The Calvin Johnson Rule Does Not Apply

[locked&loaded]

i know the rule, you apparently don't..I explained it to you, the NFL explained it to you and you still ignore the ruling...Dez must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of the catch when he goes to the ground,

you are being dense. How thick is your skull.

5 yards, 3 steps, lunge for endzone. Process complete. This is where we rule it down, ground cant cause a fumble.

 

[dallasfan4lizife]

well he caught it at the 6 and the ball was spotted inside the 1

so he made a bit of progress I'd say

No no no. One of the most athletically gifted football players clumsily fell forward 15 feet towards the goal line while extending his body by complete accident. Therefore not a football move ~ steratore

 

[Deep_South]

The one thing it absolutely could not be was a fumble. His elbow hit before the ball came out. If it was a catch, he was down by contact. If it was incomplete, it was incomplete.

We were discussing a hypothetical in which a player caught a ball and went ten yards, tripped, went to the ground, and the ball popped out.

 

[The Quest for Six]

you are being dense. How thick is your skull.

5 yards, 3 steps, lunge for endzone. Process complete. This is where we rule it down, ground cant cause a fumble.

that didn't happen, if you want to believe that, have had it, but it didn't happen

 

[tyke1doe]

Which he did. Attempting to advance the ball made him a runner. That and the fact he was actually running

Uh, no. He wasn't running. He was in the process of catching the ball and in so doing he tries to stretch to score and, unfortunately, makes contact with the ground with the ball.
The explanation is very clear. We're just mad because it went against us.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

i know the rule, you apparently don't..I explained it to you, the NFL explained it to you and you still ignore the ruling...Dez must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of the catch when he goes to the ground,

You consistently have contradicted yourself by saying that there was no football being made and I showed you that it did.

And in the Denver-Indy game there was a fumble and Mike Carey said that it should be a fumble and the refs after review said 'no fumble.'

Or how about in 2005 when Troy Polamalu intercepted Peyton Manning in the AFC Championship game...rolled on the ground and when he got up he kneed the ball loose and they called it an 'incomplete pass.'

The NFL originally agreed with the rule and then a week later stated that they looked at the play and it should have been ruled a catch and then a fumble.

I'm not ignoring the ruling because *you* are only reading 1-part of the rule and have completely ignored what constitutes 'the process of the catch' and when the receiver has made a catch and is now in the process of trying to advance the ball like a runner.

It's painfully obvious that you do not understand the rule and are being obtuse about it. And it's also been PROVEN that the NFL has agreed with rules in the past and then turned back and said 'we made a mistake, that's not the rule.'




YR

 

[TheCount]

If he is trying to score you are acknowledging that it is a catch because that act is a football move and defined as such in your sacred rule book. Along with a lot of other crap that is bad for the game.

Yes, my sacred rule book. Some of y'all are losing your damn minds over this thing and turning friends into enemies in your mind.

 

[links18]

And herein lies the problem with the NFL product today: Nobody knows what the rules actually are, including the refs apparently. The ball touched the ground with his freaking arm underneath it
The ground did not help him maintain control. He didn't even need to have made a football move. It was a catch either way.

Of course, that's just my opinion. I am sure someone will chime in to tell me I have no idea what I am talking about.

 

[JD_KaPow]

that didn't happen, if you want to believe that, have had it, but it didn't happen

Now we're getting to the crux of the matter. You believe that Dez just fell. I and others do not, and find it incomprehensible that somebody could watch that play and believe that.

 

[percyhoward]

"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. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."

That's the rule that all the talking heads are pointing to as justification for the reversal. Just one problem. It only applies in the case of a receiver going to the ground in the act of catching a pass. It doesn't apply if the catch is made before the player goes to the ground, as this catch was.

 

[MagicMan]

Everybody thought he had it including those who won't admit it.

Including the official who had the best look at it right there......it was ruled a catch on the field. So he had the best look of all this than the NY bozos who are now trying to hide behind the CJ rule which does not apply and the "act common to the game"-----guess they never seen someone diving to the end zone before.

 

[Jenky]

Merrill Hodge thinks its a great catch with the intent of lunging for the TD. He also says there's no clear shot of the ball hitting the ground and says it pops up, with Dez regaining possession for a TD.

 

[Brooksey]

falling towards the end zone off balance isn't a football move...

Reaching out for the plane is.

 

[tyke1doe]

He was not just falling towards the endzone. He made a football move by digging in his left foot into the field for leverage to leap for a TD.

But it was continuous with the catch. If he had caught the pass, secured it, stops and then starts running towards the end zone, then if the ball comes out it's still a catch, assuming he recovers it.

But that's not what happens. Almost immediately after catching it, his motion carries him to the ground. You can't tell whether he's stretching out or whether he's falling as a result of the catch.

It was ruled correctly, according to the rules.

 

[Dave_in-NC]

You consistently have contradicted yourself by saying that there was no football being made and I showed you that it did.

And in the Denver-Indy game there was a fumble and Mike Carey said that it should be a fumble and the refs after review said 'no fumble.'

Or how about in 2005 when Troy Polamalu intercepted Peyton Manning in the AFC Championship game...rolled on the ground and when he got up he kneed the ball loose and they called it an 'incomplete pass.'

The NFL originally agreed with the rule and then a week later stated that they looked at the play and it should have been ruled a catch and then a fumble.

I'm not ignoring the ruling because *you* are only reading 1-part of the rule and have completely ignored what constitutes 'the process of the catch' and when the receiver has made a catch and is now in the process of trying to advance the ball like a runner.

It's painfully obvious that you do not understand the rule and are being obtuse about it. And it's also been PROVEN that the NFL has agreed with rules in the past and then turned back and said 'we made a mistake, that's not the rule.'

I hope they don't in this instance. That would really suck.




YR

 

[JD_KaPow]

Including the official who had the best look at it right there......it was ruled a catch on the field. So he had the best look of all this than the NY bozos who are now trying to hide behind the CJ rule which does not apply and the "act common to the game"-----guess they never seen someone diving to the end zone before.

And the hilarious part is that "act common to the game" IS NOT PART OF THE CJ RULE. If you're talking about one, you're not talking about the other.

 

[plymkr]

OK, let's say he goes ten yard, trips and lands on the ground and the ball pops out....

Then it's obviously not a catch. What you have to do is catch the ball maintain possession until the game is over and bring the ball to practice the next day. If your a cowboy that's the ruling. I'm personally thankful for all the catches that they didn't review. Green Bay players, especially Cobb, apparently can use the ground as a spare arm if needed

 

[tyke1doe]

Merrill Hodge thinks its a great catch with the intent of lunging for the TD. He also says there's no clear shot of the ball hitting the ground and says it pops up, with Dez regaining possession for a TD.

I love how the guys who we think are haters and mediots are now worth quoting when they see things our way.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Uh, no. He wasn't running. He was in the process of catching the ball and in so doing he tries to stretch to score and, unfortunately, makes contact with the ground with the ball.
The explanation is very clear. We're just mad because it went against us.

It's not clear and you know it.

It says 'thru the process of the catch.' But you completely ignore what constitutes 'the process of the catch.' You talk about a 'football move' and then act like a guy that extends his arm AND extends his body is not making a football move to advance the ball to the end zone.

I'm tired of people stating that it is the CJ Rule when the CJ Rule was for a player in the end zone. It's really a question of when the 'process of the catch' is completed and going from a receiver to a player that is advancing the ball..




YR

 

[Dave_in-NC]

But it was continuous with the catch. If he had caught the pass, secured it, stops and then starts running towards the end zone, then if the ball comes out it's still a catch, assuming he recovers it.

But that's not what happens. Almost immediately after catching it, his motion carries him to the ground. You can't tell whether he's stretching out or whether he's falling as a result of the catch.

It was ruled correctly, according to the rules.

So being athletically gifted screwed him. Nice.