The Calvin Johnson Rule Does Not Apply

[ConstantReboot]

Others have mentioned this, but I think many are still unclear about it: Because he got both feet down and then was contacted, Dez did not have to make a football move.

The rule states that the receiver only needs to hold the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game. It's worded this way because if the player is tackled immediately after both feet are down, he obviously didn't have enough time to make a football move. That's why it doesn't say something like, "the player must hold the ball for two seconds," for example. Because of the tackle and the force of hitting the ground, the ball might not be in his possession for the prescribed amount of time, as was the case with Gresham's catch.

Well the rules does apply here. Rules are that he needs both feet in bounds with control of the ball. Dez did do that. He even took a 3rd step and leaped towards the endzone. He did that as well. He not only completed the catch but he also lunged towards the endzone which is a football move.

And another thing, where is the indisputable evidence that proves that was an incomplete pass?

The rules does apply here. But not the Calvin Johnson rule.

What the NFL is doing is diverting this as a Calvin Johnson rule when its not.

Thats a catch, pure and simple.

 

[TwoDeep3]

The angle of Dez' body could have been concluded that he was out of control and going to the ground.

I first maintained that the juggle by Dez was what made this a situation where he'd have to maintain control to the ground. But looking at the play on full screen in one of the videos provided - the reverse angle close-up - the league construed what all here call a football move was Dez falling.

Don't know if I agree with that assessment, but that gave the league the groundwork to say this was an incomplete pass.

If the booth saw his movement as one fluid fall forward, the two feet down means nothing. This is the same as falling out of bounds after a catch. Because if the ball is jarred loose from the receivers hands, and there is video evidence the ball certainly was, then the catch was nullified by the "fumble."

Quote all the rules you please, if the entire sequence was viewed as a continuation to the ground, regardless of two steps or twenty, if Dez allowed the ground to force the ball out of his hands, no matter what he did in the end zone by catching it, then that is an incomplete pass.

There is no other explanation for the call. They viewed Dez as falling, trying to get his feet under him, and thus the rule of ball security and the ground come into play.

 

[sb220]

Take solace that if the rule is to change, this fiasco will do it....but unfortunately for it to have been ruled a catch, the rule has to change

 

[JoeBoBBY]

The angle of Dez' body could have been concluded that he was out of control and going to the ground.

I first maintained that the juggle by Dez was what made this a situation where he'd have to maintain control to the ground. But looking at the play on full screen in one of the videos provided - the reverse angle close-up - the league construed what all here call a football move was Dez falling.

Don't know if I agree with that assessment, but that gave the league the groundwork to say this was an incomplete pass.

If the booth saw his movement as one fluid fall forward, the two feet down means nothing. This is the same as falling out of bounds after a catch. Because if the ball is jarred loose from the receivers hands, and there is video evidence the ball certainly was, then the catch was nullified by the "fumble."

Quote all the rules you please, if the entire sequence was viewed as a continuation to the ground, regardless of two steps or twenty, if Dez allowed the ground to force the ball out of his hands, no matter what he did in the end zone by catching it, then that is an incomplete pass.

There is no other explanation for the call. They viewed Dez as falling, trying to get his feet under him, and thus the rule of ball security and the ground come into play.

And I get that.

I guess my beef is, a football move to me, would be tryin gto get the ball into the endzone. Momentum was taking Dez that way anyway, and he "went with it". It was a choice he made. After ......After he got control of the ball and switched it to his other hand. He just kept doing all those football moves while he had momentum.

In the process of that momentum, he shifts his body , (and the ball) because the defender is in his way(leg kicks him) for a straight path to the goal line. (a football move).....and tries to go for the pylon...

Having said all that. Watched it over and over. gathered others opinions.

Yes, there is "some?" question if that was all continuous process or not. I get it. I get why GB threw the flag. They did it Out-Of-Desperation too.....

But to OVERTURN THE CALL ON THE FIELD, with that evidence.........was that irrefutable evidence???? i mean really.

Worst call ever made. !!! At the worst possible time. Against are Cowboys. How could that Replay official make that call? What would drive him to do that, because I will tell you what, it wasn't "fair play" that's for sure.

 

[TwoDeep3]

And I get that.

I guess my beef is, a football move to me, would be tryin gto get the ball into the endzone. Momentum was taking Dez that way anyway, and he "went with it". It was a choice he made. After ......After he got control of the ball and switched it to his other hand. He just kept doing all those football moves while he had momentum.

In the process of that momentum, he shifts his body , (and the ball) because the defender is in his way(leg kicks him) for a straight path to the goal line. (a football move).....and tries to go for the pylon...

Having said all that. Watched it over and over. gathered others opinions.

Yes, there is "some?" question if that was all continuous process or not. I get it. I get why GB threw the flag. They did it Out-Of-Desperation too.....

But to OVERTURN THE CALL ON THE FIELD, with that evidence.........was that irrefutable evidence???? i mean really.

Worst call ever made. !!! At the worst possible time. Against are Cowboys. How could that Replay official make that call? What would drive him to do that, because I will tell you what, it wasn't "fair play" that's for sure.

And I get this. I agree. Dez was trying to score.

But as the lead butt munch for the league said when he tried to make this call palatable, there was not enough of a football move for them to rule it a catch.

And in that gray area the league created by wanting offense to the point they totally screwed up pass interference by giving the offense all the breaks, then coming back and trying to corral the juggled catch due to being moved by the ground, they have left the refs, and the booth mouth breathers with such a vague interpretation of the rules, it's a wonder Dez wasn't called off sides on a kick off during this play.

Now here is the real point that will make a Cowboy fan irrational.

They will not fix this. They will further complicate it to distance themselves until the next team if screw, blued, and tattooed..

 

[tyke1doe]

That is not going by the rules. So yeah if you throw out the rules you can call it whatever you want.

The rules: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete."

You may not like the rule, but there it is. And it's been interpreted that way since 2010.

 

[percyhoward]

When a guy grabs the ball but cannot stay upright, with or without contact, he is now "going to the ground."

I refer you to Blandino's explanation of the Gresham catch.

To me, and the experts, Dez was clearly going to the ground after high pointing the ball. If he was, case closed. If he was not, you have an argument.

The field judge, who was obviously trained for his job, obviously saw Dez falling down.

He ruled it a catch and down by contact.

 

[tyke1doe]

Read the Percyhoward explanations at the top of this page. It will help you understand the rule. It also references the Gresham play from Cincinnati which demonstrats the inconsistent application of rules.

So is it going to help Mike Pereira understand the rule? Look, Cowboys fans are upset and feel the call was incorrect. And just like arm-chair lawyers do, they read laws and codes and then by reading them, that makes them understand the law as well as an actual lawyer. So too, fans read the rules and put their twist and understanding on what they believe to be the rule and try to argue exceptions.

We've already done that. The call is not going to be overturned. And those who hold the authority in this matter, and with that authority, the interpretation of the rules, say that Dez did not maintain possession when he hit the ground. Based on the way the rule is written it wasn't a catch.

Do I think it should have been a catch? Of course. But the way the authority who made the rule interpreted the rule, and based on almost all other cases where a similar play occurred and the ball touched the ground, the catch was invalidated because the ball hit the ground. I'm sure anyone can find an example or two that proves inconsistency. That shouldn't be surprising because part of being human is committing mistakes and errors. But also part of being human is growing in one's understanding of the rules as well as bias from fans who simply don't want to see anything other than their favorite team got jobbed.

We're all arguing matters of interpretation. But, really, none of our opinions matter because we aren't referees, and we don't supervise NFL referees.

So we're left with our anger and getting mad (not saying you're doing this so please don't take this personally) at others who don't join us in our opinions that Dez made that catch and shouldn't have had it invalidated.

And around and around we go.

 

[percyhoward]

The two main problems in the call are simple. One did Dez complete the three steps needed in the basic rule. The NFL and officals pretty much said that he completed A and B because they were talking about C. The implication by their statements is that if Dez makes a "football move" the pass is complete because he completed the process outlined in the basic rule of a completed catch. Since they determined, in their judgement, that he didn't make enough of a stretch for a football move, then you go to Item 1, which allows for an exception to the basic rules of catching a ball and means you don't have to complete a football move to have a completed catch as long as you maintain full control through contact with the ground.

I'll give that if you don't find the evidence of a football move the pass is incomplete, Dez lost control when he hit the ground and I think there's enough evidence of the ball on the turf to make it incomplete. The problem is that they set about the review, by their statements, in the wrong way. They set out to prove that Dez made a football move. That's not what they needed to do, they had to prove that Dez doesn't make a football move. Very thin distinction but makes it much harder on them to over turn the correct way. Either way any rule that makes something like that not be a catch is poorly worded at the best, and flat out wrong at the worst.

There's no real difference between the Gresham play and Dez's play: Catch, two feet down, contact by the defender, fall, ball comes loose.

Gresham's catch was confirmed by replay, and Blandino explained why it was ruled a catch on the field (based on two feet down, then contact), and explained that there wasn't enough evidence to overturn.

Dez's catch was overturned by replay, with no acknowledgement by Blandino of the contact, and no explanation of why it was ruled a catch on the field in the first place. Of course, any explanation of why it was ruled a catch on the field would include having to point out that there were two feet down, then contact.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

And I get this. I agree. Dez was trying to score.

But as the lead butt munch for the league said when he tried to make this call palatable, there was not enough of a football move for them to rule it a catch.

And in that gray area the league created by wanting offense to the point they totally screwed up pass interference by giving the offense all the breaks, then coming back and trying to corral the juggled catch due to being moved by the ground, they have left the refs, and the booth mouth breathers with such a vague interpretation of the rules, it's a wonder Dez wasn't called off sides on a kick off during this play.

Now here is the real point that will make a Cowboy fan irrational.

They will not fix this. They will further complicate it to distance themselves until the next team if screw, blued, and tattooed..

lol.

 

[loublue22]

The rules: "If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete."

You may not like the rule, but there it is. And it's been interpreted that way since 2010.

The main catch rule says that control of the ball with two feet in bounds and advancing the ball is a catch. How does Dez not meet all those requirements?

 

[percyhoward]

Gresham play was blown dead due to forward progress.

That's how we know he must have completed the catch process before he fell. There's no forward progress without possession of the ball first.

Remember, the field judge also ruled Dez's forward progress had been stopped. That's why the ball was spotted inside the one.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

That's how we know he must have completed the catch process before he fell. There's no forward progress without possession of the ball first.

right.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

That's how we know he must have completed the catch process before he fell. There's no forward progress without possession of the ball first.

But hey.

Janitorial Supply Salesmen with an extremely large ego, from hometown Pittsburgh , determines there was 100% with out any doubt, enough evidence, to over turn the call on the field....

somebody needs to be FIRED!!

 

[T-RO]

The chance for the league to review calls has nothing to do with "getting it right."

Instead it gives the league a chance to best engineer from on high the results it wants to see. They can bend, contrive, twist and spin whatever cover story they need. The game has become like boxing and the NBA. A fraud.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

The chance for the league to review calls has nothing to do with "getting it right."

Instead it gives the league a chance to best engineer from on high the results it wants to see. They can bend, contrive, twist and spin whatever cover story they need. The game has become like boxing and the NBA. A fraud.

that is the only conclusion I can come too after watching this disgusting debacle last Sunday.

Either that and/or Both. It allows part time guys from Pittsburgh to make the call and get backed by the NFL.

 

[speedkilz88]

Catch this past clip of Dean Blandino(Gresham & Gio Bernard plays):
THX to dadymat

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2014010500/2013/POST18/chargers@bengals#menu=gameinfo|contentId:0ap2000000310644&tab=recap&recap=fullstory

 

[sb220]

That's how we know he must have completed the catch process before he fell. There's no forward progress without possession of the ball first.

Remember, the field judge also ruled Dez's forward progress had been stopped. That's why the ball was spotted inside the one.

Gresham's fall doesn't matter because forward progress was called as soon as he was hit....play dead. Yeah its messed up how fast you can call forward progress one time and then let a guy get driven back twenty yards by ten guys the next play.

When the ground causes the stoppage of forward progress there are details that must be adhered to unfortunately.

 

[speedkilz88]

Gresham's fall doesn't matter because forward progress was called as soon as he was hit....play dead. Yeah its messed up how fast you can call forward progress one time and then let a guy get driven back twenty yards by ten guys the next play.

When the ground causes the stoppage of forward progress there are details that must be adhered to unfortunately.

As been pointed out countless times, not when a football move has already been made. Also when the feet were down prior to when the defender makes contact that makes them go to the ground.

 

[sb220]

As been pointed out countless times, not when a football move has already been made. Also when the feet were down prior to when the defender makes contact that makes them go to the ground.

these are points of opinion and judgement. Imo I think dez was going down. I saw him grab the ball off his shoulderpad and secure it. I didn't see enough to make me feel he was doing anything more than falling on the run. Im sorry for seeing it that way