Mike Carey: I’m right, NFL is wrong about Colts’ muffed punt

[LandryFan]

"Football move" is a red herring that they talk about it in order to leave the impression that the call is open to interpretation. It's really just a simple ruling of a catch and down by contact.

Not sure I follow you. My understanding is that if the catch is made (nobody, including Blandino, disputes that Dez caught the ball) AND an "act common to football/football move" is made, then the process for a catch is complete. The part about having to control the football through contact with the turf does not apply at that point. Now if a football move has not been performed, the receiver must control the ball all the way through contact with the ground. Am I wrong here?

 

[percyhoward]

Not sure I follow you. My understanding is that if the catch is made (nobody, including Blandino, disputes that Dez caught the ball) AND an "act common to football/football move" is made, then the process for a catch is complete. The part about having to control the football through contact with the turf does not apply at that point. Now if a football move has not been performed, the receiver must control the ball all the way through contact with the ground. Am I wrong here?

You're right, as it relates to that scenario. What I'm saying is, it never had to come down to a question of whether Dez made a football move. All their statements begin with the phrase, "If you're going to the ground to make a catch..."

So, going back to that point, we have to ask the question, "Was Dez going to the ground to make a catch?"

Was he going to the ground to make the catch (which means the catch process is complete, and brings in "acts common to the game" and "football moves"), or was he going down as a result of contact that came after the catch? The field judge ruled the latter, so they should have needed clear evidence to the contrary in order to overturn his call.

 

[LandryFan]

You're right, as it relates to that scenario. What I'm saying is, it never had to come down to a question of whether Dez made a football move. All their statements begin with the phrase, "If you're going to the ground to make a catch..."

So, going back to that point, we have to ask the question, "Was Dez going to the ground to make a catch?"

Was he going to the ground to make the catch (which means the catch process is complete, and brings in "acts common to the game" and "football moves"), or was he going down as a result of contact that came after the catch? The field judge ruled the latter, so they should have needed clear evidence to the contrary in order to overturn his call.

Roger that. Completely agree.

 

[joseephuss]

NFL got both calls right, move on!!

If you are moving on then why read through a thread about this topic?

 

[links18]

There are about six different ways the NFL screwed up the Dez call. Well, maybe three or four, but the point is they botched it: 1.) Catch and down by contact; 2.) Catch and he made a football move to go for the endzone; 3.) Catch and he went to the ground but didn't use the ground to control the ball; 4.) claiming there was "indisputable evidence" to overturn the call on the field.....

 

[LandryFan]

There are about six different ways the NFL screwed up the Dez call. Well, maybe three or four, but the point is they botched it: 1.) Catch and down by contact; 2.) Catch and he made a football move to go for the endzone; 3.) Catch and he went to the ground but didn't use the ground to control the ball; 4.) claiming there was "indisputable evidence" to overturn the call on the field.....

There is no arguing 1, 2, and 4...especially 4! 3 can be debated, but the others make 3 moot point.

 

[CF74]

NFL got both calls right, move on!!

Ban.....

 

[big dog cowboy]

Their entire argument rests on their assertion that Dez was going to the ground to make the catch.

That goes directly to my same point earler this week. The catch was made far before Dez started going to the ground. If there was contact made by the defender he was down when his elbow hit. Otherwise it's a fumble recovery in the end zone for a TD. He most definately WAS NOT going to the ground to make a catch.

 

[percyhoward]

That goes directly to my same point earlier this week. The catch was made far before Dez started going to the ground. If there was contact made by the defender he was down when his elbow hit. Otherwise it's a fumble recovery in the end zone for a TD. He most definitely WAS NOT going to the ground to make a catch.

We've got an overturn of a ruling on the field, and nobody who interviewed them -- from the pool reporter to Long, to Eisen, to Irvin -- ever asked them about the ruling on the field.

 

[blindzebra]

We've got an overturn of a ruling on the field, and nobody who interviewed them -- from the pool reporter to Long, to Eisen, to Irvin -- ever asked them about the ruling on the field.

From memory I believe Seratore said, "GB is challenging the ruling on the field of a completed catch." That phrasing gives them an out, as they get to interpret a catch by whatever ruling that they want as opposed to catch and down by contact which common sense says was the ruling on the field.

 

[theogt]

“There’s no difference between the Dez Bryant play and the Josh Cribbs play,” Carey said. “There was not enough there for possession, which means control, two feet down, and if you’re going to the ground, maintain control when you hit the ground.”

The difference is that Cribbs wasn't going to the ground when he caught the ball.

This just highlights that these guys do not even understand the rules.

 

[percyhoward]

From memory I believe Seratore said, "GB is challenging the ruling on the field of a completed catch." That phrasing gives them an out, as they get to interpret a catch by whatever ruling that they want as opposed to catch and down by contact which common sense says was the ruling on the field.

Since the ruling on the field was a catch, that requires indisputable visual evidence that it was not a catch.

 

[tyke1doe]

The difference is that Cribbs wasn't going to the ground when he caught the ball.

This just highlights that these guys do not even understand the rules.

Carey was viewing the play as if Cribbs was catching a pass. He wasn't. Cribbs was catching a punt, not a forward pass. So the same rules CAN'T apply. Where the ball landed is where the ball will be put in play. It won't go back to the line of scrimmage like a pass would. I think he got confused.

 

[blindzebra]

Since the ruling on the field was a catch, that requires indisputable visual evidence that it was not a catch.

Exactly my point, they changed the actual call on the field so that all they needed was the ball coming loose part to overturn it. They chose to focus on the one rule they could use to overturn it, even though they even failed to get that part correct based on the football move part of the rule.

 

[percyhoward]

Exactly my point, they changed the actual call on the field so that all they needed was the ball coming loose part to overturn it. They chose to focus on the one rule they could use to overturn it, even though they even failed to get that part correct based on the football move part of the rule.

The ruling on the field was that he caught the ball, got both feet down and was contacted causing him to fall, which is a catch.

They only talk about "football moves" so that it seems like the play is open to interpretation.

 

[Risen Star]

All this over analysis of football. Watch the play. It was a catch.

Stick your football move up your replay.

 

[joseephuss]

Carey was viewing the play as if Cribbs was catching a pass. He wasn't. Cribbs was catching a punt, not a forward pass. So the same rules CAN'T apply. Where the ball landed is where the ball will be put in play. It won't go back to the line of scrimmage like a pass would. I think he got confused.

Carey was confused? Or is he still confused? It is nearly a week later and Carey is still calling it a fumble. He has had plenty of time to review the play and judge it as a fumble.

 

[JPostSam]

i watched that segment with carey and couldn't believe my eyes and ears. cribbs got creamed the *instant* the ball landed in his hands. the fact that he had both feet down on the ground was due to them *already being there* while he was waiting for the punt. no way i consider that a catch with possession. no way i consider it comparable to what dez did, either. how can carey say they are the same thing?

 

[coult44]

NFL got both calls right, move on!!

Yep, we should all listen to a high school freshman...

 

[Mansta54]

NFL got both calls right, move on!!

No, they didn't.