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

[KJJ]

Like I said. just make it up as you go. It changes every time it is called.

It hasn't changed with me or the league it was confirmed to be the correct call you just won't accept it. Get over it!

 

[foofighters]

Terrible way to look at this.

It's good to debate about this because there are catches/no-catches like this EVERY WEEK.

Why is it a terrible way to look at it? Just because my opinion is different than yours? I've moved and I have seen the call go both ways this year. That tells me it's pretty inconsistent but I can do nothing about it so I will focus on other things. I have different priorities, I guess, than to carry feel bads from a game that happened LAST YEAR.

 

[Wayne02]

Can't do it. Might have been our best shot at a SB.

If the Cowboys can find a way to sneak in to the playoffs, I think they would be one of the favorites to get to the Super Bowl this year.

 

[Everson24]

Blandino explained it's not the same as the Dez Bryant play because the receiver wasn't going to the ground.

I find the distinction questionable, as the receiver did end up going to the ground in the same manner Bryant was going to the ground - a defender prompted them both going to the ground. Neither would have fallen if not contacted by a defender.

If Tate is an established runner here, simply because he wouldn't have fallen if not contacted by a defender, the same logic should have applied to Bryant.

Tom Waddle on Mike and Mike said he couldn' believe that they ruled this a TD and Dez' catch incomplete. He stated that Dez took more steps than Tate. He then said it was totally ridiculous and I agree.

 

[Everson24]

If the Cowboys can find a way to sneak in to the playoffs, I think they would be one of the favorites to get to the Super Bowl this year.

Not if Dean Blandino and John Mara are still in power.

 

[loublue22]

There are a billion little movements that a player could make that could be interpreted either way. Was that a purposeful lunge he took, or was it because the defender was pushing him that way? Was that little twist a football move or was it momentum? No, the problem with the rule is that they injected something into it that is impossible to objectively measure.

Complete nonsense, I'm not talking about falling forward, I'm talking about reaching out with clear control. It's not difficult at all to tell if it happens.

 

[percyhoward]

And the refs ruled that he did not have possession. That's why it was ruled an interception. Then Blandino stepped in and changed it because he's a liar and a scumbag. Nobody, not even the officiating shill Perreira, thought it was a catch. But it got Blandinoed into being one.

I prefer the term "blandoozled."

 

[percyhoward]

It's VERY simple, the rules already state that if you make a "football move", then it's a catch. It just needs to be made a rule that reaching out with control of the ball (which is what Dez did and was the only reason he fumbled) is explicitly considered a football move.

Although the "football move" is no longer one of the requirements for becoming a runner, last year when it was still in use, the league was explicit in stating that reaching to break the plane was indeed considered a football move. Blandino got around this by claiming that Dez did not reach with two hands, or extend his arm toward the goal line.

Even though since Dez was falling more toward the sideline, he had to bend his elbow in order to get the ball closer to the goal line, and everyone knows you don't need to reach with two hands to break the plane.

 

[Hoofbite]

Once he gets that second foot down, it's in Blandino's hands.

After two feet down, all he has to do is hold onto the ball long enough to become a runner. How long that is ultimately depends on the judgment of the league's head of officiating, who oversees all reviews. Blandino said he had it long enough to become a runner. So he's a runner. Touchdown.

Even under last year's rules, the "football move" would not have applied to Tate's catch, as it occurred in the end zone, where no football move is needed. Last year, the question would have been, "Did he hold onto the ball long enough to make a football move, thus becoming a runner?" while this year it's shortened to "Did he hold onto the ball long enough to become a runner?" That makes sense in the end zone, where no football move is needed, and it applies to the famous Calvin Johnson play.

Dez's catch did not occur in the end zone, so under last year's rules, they did have to look for a football move. They said he didn't make enough of one, because he didn't reach with two hands, or extend his arm toward the goal line. Neither of those explanations makes sense, of course.

I don't think last years rules required the move, only the time afforded to have made such a move if necessary.

 

[pancakeman]

To be fair, Tate didn't go to the ground (or start to go) until after the ball was out of his hands and he tried to reach for it and tripped. This would all be after the point he would have been deemed a runner (apparently). Nobody is very clear on exactly when someone becomes a runner anymore, it's whatever the particular official wants it to be.

Plus, the whole idea of "becoming a runner" in the end zone makes no sense--where are you gonna run TO?

 

[SultanOfSix]

Blandino is a schill for his mafia masters. Someone should check his bank records.

Nothing will excuse that atrocity of a reversal that was made against Dez last year.

 

[percyhoward]

I don't think last years rules required the move, only the time afforded to have made such a move if necessary.

Technically no, because the play might occur in the end zone, where no football move is needed. But under the old rules, if the player wasn't in the end zone, the football move was effectively part 3 of the catch process, since if he had the time and the motive to make the move, he would.

 

[percyhoward]

Plus, the whole idea of "becoming a runner" in the end zone makes no sense--where are you gonna run TO?

Ha ha, that's true. Of course what they really mean is that a certain, unspecified amount of time has to pass after you get control and both feet down. Before, at least outside the end zone, something observable (the football move) proved that this time had passed. Now, there's literally nothing to observe. It's all the replay official's judgment as to whether the ball has been held onto long enough.

 

[TheDude]

Just make it 2 steps (feet) after securing the ball (not moving). Then make it that the ground can cause a fumble. If you cross the plane, TD...at the 50, fumble.

Still people will be pissed, but easier for objectivity

 

[burmafrd]

Just make it 2 steps (feet) after securing the ball (not moving). Then make it that the ground can cause a fumble. If you cross the plane, TD...at the 50, fumble.

Still people will be pissed, but easier for objectivity

If the football hits the ground and then comes out that should be ruled down. Frankly once the player hits the ground unless he has been touched he can still go, so only contact or football touching the ground should end the play.

 

[burmafrd]

bottom line is that if the NFL had the stones to admit that they should NEVER have tried to specify what a catch is in the calvin Johnson rule the whole mess would have been avoided.

Control of the ball should be what every thing is keyed on.

 

[TheDude]

If the football hits the ground and then comes out that should be ruled down. Frankly once the player hits the ground unless he has been touched he can still go, so only contact or football touching the ground should end the play.

If touched, any knee,elbow, package, should be down if ball then comes out. If not touched, then it is still possesion, but that would be a fumble

 

[Hoofbite]

Technically no, because the play might occur in the end zone, where no football move is needed. But under the old rules, if the player wasn't in the end zone, the football move was effectively part 3 of the catch process, since if he had the time and the motive to make the move, he would.

If he had the motive, he would. If he didn't, he probably would not. Catch a pass and fail to see a defender coming, the time can be there but motive may not be. I'm just saying, I think time was part 3 before and it still is now. From what I can remember from back when I looked at it, the change in the rule really just moved away from a "football move" to "establishing oneself as a runner", which is really no change at all.

A football move established oneself as a runner so the only difference is that they removed a little bit of conflict that arises when a player commits a football move while on the way to the ground. See Dez Bryant. You can commit a football move while going to the ground, but you most certainly are not an established runner when going to the ground.

The real change to the rule needs to be that it only applies to players for whom going to the ground was an absolute prerequisite to being able to make the catch. Full-on diving for a slightly overthrown pass, sliding to catch a ball that is low and away, and sideline tiptoe catches. I would even be okay with plays where forceable contact that takes a player who is airborn to the ground had begun prior to the receiver getting both feet down. For these plays, there really is no alternative. The player cannot remain upright so the rule should apply. For all other plays, the general requirements of a completed pass should be the only requirements in play.

Tate didn't even satisfy the general requirements for a catch, IMO. Even correcting the whole going to the ground issue, Tate's play is a fiasco all to itself.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Blandino explained it's not the same as the Dez Bryant play because the receiver wasn't going to the ground.

I find the distinction questionable, as the receiver did end up going to the ground in the same manner Bryant was going to the ground - a defender prompted them both going to the ground. Neither would have fallen if not contacted by a defender.

If Tate is an established runner here, simply because he wouldn't have fallen if not contacted by a defender, the same logic should have applied to Bryant.

Blandino is a Class A Moron.

It's embarrassing that I know the rule better than he does.

It's a catch because he secured the ball and advanced the football past. You can clearly see he advanced the football because he was short of the goal line and advanced it to break the plane.

That's how the rule was written. If yo secure it and advance the football, as long as the football has been advanced it is now a catch and can no longer be incomplete or intercepted. It can only be the receiver's possession and/or the receiver can fumble it.

It's the same with the Dez catch. Once it was advanced by Dez, it's 'an act common to the game' (aka a football move) and it's no longer incomplete.

Having this clown continue to insult our intelligence and continue to not understand the rule is bewildering. Roger Goodell must think his stand up routine is funny.





YR

 

[burmafrd]

Blandino is a Class A Moron.

It's embarrassing that I know the rule better than he does.

It's a catch because he secured the ball and advanced the football past. You can clearly see he advanced the football because he was short of the goal line and advanced it to break the plane.

That's how the rule was written. If yo secure it and advance the football, as long as the football has been advanced it is now a catch and can no longer be incomplete or intercepted. It can only be the receiver's possession and/or the receiver can fumble it.

It's the same with the Dez catch. Once it was advanced by Dez, it's 'an act common to the game' (aka a football move) and it's no longer incomplete.

Having this clown continue to insult our intelligence and continue to not understand the rule is bewildering. Roger Goodell must think his stand up routine is funny.







YR

the advanced part is BS and one of the reasons why its so screwed up. If you are in the end zone how can you advance? POSSESSION which should be based on controlling the ball should be the key- which is WHAT it was before the NFL got stupid with megatron. If you control the ball and have either both feet on the ground or part of the lower body then its a catch.