McCarthy Says Dez Didn’t Catch It?

[Diehardblues]

I guess the debate would've been moot if Dez would've just made that catch like he already had--clearly--and then just tucked it and gone to the ground, instead of taking more steps and reaching for the TD.
I don't think anyone on either side of the debate would ever say he could not have easily done that (which is telling in and of itself if we think about it).
But Dez being Dez...he wanted to reach for the goal line.

Correct

And that would have been the right call. 1st down and no TD.

 

[kskboys]

Just speaking truth Marcus.

You seem more invested in Dez' catch NOT being real than any other threads that ever participate in this forum.
Just admit it

Now if you say you were NOT anti-Romo, then I'll be lazy and not do the research right now...and will take your word for it. Would not call someone a liar randomly like that.

So maybe you aren't one of them. But there is a pattern there with anti-Romo dudes and anti Dez catch folks. The overall bias is real.
At some point, I'll take the time and look it up to see if the pattern holds true.

I disagree with you on the catch. But what stands out to me is how invested you seem to be in arguing the non catch angle.

Marcus calls it the way he sees it. No holds barred.

 

[DFWJC]

Marcus calls it the way he sees it. No holds barred.

That's completely fine.
Just seems that this is a topic --for whatever reason--is one that he is most passionate about....at least in this forum.

I sometimes wonder if maybe one of his favorite teams is Green Bay.
Really don't know either way. No big deal if they are.

 

[kskboys]

That's completely fine.
Just seems that this is a topic --for whatever reason--is one that he is most passionate about....at least in this forum.

I sometimes wonder if maybe one of his favorite teams is Green Bay.
Really don't know either way. No big deal if they are.

I'd say he's simply defending his point.

The truth is, there are some plays that can legitimately go either way and be right either way. There's not always a definitive answer, as much as most just have to try and make it black and white.

My only argument w/ this entire episode is that I do not believe there was enough evidence to overturn. I knew at the moment it happened that by the rules at the time it was not an official catch. The refs messed up the Calvin Johnson catch, and this was quite simply one of the results of that mess. Same as that tuck rule crapp. The NFL hated Al Davis because he kept doing whatever he wanted, so they called that against him. Brady fumbled that ball, very clearly, but after that they had to keep calling it that way.

 

[MarcusRock]

Just speaking truth Marcus.

You seem more invested in Dez' catch NOT being real than any other threads that ever participate in this forum.
Just admit it

Now if you say you were NOT anti-Romo, then I'll be lazy and not do the research right now...and will take your word for it. Would not call someone a liar randomly like that.

So maybe you aren't one of them. But there is a pattern there with anti-Romo dudes and anti Dez catch folks. The overall bias is real.
At some point, I'll take the time and look it up to see if the pattern holds true.

I disagree with you on the catch. But what stands out to me is how invested you seem to be in arguing the non catch angle.

My "investment" is in anti-whining. The only people who get upset at me chiming in with the rules are those who know I'm right when I do. But people don't want truth if it doesn't favor them and I like seeing what happens when I show it to them.

 

[Cowpolk]

It was a catch then now and for ever. They even admitted it was a catch. So it was a catch

 

[MarcusRock]

Marcus calls it the way he sees it. No holds barred.

Thanks bro. You've seen me on boards like these for probably over 10 years so you've seen me operate. Not the place to be if you don't like having your points challenged.

 

[Aviano90]

Thanks bro. You've seen me on boards like these for probably over 10 years so you've seen me operate. Not the place to be if you don't like having your points challenged.

I find it funny you debating the rules makes someone wonder if you’re anti-Romo or not and someone is going to do research to figure it out.

 

[DallasEast]

 

[MarcusRock]

I find it funny you debating the rules makes someone wonder if you’re anti-Romo or not and someone is going to do research to figure it out.

Right? Wide-sweeping generalization first, actual investigation for proof later. CONSPIRACY! theorists leave out the latter altogether. Lol.

 

[kskboys]

Right? Wide-sweeping generalization first, actual investigation for proof later. CONSPIRACY! theorists leave out the latter altogether. Lol.

That's pretty much why I've stopped arguing about this!!!!!!

 

[khiladi]

Going to the ground DOES overrule everything if it's labeled that, unless a receiver can show he's NOT going to the ground. The only way the rules show you can get out of the GTTG tag is with a lunge. Again, you don't know the rules, which I've already proven, and I haven't even broken out the Approved Rulings which show the lunge qualifies as satisfying the time element, which you're already on record as saying didn't exist until they "changed" the rule (they didn't). But you're dead set on CONSPIRACY! so it won't matter.

The first person to mention a "dive" was YOU (because you want to get away from the rule mechanics and their requirements). So I merely showed you what a proper lunge looks like. You still haven't answered my question about how Dez' lunge compares to my posted example. Why is that?

So what Pereira was saying is that Dez' attempt won't be considered a football move that would have the UPRIGHT catch rules apply (as found in the ARs - but what do you know about those?). Therefore, GTTG applied instead. And what are those rules' requirements? Again you won't answer that and scream CONSPIRACY! to avoid having to.

How else may I carve up your argument today?

Again, flip flopping...

1. Only in your imagination you got owned.

2. I said multiple things, including TIME in 2015, football moves, Dez becoming a runner, Dez dived and REACHED for the goal-line. You on the other hand, just kept yapping about 'going to the ground' over-ruling everything, as if I never stated that Dez became a runner, because that is what we are discussion here. A football move doesn't have to be a runner, because one can try and reach to cross the goal-line to score a TD, which is basically what Pereira was stating.

LOOK, I know this may be hard for you, but Mike Pereira stated what he stated and then he flip-flopped. Those are the FACTS and whether you deny them or not, the evidence is right there. I know you have a hard time dealing with it, but it is what it is.. That;s the great thing about the internet.

Mike Pereira clearly said in 2015, that the issue was that he thinks Dez didn't stretch enough.

That COMPLETELY contradicts your argument, that Dez was still going to the ground at that point.

 

[khiladi]

Damn skippy. "In control" is a great qualifier.

Compare this:

To this:

Which lunge is more definitive and "in control?" I don't deny Dez' intention but he just didn't execute. That's as clear as day and "hope" can't change that.

So now you admit it happened, but you are adding terms such as "in control" and "more definitive".

Thank you very much... Now your complaint is he tried to lunge but he supposedly didn't execute... OK...

 

[MarcusRock]

Again, flip flopping...

1. Only in your imagination you got owned.

2. I said multiple things, including TIME in 2015, football moves, Dez becoming a runner, Dez dived and REACHED for the goal-line. You on the other hand, just kept yapping about 'going to the ground' over-ruling everything, as if I never stated that Dez became a runner, because that is what we are discussion here. A football move doesn't have to be a runner, because one can try and reach to cross the goal-line to score a TD, which is basically what Pereira was stating.

LOOK, I know this may be hard for you, but Mike Pereira stated what he stated and then he flip-flopped. Those are the FACTS and whether you deny them or not, the evidence is right there. I know you have a hard time dealing with it, but it is what it is.. That;s the great thing about the internet.

Mike Pereira clearly said in 2015, that the issue was that he thinks Dez didn't stretch enough.

That COMPLETELY contradicts your argument, that Dez was still going to the ground at that point.

You were better off when I thought you ran from the argument. You weren't around when I posted this link to the explanation, which addresses everything. 1. The GTTG rule applied so THOSE requirements have to be met. Why? Because 2. NO football move happened to satisfy the main 3-part catch rule. This was addressed by Pereira the day of the game, Steratore the day of the game, and then Blandino in this video below. They all agree that 3. Dez' attempted "reach" looks nothing like your classic, demonstrative reach like the samples I've posted. Samples neither YOU or anyone else want to answer my question about because then you too would agree with Pereira, Steratore, and Blandino. Very telling. So, unless you're claiming some nicely-coordinated CONSPIRACY!, nothing out there that calls this play incomplete is in conflict with each other.

Educate yourself:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...00457361/Dean-Blandino-reviews-Bryant-s-catch

 

[MarcusRock]

So now you admit it happened, but you are adding terms such as "in control" and "more definitive".

Thank you very much... Now your complaint is he tried to lunge but he supposedly didn't execute... OK...

Are you even paying attention to your own points? YOU mentioned "dive" first so I addressed it.

So are you going to answer my question? Does Dez' "reach" look anything like these classic examples of reaches? Yes or no? Now is the part where you feign incredulousness and exit in a huff to avoid answering. Or just not return at all. Did you mention getting owned? Indeed. Lol.

 

[khiladi]

You were better off when I thought you ran from the argument. You weren't around when I posted this link to the explanation, which addresses everything. 1. The GTTG rule applied so THOSE requirements have to be met. Why? Because 2. NO football move happened to satisfy the main 3-part catch rule. This was addressed by Pereira the day of the game, Steratore the day of the game, and then Blandino in this video below. They all agree that 3. Dez' attempted "reach" looks nothing like your classic, demonstrative reach like the samples I've posted. Samples neither YOU or anyone else want to answer my question about because then you too would agree with Pereira, Steratore, and Blandino. Very telling. So, unless you're claiming some nicely-coordinated CONSPIRACY!, nothing out there that calls this play incomplete is in conflict with each other.

Educate yourself:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...00457361/Dean-Blandino-reviews-Bryant-s-catch

Congratulations for telling me what I already no and have been saying ad nauseum.

So you agree that the officials flip-flopped over the fact that Dez performed a football move and that was what the issue was about. So all your yapping about "going to the ground" was absolutely pointless and you are basically just trying to step back and now argue about whether or not it was a football move...

Thank for proving my point, yet again..

 

[OmerV]

Congratulations for telling me what I already no and have been saying ad nauseum.

So you agree that the officials flip-flopped over the fact that Dez performed a football move and that was what the issue was about...

Isn't that what replay is - a chance to take another look at the play and determine if the original call was right or wrong?

 

[khiladi]

Are you even paying attention to your own points? YOU mentioned "dive" first so I addressed it.

So are you going to answer my question? Does Dez' "reach" look anything like these classic examples of reaches? Yes or no? Now is the part where you feign incredulousness and exit in a huff to avoid answering. Or just not return at all. Did you mention getting owned? Indeed. Lol.

What does CLASSIC examples of a reach have anything to do with the discussion. The issue is whether or not Dez dived and then tried to reach to cross the plane. Of course he did.. All these irrelevant tangents mean nothing to what Dez did...

 

[MarcusRock]

Congratulations for telling me what I already no and have been saying ad nauseum.

So you agree that the officials flip-flopped over the fact that Dez performed a football move and that was what the issue was about. So all your yapping about "going to the ground" was absolutely pointless and you are basically just trying to step back and now argue about whether or not it was a football move...

Thank for proving my point, yet again..

YOU mentioned dive so I addressed the dive.

Are you going to answer my question above or is this the "incredulousness" I spoke of? Lol.

 

[khiladi]

Isn't that what replay is - a chance to take another look at the play and determine if the original call was right or wrong?

Yes and Pereira admitted he reached and qualified it as a football move. He just said he didn't think he reached enough. Then he flip-flopped in 2017.

And like I said, the NFl replay would have been on slow motion, so they clearly would have seen Dez pushing off and trying to cross the plane.