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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zimmy Lives

Zimmy Lives

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,165
Reaction score
4,631
Joefrl said:
The rule is left open to interpretation, because it is poorly written. One has to interpret it some way, and the only way to do it is to use "common sense". Or should I say "logic", because it is illogical to think 8-3-item 1 would not apply. Think of Dez as an outfielder. As soon as the ball hit the ground the ump would wave off the catch, even if he never lost control!
Click to expand...

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/4mcvWJ308xqWOm4Utn0PZQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NQ--/http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/uD74yEGDrCgPH9CfEUWHYQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/https://lh4.***BROKEN***/fJt1y-ZIEyU4ZqUnCSQ1zHKeLFpqo5Eq6Ff-OQe2dD-4bCMbw5imO8qIpuI1qFNyl1MyX_H4bXcPbJbP4YFW62mLr2svmOXU2Q7pqlUUfTCZczK1kQpmr93OBui_JhUCA3g0tvw
 
percyhoward

percyhoward

Research Tool
Messages
17,062
Reaction score
21,861
nathanlt said:
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RECEIVER AND RUNNER, STOP DISCUSSING IT. DOWN BY CONTACT APPLIES TO BOTH.
Click to expand...

Before you go any further, we are NOT talking about WR vs RB here. The NFL calls someone who has established full possession of the football (including by having completed the 3-part catch process) a "runner." A player who has been targeted with a pass but has not completed the 3-part catch process is a " receiver."
 
percyhoward

percyhoward

Research Tool
Messages
17,062
Reaction score
21,861
Joefrl said:
That's illogical, either a receiver or a runner can reach with the football.
Click to expand...
A receiver is a player who is still in the act of catching a pass. Only after completing this process does he become a runner. You've no doubt heard the term "establishing oneself as a runner." Obviously, we are not talking about positions, because even a RB has to complete the catch process to establish himself as a runner.
 
percyhoward

percyhoward

Research Tool
Messages
17,062
Reaction score
21,861
Joefrl said:
C can take place out of bounds, in the end zone, anywhere! Notice it does not say C has to take place in the field of play, your brain is adding that in!
Click to expand...
Please explain how a player who has completed A and B, and is a) out of bounds, or b)in the opponent's end zone is supposed to make a football move. Sometimes there is no TIME or no NEED for a football move, so the player is considered to be going to the ground in the act of catching a pass. That's why they looked for part C FIRST (the football move), to justify their judgment that Dez was going to the ground.

They determined that there was no TIME for Dez to make a football move, so they applied the part of the rule that applies to players going to the ground in the act of catching a pass.
 
Last edited:
blindzebra

blindzebra

Well-Known Member
Messages
12,560
Reaction score
4,451
percyhoward said:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-netwo...00000246515/Calvin-Johnson-rule-strikes-again

I learned most of what I know about this topic from Blandino in this clip from 2013. Skip ahead to the 1:15 mark. Highly recommended for anybody who can't answer the question, "Why did they look for a football move?"

(If you aren't sure whether that applies to you, it probably does.);)
Click to expand...

Anyone that argues that falling trumps the 3 part process now is a complete moron. That is game, set and match my friend.
:bow:
 
nathanlt

nathanlt

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,042
Reaction score
3,045
percyhoward said:
Before you go any further, we are NOT talking about WR vs RB here. The NFL calls someone who has established full possession of the football (including by having completed the 3-part catch process) a "runner." A player who has been targeted with a pass but has not completed the 3-part catch process is a " receiver."
Click to expand...

I am fully aware of the NFL's distinction between a WR as a runner, and a WR as a receiver going to the ground. Because of the INADEQUATE phrase, "throughout the process of of contacting the ground" the only NFL sanctioned definition, "down by contact" replaces it.

Therefore, Dez as a WR-runner CAUGHT THE BALL. AND DEZ AS A WR-RECEIVER GOING TO THE GROUND CAUGHT THE BALL.

Thanks, down by contact.
 
nathanlt

nathanlt

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,042
Reaction score
3,045
KJJ said:
Camp has started and this is still going. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Just wait until either Romo or Witten looks like they won't see a Super Bowl because of Blandino's TAMPERING, IN DEFIANCE OF THE RULEBOOK.
 
nathanlt

nathanlt

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,042
Reaction score
3,045
percyhoward

percyhoward

Research Tool
Messages
17,062
Reaction score
21,861
Joefrl said:
That is correct. Now, which of those two ideas apply to Dez? Receiver or Runner? I said, if he was tripped by Shields, he never had a chance to become a Runner. If somehow he avoided the trip, it was close, THEN he was a Runner, complete!
Click to expand...
Forget what you or I say establishes a player as a runner. The NFL doesn't care. They have their own way of making this determination, called the catch process. They check to see if the player completed all three parts of the process -- with the third part being the football move. If they had ruled that Shields' trip was the reason Dez didn't establish himself as a runner, then why did they look for a football move that happened well after the trip?

And again, why look for a football move at all if that's not what the call hinges on?
 
Joefrl

Joefrl

Member
Messages
189
Reaction score
3
Carharris2 said:
So can a player be judged to be going to the ground anytime he falls. After the ball is caught and he runs 10 steps then falls is no different than the case with Dez. Once the process is complete the catch is complete. He's a runner.
If not explain to me, as I clearly asked before, why did Blandino and Steretore say they were looking for a move after he was falling if it didn't matter?

They were because it would've completed the process regardless of the fall.
Click to expand...

I never understood what they said. Every so called expert left holes in their explanation. Going to the ground, falling, same thing. The judgment is, when did they start to fall? If they took 10 steps first, them they are a runner. If they tripped or slipped and then stumbled 10 steps, the 10 steps mean nothing because the beginning point of going to the ground happened first, the trip or the slip.................. unless they completely regained their balance at some point.
 
Joefrl

Joefrl

Member
Messages
189
Reaction score
3
percyhoward said:
Forget what you or I say establishes a player as a runner. The NFL doesn't care. They have their own way of making this determination, called the catch process. They check to see if the player completed all three parts of the process -- with the third part being the football move. If they had ruled that Shields' trip was the reason Dez didn't establish himself as a runner, then why did they look for a football move that happened well after the trip?

And again, why look for a football move at all if that's not what the call hinges on?
Click to expand...

I think it was one of those, making the right call for the wrong reason or just giving the wrong reason, miscommunication? I seem to remember a World Series game ending obstruction call. That was the right call, but the reasoning after the game was terrible.
 
Joefrl

Joefrl

Member
Messages
189
Reaction score
3
percyhoward said:
Please explain how a player who has completed A and B, and is a) out of bounds, or b)in the opponent's end zone is supposed to make a football move. Sometimes there is no TIME or no NEED for a football move, so the player is considered to be going to the ground in the act of catching a pass. That's why they looked for part C FIRST (the football move), to justify their judgment that Dez was going to the ground.

They determined that there was no TIME for Dez to make a football move, so they applied the part of the rule that applies to players going to the ground in the act of catching a pass.
Click to expand...

Suppose a receiver leaves his feet to catch a pass and lands on his stomach, the landing spot being in the end zone. If the ball squirts far away from him because of the force of hitting the ground, C never had a chance to happen and thus it is an incomplete pass, even if his two feet hit the ground first!

Now, suppose a receiver catches a pass on the sidelines on his tippy toes in bounds and falls out of bounds on his stomach. Again the ball squirts out due to the force of hitting the ground. Two feet down inbounds, but it is still no catch because C never had a chance to happen.
 
Joefrl

Joefrl

Member
Messages
189
Reaction score
3
blindzebra said:
How can anyone refute the 3 step process? The video has Blandino himself saying that is what makes it a catch as long as all 3 happen before the player hits the ground. Falling is irrelevant as long as control, 2 feet and a football move happen.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-networ...-strikes-again

It is all right there from the horse's mouth.
Click to expand...

8-3-item 1 says all 3 have to happen before he starts going to the ground.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top