROUND in the PROCESS of MAKING THE CATCH.
The process of the catch is a 3 part process-control, 2 feet down, and then have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game. If you can perform all 3 parts, in that order, you HAVE a catch. If not AND you’re GOING TO THE GROUND you must control the ball when you hit the ground. Watch what happens when Calvin hits the ground, the ball comes loose. He did not have Both feet down prior to THE Reach for the goaline SO this is all one process. This is an incomplete pass.” —Dez had both feet down. Very clearly.

You bailed on the thread back in the day and didn’t attempt to explain this. To his credit out of the 4-5 on the other side of the debate, and after 75 pages of nonstop rebuttals most left the thread when this video tutorial was found by percy. Or it was conveniently and transparently ignored. Only @OmerV attempted to explain why Blandino previously gave perfect examples of why the Dez catch should’ve ultimately been ruled a catch as it was on the field.

Glad you remember because I really don't care that much. I don't feel it was a catch at the time, it just wasn't. I left a worn and heavily beaten topic. Sorry I didn't stick around long enough.

 

[Bullflop]

That’s not accurate. Once a receiver establishes possession under the rules that means a catch has been determined and he becomes a runner and not a receiver. Note the words “under the rules”. If it hasn’t been ruled a completed pass then possession was never established “under the rules”.

And this applies to any receiver, even if they are a listed on the roster as a RB or come out of the backfield to catch a pass. The rule doesn’t change based on where a player lines up on the field.

What you are talking about is a receiver going to the ground when possession has not been established under the rules and a catch has not yet been determined.

I think we're talking about two different things. I'm not arguing about Dez's catch -- I'm talking about the rules as they stand today. Yessir, Dez's catch according to the rules back then was right by calling it incomplete. No problem, there. Yes, what was true back then isn't the case now and yes, it wasn't a catch back then, even though it would be a catch in the here and now.

Just my opinion but these rules of what's a catch and what isn't have become so convoluted that it takes away from what's in the best interest of the game itself. Many have become disenchanted with what the rules committee has seen fit to change on a regular basis. It's disturbing and frankly, not in the best interest of what the NFL should be. The endless complexities have reduced the game into an exercise of interpretation. Not a good thing, imho.

 

[Bullflop]

But that’s the key. They don’t call it differently for RBs and receivers. On a pass both positions have to either establish possession before going to the ground, or maintain control through the the play. That’s th rule for all receivers whether Wr, slot receiver, TE or RB.

And no, it’s not 50/50 on every pass play. Far and away most plays there is no question with anyone. Even of the ones that get challenged most end up ruled where everyone agrees. There is just the occasional borderline play where it is really hard to tell that ends up being questioned, and sometimes blown by the officials

A RB doesn't maintain control if he loses the ball going to the ground. The ground can't cause a fumble. If a receiver loses the ball going to the ground, even if he maintains possession and the ball pops out upon hitting the ground, it's an incompletion. In one case with the RB, it's a dead ball and the offense retains possession. If a receiver establishes possession and loses possession as he hits the ground, it's an incompletion and the offense gets penalized by losing the down. That's an inconsistent circumstance. Simple contention in my estimation. That should justifiably change, imho.