McCarthy Says Dez Didn’t Catch It?

[darthseinfeld]

I still believe it was a catch, even by the 2016 rule book...………….but, whatever.

There were still 4 min left in the game, plenty of time for Aaron Rogers.

We would have still lost.

Bingo!

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I have heard if you argue this point enough times, it will tear time and space and we can actually go back and change the play where the challenge was lost, the refs Said Dez caught the ball, we went on to win the game and later the superbowl and Jason was still the coach for years and years.

Well actually...no, it will not happen, it will not change nor will hardly anybody change their mind if they feel it was or was not technically a catch.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

How is the catch still something people even think about? Move on already.

I mean I think it’s more about making the league look like the joke that it has become.

 

[SacredStar]

If it was a Packer who caught it, it would have been a catch.

Since it was not a Packer, it wasn't a catch.

Lambeau Mystique.

 

[Red Dragon]

It was a divisional playoff game that we probably would have lost anyways.

Why is this still a thing?

We basically got robbed of watching Aaron Rodgers march down the field on our defense and win.

This, pretty much. If Dez catches it, Dallas probably takes a 27-26 or 29-26 lead. And what? League MVP A-Rod will simply march the Packers downfield for the winning score.

This reminds me of people who blame Romo's bobbled snap for the Cowboys losing to Seattle, forgetting that it would have been merely a 23-21 Dallas lead had the snap gone cleanly. What happens next? We all know what comes next; Hasselbeck exploiting the weak coverage of strong safety Roy Williams. Seattle would have marched downfield, kicked a field goal of their own and won 24-23.

 

[khiladi]

I still believe it was a catch, even by the 2016 rule book...………….but, whatever.

There were still 4 min left in the game, plenty of time for Aaron Rogers.

We would have still lost.

Nope.. We still would have taken time off the clock and force GB to burn time outs. Plus AR that last drive to seal the deal actually got lucky on one catch that was I believed tipped and ended up in the hands of the WR. He didn’t look good at all that drive..

 

[Doomsay]

That would have been huge momentum, I can never understand those who say we definitely would have lost, anyway.

 

[khiladi]

And that was a catch by the 2014 rules, that Dez made a football move. They then changed it in 2015 and basically stated that catch is dictated by holding the ball long enough to be a runner after the second foot comes down, meaning it is TIME that dictated the catch.

So the issue of Dez was the NFL trying to flop around to justify the ruling they made then. But the rule was written so bad in 2015, they just admitted in 2018 that per the 2015 rules it was a catch. This was because the Jesse James play against the Patriots that the refs screwed the Steelers over with in 2017 and nobody was buying it.

 

[khiladi]

Just to remind people, GB burned their second timeout with nine minute to go. Dallas could have more than taken there time to run a few plays after the Dez catch and totally change the dimension of the game for GB.

 

[Ranching]

It was a catch. We were robbed.

Garrett curse!

 

[CWR]

Two things I know for sure.

1. It was a catch
2. Our defense would have let us down anyways.

 

[CWR]

This, pretty much. If Dez catches it, Dallas probably takes a 27-26 or 29-26 lead. And what? League MVP A-Rod will simply march the Packers downfield for the winning score.

This reminds me of people who blame Romo's bobbled snap for the Cowboys losing to Seattle, forgetting that it would have been merely a 23-21 Dallas lead had the snap gone cleanly. What happens next? We all know what comes next; Hasselbeck exploiting the weak coverage of strong safety Roy Williams. Seattle would have marched downfield, kicked a field goal of their own and won 24-23.

I cant wait for the day we dont feel like even if we scrounge up enough points to take the lead our defense will inevitably fold like a lawn chair.

 

[WoodysGirl]

How is the catch still something people even think about? Move on already.

We still talk about the catch by Dwight what's-his-face on the 9ers. It's what fans do. *shrug*

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

We still talk about the catch by Dwight what's-his-face on the 9ers. It's what fans do. *shrug*

Bad memories. lol

 

[Flamma]

I mean it goes without saying. Randall Cobb basically said the same thing. Everyone knew they caught a break there. That should've been catch.

It was a catch. I think the spirit of the rule was lost in translation by the refs. They do this from time to time. The way the actual rule was worded left for a lot of interpretation. The rule was most likely intended for WRs catching the ball as they were going to the ground, like diving catches or lunging catches. The refs then included all catches that resulted in the player going to the ground.

Another example of this lost in translation issue is putting your body weight on the QB when making a sack.

 

[CWR]

It was a catch. I think the spirit of the rule was lost in translation by the refs. They do this from time to time. The way the actual rule was worded left for a lot of interpretation. The rule was most likely intended for WRs catching the ball as they were going to the ground, like diving catches or lunging catches. The refs then included all catches that resulted in the player going to the ground.

Another example of this lost in translation issue is putting your body weight on the QB when making a sack.

Which is why league officiating drives me crazy. Would it be that hard to put all your officials in one room and go over the intent of the rule and how to enforce it? There should be uniform standards. You have what 2 dozen crews and they all call their own version of the rules. Whats too much contact down the field? When do you let them play? When is a rub route a pick and what is actually holding? Lol depends on which official you ask.

 

[nobody]

I swear, y'all are interested in the most inane stuff.

So, which players and coaches wear boxers, which wear briefs?

 

[smitty313]

It’s the one sliver of hope we had in the past 25 years. Let us have our moment.

We now have the coach that exploited that rule..it's not like Garrett could of won the next game anyway

 

[Flamma]

Which is why league officiating drives me crazy. Would it be that hard to put all your officials in one room and go over the intent of the rule and how to enforce it? There should be uniform standards. You have what 2 dozen crews and they all call their own version of the rules. Whats too much contact down the field? When do you let them play? When is a rub route a pick and what is actually holding? Lol depends on which official you ask.

You would think. But you can see what I'm saying, right? Another example is hitting a defenseless WR. Some refs call this even after the WR makes the catch. The wording of the rule allows for this, but it makes no practical sense. On that, something must have been said because I don't see it anymore. I could go on. Years ago they had an "In the grasp" rule for QBs that the refs made a mockery of. That ended because it couldn't be officiated correctly.

 

[MarcusRock]

And that was a catch by the 2014 rules, that Dez made a football move. They then changed it in 2015 and basically stated that catch is dictated by holding the ball long enough to be a runner after the second foot comes down, meaning it is TIME that dictated the catch.

So the issue of Dez was the NFL trying to flop around to justify the ruling they made then. But the rule was written so bad in 2015, they just admitted in 2018 that per the 2015 rules it was a catch. This was because the Jesse James play against the Patriots that the refs screwed the Steelers over with in 2017 and nobody was buying it.

It was a catch. I think the spirit of the rule was lost in translation by the refs. They do this from time to time. The way the actual rule was worded left for a lot of interpretation. The rule was most likely intended for WRs catching the ball as they were going to the ground, like diving catches or lunging catches. The refs then included all catches that resulted in the player going to the ground.

Another example of this lost in translation issue is putting your body weight on the QB when making a sack.

What you both aren't getting is the mechanics of the rules at the time. You had the general catch rule and then there were rule subsets that basically functioned as exceptions and those rules took precedence over the general catch rule. The going to the ground rule is either a yes or no question and if yes, the ball can't touch the ground and come out. The official on the field didn't see the ball hit the ground because he was shielded from it, but the replay showed everything and it was ruled as such.

As for the 2015 rule wording change, nothing about the rule itself changed. Time was always part of the elements of a catch so that was nothing new. You jump, land, and immediately get the ball poked out, there's not enough time to declare it a catch. That's always been the case. So despite whatever conspiracy trying to be created, nothing that happened from 2015 onward to the recent rule change was any kind of coverup. If you understand the rules as they were written (and the average football fan couldn't, which is why they re-worded it), you know it was the correct call at the time and all the way up to when they removed that subset rule taking precedence over the general catch rule. There was no "spirit of the law" being missed. It was always a yes/no determination. The field official missed what replay caught, which was that the ball hit the ground and came out of Dez' grip. By rule, that's a done deal and no catch. Dez needed to do all he could to secure the ball and take the 1st and Goal. Didn't happen.