What was confusing on the Dez play was the term "football move" being brought into it because no one including Blandino could explain exactly what a "football move" is. Blandino was cornered with the term several times in interviews where the play was being shown and was asked how could what Dez was doing not be a "football move?" Blandino said he understands fans are frustrated and confused with it but said it was determined Dez wasn't "upright" and because his momentum was taking him to the ground they felt he couldn't make a "football move." It's the terms "football move" and a "move common to the game" that's raised the ire of fans and everyone else because no one can understand how the league can say Dez didn't perform a "football move" with everything he did on that play.
If the officials determine that a receiver is "going to the ground" anything that receiver does that appears to be a "football move" to the everyday fan goes out the window so they have to hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground regardless if a knee or elbow hits the ground. There's no down by contact if it's determined a receiver is "going to the ground."
That is just more crap from Blandino.
When Dez lands his body is facing across the field and back toward the LOS. If he was just falling would one not assume he'd land on his left side or back? But he didn't Dez turned over 90 degrees
toward the goal line and took a step. During that step Shields tripped him which either caused the going to the ground or accelerated it. Dez then took the ball from two hands to his dominant hand, why? It isn't part of the catch process. He is falling toward his left side so if he is trying to brace his fall he should be moving the ball to his right hand. Nope Dez moves it to the hand closest to the goal line. And as we see in the case play where bracing and lunging end the catch process Dez braces with his right arm and pushes off his left foot. We know he pushes off because the angle of his knee changes from bent to straight and grass flies up from where his cleats dig in.
Now we have 3 potential acts common to the game here the turn and step, switching the ball, and the brace and lunge/reach. None of which
conclusively point to the act of falling. All seem to point to the act of attempting to advance the football. Now we go to what was called on the field, a catch and down by contact. Where is the smoking gun, the conclusive visual evidence that the turn, step, switch to the hand closest to the goal line, brace, push off and reach were not moves common to the game?
There isn't any. All you have is the ball coming loose. Now without conclusive visual evidence that is moot because there are not grounds to overturn the call...but wait, they do overturn it. We already have had a ball clearly and conclusively hit the ground in the first half but what happened? They upheld the Cobb catch...why? There was conclusive visual proof to the contrary. Now we have a play ruled a catch with no conclusive visual evidence to overturn and it is. What links these two calls? They both went against Dallas.
What proceeded this game? A summer party bus story where Blandino is seen partying with Cowboys' ownership. Controversial calls in the Detroit playoff game that publicly seem to favor Dallas. A resurfacing of the party bus story and Blandino getting questioned all week about being in the Boys pocket.
The game starts and you have two replays where Blandino has an opportunity to influence the review, one conclusively shows a non-catch but gets upheld anyway in favor of GB and the second does not have conclusive evidence but gets overturned anyway, again in favor of GB.
After the game we have mixed messages from Blandino and Seretore. Blandino's story changes multiple times from not enough of a football move to a football move wasn't needed...What? If he is head of the officials why is he confused? Why did he and Seretore talk about a football move right after the game if one wasn't needed to complete the 3 part process? Months pass and we hear there will be no rule change just a rewording to simplify things. When it comes out they did change the rule. We saw from the casebook play here:
A.R. 8.12 GOING TO THE GROUND—COMPLETE PASS First-and-10-on B25. A1 throws a pass to A2 who controls the ball and gets one foot down before he is contacted by B1. He goes to the ground as a result of the contact, gets his second foot down, and with the ball in his right arm, he braces himself at the three-yard line with his left hand and simultaneously lunges forward toward the goal line. When he lands in the end zone, the ball comes out. Ruling: Touchdown Team A. Kickoff A35. The pass is complete. When the receiver hits the ground in the end zone, it is the result of lunging forward after bracing himself at the three-yard line and is not part of the process of the catch. Since the ball crossed the goal line, it is a touchdown. If the ball is short of the goal line, it is a catch, and A2 is down by contact.
That the 3 part process continues during going to the ground and yet part C) goes to upright long enough. This is a major change because it now makes going to the ground the process instead of an exception when the process isn't met. This play has never been enforced this way in the past except one time...in GB. They altered the rule to fit the overturn and not to clarify the rule.
Blandino went into that GB game with an agenda. He twice influenced calls that both went against Dallas and neither were correct under the existing rules. He then went about making the rule fit the overturn to cover his butt.
