Sam Shields, "It was a catch"

[percyhoward]

They need to close the loophole on that rule to leave no room for replay officials to take it away.

I don't think this is about loopholes in a rule. It's clearly stated that there needs to be indisputable visual evidence to overturn the ruling on the field, but the referee and the VP of officiating were either very confused, or they just decided not to follow those guidelines.

Steratore said, "there were a couple of angles that show the ball actually hitting the ground and then the receiver losing possession of it" like this is supposed to be evidence that the ruling on the field was wrong. But the field judge was standing right there and saw the ball come out, which means he obviously thought the catch happened before that, so this "evidence" doesn't contradict anything that the field judge ruled. That means it's not really evidence at all, and in fact it's completely beside the point.

If Steratore or Blandino saw something before this point that actually does prove the field judge wrong, they haven't said anything about it. And you'd think this would be the first thing they'd mention. I know if I were interviewing one of them, and they told me that the ruling on the field was wrong without even saying what that ruling was, I would ask that question.

 

[cowboyvic]

I think pretty much everybody knows it was a catch.

Ancient history now. Time to move on.

Stop telling folks to move on. i will never move on from this screw job.if you want to move on do it.

 

[SultanOfSix]

Helen Keller knew it was a catch.

That play was two play makers putting it all on the line and making a play in a crucial moment - what the game is supposed to be about - and it was stolen from them by people who don't/shouldn't even count/matter.

It should not be lived down.

 

[burmafrd]

If anybody tells you, "Well, that's the rule. Good call, bad rule," remind them that the rule they're talking about applies only to receivers, not runners. According to the field judge's ruling on the field, Dez was a runner who was down by contact.

So, it's not the rule that's the problem here. The problem was Steratore and Blandino misapplying this rule (that deals only with receivers in the act of catching a ball), and then defending their overturn of the call by simply explaining how that misapplied rule works, instead of talking about the play as it was ruled on the field.

And it is extremely fishy.

I would like Blandino to sleep with the fishes

 

[Frozen700]

So what do we do now?

I mean we keep bringing it up. Anybody on here have a Time Machine that these posters know about, and you are simply holding out?

 

[cowboyvic]

I'm over it, but if Blandino comes out two months from now and says he was wrong or something like that, there will rightly be discussion of it.

Blandino does not need to come back later with anything. what he needs to do is resign. this man needs to RESIGN or be fired!

 

[Aven8]

I would like Blandino to sleep with the fishes

This ^^^

Is this fool being retained?? After the screw ups during the playoffs with Dez and Cribbs I see no reason why he should be!

 

[dfan32]

So we will be playing the Seahawks . . .no, wait . . . so we can go back in time in the DeLorean . . . no, wait . . . what is the point of all this second-guessing and teef nashing?

I agree it's time to let it go but the rule is completely void of any common sense. Why wasn't two feet down after showing possession of the ball not good enough? No they had to rewrite that one because it was to easy.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

If anybody tells you, "Well, that's the rule. Good call, bad rule," remind them that the rule they're talking about applies only to receivers, not runners. According to the field judge's ruling on the field, Dez was a runner who was down by contact.

So, it's not the rule that's the problem here. The problem was Steratore and Blandino misapplying this rule (that deals only with receivers in the act of catching a ball), and then defending their overturn of the call by simply explaining how that misapplied rule works, instead of talking about the play as it was ruled on the field.

And it is extremely fishy.

Ok. I'm with you.... And me.... And anything pro cowboy

 

[tyke1doe]

This is not true. He had control got two feet down and made an act common to the game. At that point he is a runner and the process of catching the ball was completed. The Calvin Johnson rule no longer applies. But i'm done arguing this.

Are you sure?

 

[ConstantReboot]

Blandino does not need to come back later with anything. what he needs to do is resign. this man needs to RESIGN or be fired!

Bladino and everyone that was involved needs to resign. Those that state that this issue needs to put to rest needs to look at the big picture. The people who are speaking up about this play aren't Cowboys fans. They are players like Sam Shield and Odelle Beckham saying that this was a catch, period. They are the ones that aren't putting this rest. Thus if players are still bringing this up then why should Cowboy fans in the know put it to rest as well?

 

[ConstantReboot]

A pro athlete 1ft from the play said it was a catch. A ref 5 feet from the play said it was a catch. They both know the rule. It was a catch.

Give it up. Some folks here will never admit they are wrong. That guy is wrong and he doesn't want to admit it. You can point to him all of the evidence that supports your case but he won't budge. Just saying.....

 

[ConstantReboot]

This is not true. He had control got two feet down and made an act common to the game. At that point he is a runner and the process of catching the ball was completed. The Calvin Johnson rule no longer applies. But i'm done arguing this.

The league is using the Calvin Johnson rule to cover up the biggest blunder in NFL history. This has nothing to do with the Calvin Johnson rule. Its nothing more than a screw job by the NFL against the Dallas Cowboys.

 

[kojak]

Yeah it sucks but we have to move on. Whats our alternative? Admit we was the better team, we beat Seattle the following week, and the catch replaces the deflated balls as the controversy before superbowl sunday. That's my approach because that's what I truly belive would of happened. Now I root for Seattle and await next year.

 

[JoeKing]

I've been dissecting that play frame by frame. At what point was the ball deemed dead? Was it when the ball appeared to hit the ground and bounced back up? I'm assuming that is the case because that is the only way that ruling could be possible. My personal feelings is that Dez had already caught the ball before that point and then fumbled it into the end zone and then caught it once again in the end zone.

It's hard to move on from such a bad ruling considering the consequences. One bad call ended the Cowboys season and its hard to accept. I feel like it was a flat out theft of a playoff game with millions of witnesses. The injustice of that call being allowed to stand does not sit right with me.

 

[DogFace]

I will never let it go. Next year before the our 2nd playoff game I'm starting the thread.

 

[percyhoward]

I agree it's time to let it go but the rule is completely void of any common sense. Why wasn't two feet down after showing possession of the ball not good enough?

It is good enough, as long as the receiver isn't going to the ground to make the catch. If you catch the ball, get both feet down, and then are contacted sending you to the ground, the pass is complete -- even if the ball comes out when you hit the ground. There's nothing wrong with the rule. In fact, Blandino used the rule to explain this catch by Jermaine Gresham in last year's playoffs.

But they get around the rule by saying Dez was going to the ground to make the catch. Even though nobody can point to any clear evidence that this is what happened, and it isn't what the field judge ruled had happened, it does bring in a different rule that they can talk about.

 

[percyhoward]

At what point was the ball deemed dead? Was it when the ball appeared to hit the ground and bounced back up? I'm assuming that is the case because that is the only way that ruling could be possible.

Exactly. If the field judge is looking for Dez to "complete the catch process," he rules it incomplete when he sees the ball come out. Which proves he didn't think Dez was "going to the ground to make the catch."

Replay officials assume that he was, don't explain why they assume this, and use it as their entire basis for overturning the call.

 

[Carolina Cowboy]

Sorry to make you all sick

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowboys/post/_/id/4740069/sam-shields-it-was-a-catch

Aside from the first couple of paragraphs that is actually a pretty cool read on the Cowboys and how together they are in AZ even off of the field. Also, some good Columbo stuff in there.

 

[cowboyvic]

The NFL and their Refs cheated the cowboys. when you put all the BS aside, this was the biggest screw job in NFL playoff history. this was a disgrace.