The NFL's Official Change to What Is A Catch: Dez Bryant play rule rewritten *merge*

[percyhoward]

As I have said over and over, they viewed him going to the ground, and this alone meant he would need to hold onto the ball until the end of the play.

It wasn't just "going to the ground" that they had to prove, TD. It was "going to the ground in the act of catching a pass."

These were the requirements for catching a pass in 2014.
a) secure control of the ball in hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
b) touch the ground in bounds with both feet or with any part of the body other than hands; and
c) maintain control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to be able to
perform any act common to the game

They knew they had to prove Dez had NOT completed all 3 parts before they could say he was still in the act of catching a pass.

Steratore:
“Although the receiver is possessing the football, he must maintain possession of that football throughout the entire process of the catch. In our judgment, he maintained possession but continued to fall and never had another act common to the game."

Steratore was not even disputing parts a and b. He was looking for part c, an act common to the game: Because if he sees it, it's a catch. If he doesn't see it, it means Dez was in the act of catching a pass. Obviously Dez was going to the ground, so that makes him a player going to the ground in the act of catching a pass. Now Steratore can apply the requirement of holding onto the ball through contact with the ground.

You think that Steratore's judgment that Dez was going to the ground in the act of catching the pass negates part C. Wrong. Steratore's judgment is based on part C. The rules said it has to be, and he was just following the rules, even if he came to the wrong conclusion.

Blandino (when asked if Bryant's reach could've been considered a football act):
“Yeah, absolutely. We looked at that aspect of it and in order for it to be a football move, it’s got to be more obvious than that, reaching the ball out with both hands, extending it for the goal line."

Again, Blandino doesn't dispute part a or b. He "absolutely" considered Dez's reach as a potential act common to the game, and explained why it wasn't, in his opinion. Again, he had to consider everything Dez did after he had control and two feet down. He was only asked about the reach. But the point is, this is where their decision lay. They make it sound much simpler by brushing past the things they were actually supposed to be looking at in order to apply "going to the ground in the act" in the first place.

You've said that part c was negated by the fact that Dez was going to the ground.

If so, why did these two men look for part c?

 

[percyhoward]

There is absolutely zero support for his elbow being the deciding factor when he was going to the bground. Because he'd have to control the ball to the ground. That is the gold standard for receivers going to the ground. Not the elbow, which is the essentially the same argument Percy is making.

You're 100% right that there is zero support for his elbow being a deciding factor. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass, it does not matter that his elbow (or knee) touch the ground before the ball comes loose. It's still an incomplete pass. He has to maintain control through contact with the ground.

That's why I'm not making any kind of point about the elbow. The only way I can think the elbow would matter is if somebody tried to say all the football moves came after the elbow was down (so that he was still in the act of catching the pass while going down), which I haven't seen anybody saying.

Once he goes to the ground, he has to maintain control.

Only if he's still in the act of catching the pass. Not if he made any kind of football move while going to the ground, because that ends it.

 

[DallasEast]

I'm looking forward to this season. The possibility exists that some receiver (hopefully NOT playing on our roster) will make a controversial catch or drop. Then the world will see Blandino dance around the brand new decision/non-decision like a cricket on a hot skillet. That will be good stuff. Heck, it'll probably happen multiple times. That guy is screwed but he only has himself to blame.

 

[5Stars]

I'm looking forward to this season. The possibility exists that some receiver (hopefully NOT playing on our roster) will make a controversial catch or drop. Then the world will see Blandino dance around the brand new decision/non-decision like a cricket on a hot skillet. That will be good stuff. Heck, it'll probably happen multiple times. That guy is screwed but he only has himself to blame.

Blandino has a face that I would like to bash in...! punk

 

[percyhoward]

I'm looking forward to this season. The possibility exists that some receiver (hopefully NOT playing on our roster) will make a controversial catch or drop. Then the world will see Blandino dance around the brand new decision/non-decision like a cricket on a hot skillet. That will be good stuff. Heck, it'll probably happen multiple times. That guy is screwed but he only has himself to blame.

He is in on every review, so it will probably come up several times in the first month. (Remember, this affects not only "catch vs. no catch," but also "defenseless receiver vs. runner.") He may think he's fixed it so that he doesn't have to explain his decision with anything more than an "in my opinion the player wasn't upright long enough," but just because it's easier for him to explain doesn't mean anybody has to like it.

After announcing that the standard would be the same, then having somebody else reveal that it wasn't, he's got even more explaining to do.

 

[DogFace]

And with the new requirement being "upright long enough" to complete the catch process, it will be impossible to second guess any ruling by a replay official. That's the beauty of no longer letting the football move be the determining factor.

When we look at the replay, everyone can see a football move and know the precise moment when it happens, so we know if the replay official missed it. With the new standard, there will be nothing to look for in the replay, and no precise moment to identify when the catch process was completed. We'll just sit and wait for the decision based on his opinion that can't even be criticized subjectively.

I can show the video of the Dez play, and say, "that's a football move." I can't show that same video and say, "that's upright long enough." Same goes for all the league's officials as they are being taught the new rule. In the past, whoever was teaching them could freeze the video and say, "this move right here completes the catch." Now, I can't even imagine what that lesson would be like. "OK, right about here it sort of feels like he's been upright long enough to me. Your opinion may differ, but don't worry. The head of officials in NY knows how long is long enough."

Yeah. You're right. Now there's no concrete evidence to show they were wrong or right. It's one big judgement play. Fans are just at the officials mercy to favor their team. Somehow I don't think this will work in our favor.

The wording in this rule couldn't be more vague. It leaves it almost all up to the judgment of the official. The wording: "Must remain upright long enough" and "maintain possession after his initial contact" are possibly the most ambiguous phrases they could've chosen.

 

[nathanlt]

You're 100% right that there is zero support for his elbow being a deciding factor. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass, it does not matter that his elbow (or knee) touch the ground before the ball comes loose. It's still an incomplete pass. He has to maintain control through contact with the ground.

That's why I'm not making any kind of point about the elbow. The only way I can think the elbow would matter is if somebody tried to say all the football moves came after the elbow was down (so that he was still in the act of catching the pass while going down), which I haven't seen anybody saying.


Only if he's still in the act of catching the pass. Not if he made any kind of football move while going to the ground, because that ends it.

through contact with the ground IS THE SAME as one elbow down. HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO MENTION IT?

The NFL has never expanded what "through contact with the ground means" IT DOES NOT MEAN ANY MORE THAN ONE ELBOW DOWN.

 

[percyhoward]

through contact with the ground IS THE SAME as one elbow down. HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO MENTION IT?

The NFL has never expanded what "through contact with the ground means" IT DOES NOT MEAN ANY MORE THAN ONE ELBOW DOWN.

If the ground knocks the ball loose, then that's not maintaining control. It's losing control. But since Dez had already caught it, then was tripped, it's OK for the ball to come loose. Ground can't cause a fumble. That's probably why they originally spotted the ball where he was down. Now if you want to say it was spotted there because that's where his elbow went down, that is indeed a possibility. But that's only assuming they rule that he caught it. Since they (erroneously) ruled that he hadn't completed the catch process, that meant the ball could not come loose, no matter whether the elbow was down or not. IOW, it was a catch, but not for the reason you're giving.

 

[nathanlt]

If the ground knocks the ball loose, then that's not maintaining control. It's losing control. But since Dez had already caught it, then was tripped, it's OK for the ball to come loose. Ground can't cause a fumble. That's probably why they originally spotted the ball where he was down. Now if you want to say it was spotted there because that's where his elbow went down, that is indeed a possibility. But that's only assuming they rule that he caught it. Since they (erroneously) ruled that he hadn't completed the catch process, the elbow doesn't matter.

Ok, I must have misunderstood you on that one. And yes, I agree he was down at the half yard line. The ball coming out after his right elbow hit the ground, then left elbow, means that he was down by contact TWICE before it came loose.

 

[nathanlt]

If the ground knocks the ball loose, then that's not maintaining control. It's losing control. But since Dez had already caught it, then was tripped, it's OK for the ball to come loose. Ground can't cause a fumble. That's probably why they originally spotted the ball where he was down. Now if you want to say it was spotted there because that's where his elbow went down, that is indeed a possibility. But that's only assuming they rule that he caught it. Since they (erroneously) ruled that he hadn't completed the catch process, that meant the ball could not come loose, no matter whether the elbow was down or not. IOW, it was a catch, but not for the reason you're giving.

I re-read your last line, and it was a catch 9 different ways. Every reason I've given is legitimate. The bolded part of your statement is NOT supported by the words in the rulebook.

through contact with the ground does not mean beyond an elbow or knee down. The reason it doesn't mean that? They've NEVER given a new definition. I hope that makes sense.

Bottom line, the comedian of officiating, Blandino could not write language that supported the concept he described afterwards. Therefore, he has NO LANGUAGE IN THE RULEBOOK to support an incompletion after down by contact.

 

[percyhoward]

The bolded part of your statement is NOT
supported by the words in the rulebook.

If he hadn't completed the catch process, nobody would be able to claim it was a catch. The football move(s) sealed the deal. Take away all the football moves, and it would have happened the way the official version says it happened.

Conversely, if you keep at least one football move (even if the first thing to touch the ground is the football, and the football comes loose), it's still a catch.

 

[KJJ]

 

[DogFace]

This person ^^^ is consistent and nothing else. Consistant terrible posts with a whiney crybaby tone. His childish threats of "banning those from his world " are creepy at best.

His lasted comparison in a thread to a peepshow operator was a revealing and odd association to make.
Someone asked a couple of weeks ago if he is a fan of our team. I said yes. I've rethought that. It seems unlikely. During our win streak this past season he was not heard from. As soon as we lost his pathetic whining came back. Disguised as concern.

I just wanted to express my disgusts with his/her posting. Etc.

 

[Joefrl]

Does my question make sense (i. e. That once his 3rd foot was down after possession that any rule dealing with possession should no longer apply.) ? I understand that with 1 foot down and maybe 2, that there has to be a rule to clarify catch or no catch, but that rule is not referenced with 10 steps so why was it referenced with 2 complete steps after possession?

You are correct, so long as the 3rd foot was down before he began to fall.

 

[Joefrl]

No, Johnson was in the end zone where there is no need for a football move, so the three-part catch process does not apply.

The three part process always applies, even if out of bounds or in the end zone. Only a runner scores a TD as soon as he crosses the goal line, not a receiver.

 

[Joefrl]

After 2 feet and control Dez took a step, so initial contact with left foot, right hand, wrist and elbow hit next, left knee hit, left forearm and then the ball touched the ground. By my count 6 body parts hit before the ball came loose, and if you want to eliminate hands and feet (per old rules), you still have right wrist and elbow, left knee and left forearm.

The entire body has to finish hitting the ground, not just the first few parts.

 

[Joefrl]

If this is indeed the official rule change, then it's obviously been tailored to this one play, which is going to cause a lot of confusion and controversy until they address it sensibly. A player can gain yards, reach a line of gain, fumble, throw passes, and do just about anything while not being upright.

But now, for the first time, he can't catch a pass. The Dez Bryant Rule. Lunacy.

He can catch a pass, he just has to hang on to it when he hits the ground, same as in baseball.

 

[Joefrl]

A football move is any act common to the game that isn't a part of the catch itself, but comes AFTER the catch. Switching the ball to one arm after a catch is a classic football move, for example. We also know from Blandino's explanations of previous similar plays that reaching for the goal line is a football move.

The football move is the thing that the player does that clinches the fact that he's no longer just trying to catch the ball.

All correct, except the time to make a football move is not only after the catch, but also after two feet are down inbounds and before he begins to fall.

 

[blindzebra]

All correct, except the time to make a football move is not only after the catch, but also after two feet are down inbounds and before he begins to fall.

He did, he turned and stepped.

So you joined just to post in this thread? I smell KJJ's second account...lol

 

[Kevinicus]

All correct, except the time to make a football move is not only after the catch, but also after two feet are down inbounds and before he begins to fall.

Welcome to the boards.

I think your interpretation is wrong on all of your posts, as has been demonstrated by countless posts (most effectively by Percy).

As for your reply to Zebra. The new rule says nothing about full body contact, just initial contact.