Tate's Catch v. Dez's Non-catch Catch

[blindzebra]

It doesn't show proof of anything it's just a waste of time. You been copying and pasting all this the past 9 months you just keep beating a dead horse.

Then shut me up by showing a rules reference saying the 3 part process must be completed before a player starts going to the ground before the 2015 upright long enough. Give us a casebook play that shows this. Show us a rule change or point of emphasis from 2013 or 2014 to make this

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.

no longer the intended application of the rule.

You won't because you can't.

 

[blindzebra]

In the segment of the Patrick show that you posted, Blandino again explained that he was looking for evidence of a football move. Go to 1:34 of the video and listen to Blandino's response to Patrick's question about the football move:

"The football move has to be an obvious, overt act. He has to lunge or dive for the goal line. We looked at that, and it's all his momentum, it's all one process. ...We talked about "Was this an act common to the game?" We didn't feel that this was an overt act of gathering himself and lunging for the goal line."

Again, Blandino says that they looked specifically at what Dez did in order to determine whether it was a football move -- an act common to the game.
Why would they do this if it didn't matter? (You still haven't answered.)

He won't because he can't.

He is wrong and anyone with an IQ above a rock knows it.

 

[KJJ]

In the segment of the Patrick show that you posted, Blandino again explained that he was looking for evidence of a football move. Go to 1:34 of the video and listen to Blandino's response to Patrick's question about the football move:

"The football move has to be an obvious, overt act. He has to lunge or dive for the goal line. We looked at that, and it's all his momentum, it's all one process. ...We talked about "Was this an act common to the game?" We didn't feel that this was an overt act of gathering himself and lunging for the goal line."

Again, Blandino says that they looked specifically at what Dez did in order to determine whether it was a football move -- an act common to the game.
Why would they do this if it didn't matter? (You still haven't answered.)

I answered the question you're just looking to argue like you always do. I told you they look at every aspect of a play and they looked to see if Dez made a so called "football move" but they determined he had to be "upright" with a solid base to be capable of making a "football move." They said his momentum was taking him to the ground therefore he couldn't make a "football move." That's what has everyone confused and frustrated because they never said anything about a receiver having to be "upright" to be capable of making a "football move" until this play.

Blandinio never mentioned it in his first interview on the play but he began to tweak his comments in subsequent interviews adding the word "upright." I've explained this thoroughly and stop wasting my time trying to prolong this never ending argument with the same questions. If you can't comprehend or accept my answers then drill Blandino on his twitter account instead of asking me to get inside his head on why he said this and why he said that. Go ask him!

 

[DandyDon52]

I didn't see clear possession with Tate the ball came out too quick in my opinion to establish control and possession. The call on the field of an int should've never been changed because it wasn't conclusive at least that's how I saw it. I saw clear possession with Dez he just didn't hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground. Under the rule a receiver who's "going to the ground" must hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground to have possession. That part of the rule needs to be tweaked.

tate had poss, and as soon as the ball crossed the goal, or even a little over the white line it was a td.
After that it doesnt matter if the ball is dropped or knocked out.
The guy pulled the ball out after it was over the line.
the video in op is clear.
With dez if he had possession, then hits the ground and ball moves, then it should still be a catch.
If they have poss. and then hit the ground and ball comes out on other plays it is not a fumble, so that doesnt jive with the catch rule.

 

[KJJ]

tate had poss, and as soon as the ball crossed the goal, or even a little over the white line it was a td.
After that it doesnt matter if the ball is dropped or knocked out.
The guy pulled the ball out after it was over the line.
the video in op is clear.
With dez if he had possession, then hits the ground and ball moves, then it should still be a catch.
If they have poss. and then hit the ground and ball comes out on other plays it is not a fumble, so that doesnt jive with the catch rule.

I never saw clear possession with Tate and neither did a few other experts including Mike Pereira. It all comes down to judgement and arguing calls aren't going to accomplish anything it's a waste of time.

 

[percyhoward]

They determined he had to be "upright" with a solid base to be capable of making a "football move." They said his momentum was taking him to the ground therefore he couldn't make a "football move."

Please post those quotes, along with a link.

 

[KJJ]

Please post those quotes, along with a link.

Around the 1:20 mark of the video I posted Blandino talked about Dez having to be upright. Yesterday on NFL Netwok in the under review segment Blandino talked about the differences between Dez's play and Tate's play and pointed out that Tate was "upright" and not going to the ground and that Dez's momentum was taking him to the ground. Blandino has discussed Dez's play many times over the past few months and I'm not about to dig up every comment he's made to try and satisfy you. Shouldn't you be tabulating passer rating's? lol

 

[knightrider94]

CJ isn't much of a talker, but I can understand his thinking here:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...nson-says-no-one-understands-the-catch-rules/

 

[KJJ]

When Blandino explained Tate's play yesterday he said Tate was upright, turned and because he had a solid base was able to establish himself as a runner. If you listen to the video I posted Blandino said had Dez been upright there would've been no problem but because he was "going to the ground" the steps he took didn't matter and a knee touching doesn't matter.

 

[percyhoward]

Around the 1:20 mark of the video I posted Blandino talked about Dez having to be upright.

You stay away from direct quotes and prefer to paraphrase because you can't find any quotes that support what you claim. Here's why you didn't transcribe what he said. Patrick asked Blandino about the three steps, and Blandino said "You gotta forget about the steps when he's going to the ground. If he's upright and he takes three steps, there's absolutely no problem. But when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you take two steps, a knee, that's all considered one process." If you were claiming that going to the ground trumps the three steps that Dez took, there would be your proof.

One problem: that's not what you're claiming. You're trying to say that going to the ground trumps the football move. So keep listening to his answer, because he specifically addresses the football move that you say didn't have any effect on the reversal.

"But when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you take two steps, a knee, that's all considered one process. And the football move has to be an obvious, overt act. He has to lunge or dive for the goal line. We looked at that, and it's all his momentum, it's all one process. ...We talked about "Was this an act common to the game?" We didn't feel that this was a clear overt act of him gathering himself and lunging for the goal line."

To break it down even further, Blandino does say "you gotta forget about the steps," and he does not say "you gotta forget about the football move." In fact, he outlines exactly what constitutes a football move, and says he did not see Dez meet that requirement. He does not say "when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you make a football move." He says that it does matter, that he did look for one, and that Dez did not perform one. He says, in that video, that Dez did not lunge or dive for the goal line.

He does not say that going to the ground trumps the lunge or dive, he says that he was specifically looking for the lunge or dive, and that it did not happen.

 

[blindzebra]

You stay away from direct quotes and prefer to paraphrase because you can't find any quotes that support what you claim. Here's why you didn't transcribe what he said. Patrick asked Blandino about the three steps, and Blandino said "You gotta forget about the steps when he's going to the ground. If he's upright and he takes three steps, there's absolutely no problem. But when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you take two steps, a knee, that's all considered one process." If you were claiming that going to the ground trumps the three steps that Dez took, there would be your proof.

One problem: that's not what you're claiming. You're trying to say that going to the ground trumps the football move. So keep listening to his answer, because he specifically addresses the football move that you say didn't have any effect on the reversal.

"But when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you take two steps, a knee, that's all considered one process. And the football move has to be an obvious, overt act. He has to lunge or dive for the goal line. We looked at that, and it's all his momentum, it's all one process. ...We talked about "Was this an act common to the game?" We didn't feel that this was a clear overt act of him gathering himself and lunging for the goal line."

To break it down even further, Blandino does say "you gotta forget about the steps," and he does not say "you gotta forget about the football move." In fact, he outlines exactly what constitutes a football move, and says he did not see Dez meet that requirement. He does not say "when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you make a football move." He says that it does matter, that he did look for one, and that Dez did not perform one. He says, in that video, that Dez did not lunge or dive for the goal line.

He does not say that going to the ground trumps the lunge or dive, he says that he was specifically looking for the lunge or dive, and that it did not happen.

The fact that he says the steps don't matter and then goes into a football move proves he is an idiot. For a move common to the game to matter there has to be two feet down, in other words, steps. For a move common to the game to matter he is saying the 3 step process needs to be met.

So which is it? For the going to the ground to be the deciding factor none of the catch process comes into play. He can't remove parts A) or B) but look for C). It is beyond idiotic. He is adding and subtracting parts of rules, mixing them together, and making a call. He is either a complete idiot making a travesty of the game or he is messing with games and deciding outcomes and making a travesty of the game. In either case he should have been fired a long time ago.

 

[pancakeman]

If the NFL can screw over the Cowboys, they will - no matter what rules they have to circumvent.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

 

[Nightman]

You stay away from direct quotes and prefer to paraphrase because you can't find any quotes that support what you claim. Here's why you didn't transcribe what he said. Patrick asked Blandino about the three steps, and Blandino said "You gotta forget about the steps when he's going to the ground. If he's upright and he takes three steps, there's absolutely no problem. But when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you take two steps, a knee, that's all considered one process." If you were claiming that going to the ground trumps the three steps that Dez took, there would be your proof.

One problem: that's not what you're claiming. You're trying to say that going to the ground trumps the football move. So keep listening to his answer, because he specifically addresses the football move that you say didn't have any effect on the reversal.

"But when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you take two steps, a knee, that's all considered one process. And the football move has to be an obvious, overt act. He has to lunge or dive for the goal line. We looked at that, and it's all his momentum, it's all one process. ...We talked about "Was this an act common to the game?" We didn't feel that this was a clear overt act of him gathering himself and lunging for the goal line."

To break it down even further, Blandino does say "you gotta forget about the steps," and he does not say "you gotta forget about the football move." In fact, he outlines exactly what constitutes a football move, and says he did not see Dez meet that requirement. He does not say "when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you make a football move." He says that it does matter, that he did look for one, and that Dez did not perform one. He says, in that video, that Dez did not lunge or dive for the goal line.

He does not say that going to the ground trumps the lunge or dive, he says that he was specifically looking for the lunge or dive, and that it did not happen.

I think you finally nailed it down.

Upright trumps process, just needs 2 steps but no football move
Football move trumps going to ground but still must have 2 steps
Going to ground must be part of the process and it supersedes steps but not football move

 

[KJJ]

You stay away from direct quotes and prefer to paraphrase because you can't find any quotes that support what you claim. Here's why you didn't transcribe what he said. Patrick asked Blandino about the three steps, and Blandino said "You gotta forget about the steps when he's going to the ground. If he's upright and he takes three steps, there's absolutely no problem. But when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you take two steps, a knee, that's all considered one process." If you were claiming that going to the ground trumps the three steps that Dez took, there would be your proof.

One problem: that's not what you're claiming. You're trying to say that going to the ground trumps the football move. So keep listening to his answer, because he specifically addresses the football move that you say didn't have any effect on the reversal.

"But when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you take two steps, a knee, that's all considered one process. And the football move has to be an obvious, overt act. He has to lunge or dive for the goal line. We looked at that, and it's all his momentum, it's all one process. ...We talked about "Was this an act common to the game?" We didn't feel that this was a clear overt act of him gathering himself and lunging for the goal line."

To break it down even further, Blandino does say "you gotta forget about the steps," and he does not say "you gotta forget about the football move." In fact, he outlines exactly what constitutes a football move, and says he did not see Dez meet that requirement. He does not say "when you're going to the ground, it doesn't matter if you make a football move." He says that it does matter, that he did look for one, and that Dez did not perform one. He says, in that video, that Dez did not lunge or dive for the goal line.

He does not say that going to the ground trumps the lunge or dive, he says that he was specifically looking for the lunge or dive, and that it did not happen.

You wanted the word "upright" and I provided a video of Blandino using the word "upright" saying had Dez been upright there would have been no problem with the play but because his momentum was taking him to the ground the steps he took didn't matter nor did his knee touching the ground. I'm not saying "going to the ground" trumps a "football move" that was Pereira weeks after the play telling Dan Hellie that. Pereira's explanations of the play varied with each interview just like Blandino's because both were interviewed a number of times on the play and were trying to make it as concise as possible. Hellie said to the casual fan it looked like Dez performed a "football move" and Pereira said he understands that but that everything Dez did was "trumped" because he was "going to the ground" therefore he must hang on to the ball through the contact of the ground.

Yesterday Blandino talked about the differences between the Dez and Tate play and said Tate was "upright" and had a solid base therefore he was able to become a runner. He again said Dez wasn't "upright" and because his momentum was taking him to the ground he couldn't become a runner and was required to hang on to the ball through the contact of the ground to complete the process. I told you back in Jan the league would do away with the so called "football move" because it's confusing to the fans, players and even the experts can't explain to anyones satisfaction. Pereira isn't new to sticking his foot in his mouth just a couple of weeks ago he made a gaff during a game about a call and had to backtrack.

The Dez play is the best thing that ever happened for you because it gives you an extra 2-3 hrs each day to waste your time arguing about something other than passer ratings. You and Zebra keep trying to drag me back into this claiming I'm avoiding questions and that I'm wrong because you both love arguing this topic with a passion. You don't have Blandino or the league to argue with claiming they're all wrong so you turn to me to keep you entertained. lol Nothing destroys a FANS credibility more than saying the experts and league got it all wrong especially regarding a call that was CONFIRMED by the league to be the correct ruling. Unless you can come up with an angle we haven't already argued (good luck with that) I'm done with this. I'm interested in this season and if you and a few others want to go another 20+ pages on a ruling you spent the entire offseason arguing about in at least 15 other threads go ahead.

 

[percyhoward]

The fact that he says the steps don't matter and then goes into a football move proves he is an idiot. For a move common to the game to matter there has to be two feet down, in other words, steps. For a move common to the game to matter he is saying the 3 step process needs to be met.

So which is it? For the going to the ground to be the deciding factor none of the catch process comes into play. He can't remove parts A) or B) but look for C). It is beyond idiotic. He is adding and subtracting parts of rules, mixing them together, and making a call. He is either a complete idiot making a travesty of the game or he is messing with games and deciding outcomes and making a travesty of the game. In either case he should have been fired a long time ago.

Yes, he's obviously putting cart before horse. Under the rules as they existed at the time, he first had to determine whether the catch process has been completed, before concluding that the player was a receiver going to the ground. If the catch process is completed, then he's not a receiver anymore, he's a runner.

My point to the other poster was to show that the section of the interview that he referred to did not support his claim. While Blandino said he was not counting steps, he said he was looking for a football move. He should also have been counting steps, because that's part of his job on that play. And Blandino absolutely knows that he has to count the steps, because that's how he himself explained the catch process in a segment on NFLN the year before.

 

[LandryFan]

I'm not saying "going to the ground" trumps a "football move" that was Pereira weeks after the play telling Dan Hellie that. Pereira's explanations of the play varied with each interview just like Blandino's because both were interviewed a number of times on the play and were trying to make it as concise as possible. Hellie said to the casual fan it looked like Dez performed a "football move" and Pereira said he understands that but that everything Dez did was "trumped" because he was "going to the ground" therefore he must hang on to the ball through the contact of the ground.

You're misunderstanding the rule. Dez did everything you said the problem was he was "going to the ground" and that trumps control of the ball, a football move, elbow/knee touching the ground and everything else. When a receiver is "going to the ground" they MUST hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground and Dez didn't despite all the other things he did that would normally make it a legal catch. There's a PROCESS a receiver has to complete when "going to the ground" and Dez didn't complete the process. The reason they called it a catch on the field was because the ref never saw the ball come loose when it contacted the ground it took replay to see it.

Both of the bolded parts above are from you, the second one being a part of your response to me in trying to explain why the catch was overturned. Not trying to be mean, but I'm confused as to whether going to the ground trumps a football move.

 

[slick325]

Is it possible that the League blew both calls and really have no clue what constitutes a catch at all?

 

[KJJ]

You're misunderstanding the rule. Dez did everything you said the problem was he was "going to the ground" and that trumps control of the ball, a football move, elbow/knee touching the ground and everything else. When a receiver is "going to the ground" they MUST hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground and Dez didn't despite all the other things he did that would normally make it a legal catch.

Both of the bolded parts above are from you, the second one being a part of your response to me in trying to explain why the catch was overturned. Not trying to be mean, but I'm confused as to whether going to the ground trumps a football move.

You're confused period. What you bolded is what I heard Pereira say weeks after the play I'm relaying what's been said. I'm going by the ever changing explanations from Blandino, Pereira and other experts. Both Blandino and Pereira have been asked to explain the ruling a number of times and their explanations have changed slightly each time to try and better explain the ruling the only thing that's remained consistent in their explanations is that Dez was "going to the ground" therefore he must hang onto the ball through the contact of the ground.

 

[blindzebra]

You wanted the word "upright" and I provided a video of Blandino using the word "upright" saying had Dez been upright there would have been no problem with the play but because his momentum was taking him to the ground the steps he took didn't matter nor did his knee touching the ground. I'm not saying "going to the ground" trumps a "football move" that was Pereira weeks after the play telling Dan Hellie that. Pereira's explanations of the play varied with each interview just like Blandino's because both were interviewed a number of times on the play and were trying to make it as concise as possible. Hellie said to the casual fan it looked like Dez performed a "football move" and Pereira said he understands that but that everything Dez did was "trumped" because he was "going to the ground" therefore he must hang on to the ball through the contact of the ground.

Yesterday Blandino talked about the differences between the Dez and Tate play and said Tate was "upright" and had a solid base therefore he was able to become a runner. He again said Dez wasn't "upright" and because his momentum was taking him to the ground he couldn't become a runner and was required to hang on to the ball through the contact of the ground to complete the process. I told you back in Jan the league would do away with the so called "football move" because it's confusing to the fans, players and even the experts can't explain to anyones satisfaction. Pereira isn't new to sticking his foot in his mouth just a couple of weeks ago he made a gaff during a game about a call and had to backtrack.

The Dez play is the best thing that ever happened for you because it gives you an extra 2-3 hrs each day to waste your time arguing about something other than passer ratings. You and Zebra keep trying to drag me back into this claiming I'm avoiding questions and that I'm wrong because you both love arguing this topic with a passion. You don't have Blandino or the league to argue with claiming they're all wrong so you turn to me to keep you entertained. lol Nothing destroys a FANS credibility more than saying the experts and league got it all wrong especially regarding a call that was CONFIRMED by the league to be the correct ruling. Unless you can come up with an angle we haven't already argued (good luck with that) I'm done with this. I'm interested in this season and if you and a few others want to go another 20+ pages on a ruling you spent the entire offseason arguing about in at least 15 other threads go ahead.

Ah yes fans again...you are a fan too right?

The point is...and you keep ignoring it...upright never existed in the rule until they changed it in 2015. So to use that only weakens your argument. This play happened under the 2014 rules where if you have 2 feet down, control, and have time to or make a move common to the game you are not a receiver you are a runner. Dez had control, Dez had 3 feet, a knee and an elbow down in bounds, Dez turned, stepped, switched the ball, braced, pushed off, and reached...none of which are part of catching the ball, all of which are moves common to the game. DEZ COMPLETED THE THREE STEP CATCH PROCESS AND WAS A RUNNER DOWN BY CONTACT UNDER THE RULES AS THEY EXISTED IN 2014!

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.

You keep saying the league was right because they said so, yet their explanation changed multiple times and required changing the freaking rule to justify the call they made.

And just how did we drag you into it? Did Percy put a gun to your head as I logged you in and clicked on the thread? You are the one that loves to keep it going because that is your MO, join any topic and take the anti-Cowboys stance and keep repeating the same crap over and over and when someone takes offense you call them a stupid FAN.

There is an underside of a bridge somewhere missing you.

 

[percyhoward]

Dez did everything you said the problem was he was "going to the ground" and that trumps a football move.

I'm not saying "going to the ground" trumps a "football move"