***The Second Call/NonCall good/bad conspiracy etc thread***merged**

[BrassCowboy]

this was a few frames after it hit the ground... jeesh

EDIT:: here is one just a few frames earlier:

 

[Kevinicus]

At no point in the play... during, or even immediately after... does the ball hit the ground WITHOUT Dez Bryant controlling the football. The impact of his lunge to the 1 momentarily sets the ball ajar from his grip but is still gathered against his shoulder pad. Dez rolls into the endzone and recollects the football and presents it to the official as a catch. The ball strikes the ground with Dez's hands securing it keeping the ball LIVE if that's how it is viewed, but never again.

It's a catch. Period.

I still think Rodgers takes the Packers down the field for the tie or win, but it is a CATCH.

It was a catch, but you don't understand the rule. If the going to the ground rule is invoked (which it should not have been), then if the ball touches the ground AT ANY POINT, and the ball comes loose AT ANY point after that, prior to the process being deemed to have finished, it's incomplete.

 

[Kevinicus]

this was a few frames after it hit the ground... jeesh

EDIT:: here is one just a few frames earlier:

What do "under" mean?

 

[hairic]

It was a catch, but you don't understand the rule. If the going to the ground rule is invoked (which it should not have been), then if the ball touches the ground AT ANY POINT, and the ball comes loose AT ANY point after that, prior to the process being deemed to have finished, it's incomplete.

I believe this to be an incomplete reading of the rule. There is something in there about the ball having to be in contact with the ground without control, not contact with the ground at any point.

 

[Kevinicus]

I believe this to be an incomplete reading of the rule. There is something in there about the ball having to be in contact with the ground without control, not contact with the ground at any point.

If control of the ball is lost after it hit the ground, that means it hit the ground before full possession/control. How can it not be incomplete? You absolutely cannot lose possession after it touches the ground.

 

[hairic]

If control of the ball is lost after it hit the ground, that means it hit the ground before full possession/control. How can it not be incomplete?

It's here:

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground.
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.

To my reading, for it to be incomplete, it has to both be out of the player's control and touch the ground.

 

[BAT]

'Don't put yourselves in a position where a referee's call can cost you the game.' It's good advice. We should expect a team that understands and honors that. To their credit, with the exception of Dez (and I don't blame Dez for it), that's pretty much exactly what we did.
I really hope we don't end up whining half as much as Detroit did after their QB threw a ball into a defenders back last week.

Agreed. If Cowboys don't screw up before the half, much of this is moot. Calling time out after the Witten favorable spot, THEN not running out the clock AND improving field position OR running ball on 3rd and 1 was a HUGE missed opportunity. That was a 6-10 point swing right there in a game lost by 5. Letting Packers go into half with momentum then not stealing it right back in the beginning of 3rd was crucial.

Cowboys were outplayed and outcoached by Packers in 2nd half, AND still should have won. They were the better team, but did not finish the job.

 

[gbrittain]

If control of the ball is lost after it hit the ground, that means it hit the ground before full possession/control. How can it not be incomplete? You absolutely cannot lose possession after it touches the ground.

It is not about the ball hitting the ground...total red herring.

He had the ball in his right hand switched to his left, dug his left foot into the ground to the point of creating a massive chunk of grass flying into the air and extended his arms trying to score. If that is not at least one football much much less three football moves then Dez is no more athletic than Peewee Herman.

 

[Kevinicus]

It is not about the ball hitting the ground...total red herring.

He had the ball in his right hand switched to his left, dug his right foot into the ground to the point of creating a massive chunk of grass flying into the air and extended his arms trying to score. If that is not at least one football much much less three football moves then Dez is no more athletic than Peewee Herman.

I'm not arguing that point. I'm arguing about the control through the process of going to the ground, which I don't believe applies in the case of this play.

 

[Kevinicus]

It's here:

Item 1: Player Going to the Ground.
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.

To my reading, for it to be incomplete, it has to both be out of the player's control and touch the ground.

What is the criteria of an incomplete pass?

If the ball touches the ground before it is possessed, it is incomplete. The exception is if the player has control of it when it hits the ground, he is then allowed to possess it, if he maintains control throughout the process.

 

[JDSTAR]

If he takes 3 steps with the ball secured, is it not a catch, period? The football move is not relevant to me. 3 steps with the ball secured is a catch!! Under there explanation, a player can catch and run 80 yards with the ball, but if he falls, it's not a football move, and the ball hits the ground, the whole play is an incomplete pass? I don't get it.

 

[gbrittain]

[quote"ChldsPlay, post: 5936399, member: 856"]I'm not arguing that point. I'm arguing about the control through the process of going to the ground, which I don't believe applies in the case of this play.[/quote]

Sorry I have not read the entire thread. You may have answered...are you saying he did not make a football move

I'm not arguing that point. I'm arguing about the control through the process of going to the ground, which I don't believe applies in the case of this play.

Are you saying that a football move is not relevant in this situation or that he did not make a football move? Or neither and you actually believe it was a catch and I'm ou in left field? Ha!

 

[Ken]

He took two steps before he was ever contacted, and this is probably what the field judge saw.

Look at the field judge's angle (in vid below). Here's how you know he was tripped: His left foot is the first to come down (1st step). Then he takes a full stride with his right leg (2nd step). Notice the huge difference between that stride, and the next one he takes (3rd step). This is when the trip happens. Instead of taking a full stride and the foot going down heel-to-toe, it's only less than half a stride and the foot comes down toe-first.

There is nothing that would cause such a violent change in his stride, short of being contacted.

But these two views clearly show the trip anyway. Shield's left calf hits Dez's right shin so hard it jars his leg and completely takes it out from under him.

https://vine.co/v/ODmuz2Zv16Y/embed/simple

Field Judge's Angle
https://v.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/FB70...p4?versionId=XuV0EEjvHGifwmb82nqeu1enN645viLI

Wow...watching that 2nd link.....no one.....NO ONE cane tell me the ball hit the ground.

I keep saying this and that just proved it. His arm is underneath..cupped in his hand. The ball pops up from his shoulder pad. It *may* have touched the ground.....but you can't say it with any more certainty than what i just said.

Im amazed people are just ok with the narrative that the ball hit the ground....you cant see that.

 

[Staubacher]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...-gresham-dez-bryant-catch-20150112-story.html

 

[gbrittain]

Wow...watching that 2nd link.....no one.....NO ONE cane tell me the ball hit the ground.

I keep saying this and that just proved it. His arm is underneath..cupped in his hand. The ball pops up from his shoulder pad. It *may* have touched the ground.....but you can't say it with any more certainty than what i just said.

Im amazed people are just ok with the narrative that the ball hit the ground....you cant see that.

I 100 percent agree that there was not indisputable video evidence. Per the NFL rules a football move is relevant to this discussion and I'm fairly certain he made about three of them making the ball on the ground null and void.

 

[Frozen700]

Should have never been in the situation.

We need to start pointing the fingers at the Cowboys.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...-gresham-dez-bryant-catch-20150112-story.html

It's what I've been saying all along.

The act of advancing the ball is an act common to the game per rule 8.3.1. It takes precedent over the CJ Rule which should not be used.



YR

 

[mahoneybill]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sport...-gresham-dez-bryant-catch-20150112-story.html

Actually know Markbreit. Sounds just like him. Simple and easy to understand.

Thks for the reference. Old Deano has some " splain in " to do but will never be called on it , as it's now on to
The next rounds

 

[Kevinicus]

Sorry I have not read the entire thread. You may have answered...are you saying he did not make a football move


Are you saying that a football move is not relevant in this situation or that he did not make a football move? Or neither and you actually believe it was a catch and I'm ou in left field? Ha!

People have suggested that it doesn't matter if the ball comes loose, if it is not the ground itself that causes it. I say it doesn't matter, if the ball hits the ground and at some point after that comes loose before the process is complete, then it's an incomplete pass. But I don't think any of that is relevant to this play because it was a catch before the going to the ground rule would come into play.

 

[Don Corleone]

Actually know Markbreit. Sounds just like him. Simple and easy to understand.

Thks for the reference. Old Deano has some " splain in " to do but will never be called on it , as it's now on to
The next rounds

Blandino has never served as a field ref. I wouldn't be surprised if he's fired in the offseason. The gaffes in the playoffs are a black eye to the NFL.