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

[plymkr]

The Detroit Lions fans are laughing at us. They said almost exactly the same thing last week.
Bad calls are a part of the game. And they will always be a part of the game because refs are humans and humans come with their own interpretations and humans make mistakes.

That's fine. I'm still laughing at the Detroit Lions who haven't won a playoff game since '91 and their stellar super bowl trophy collection. Btw our Lombardi trophy case is more impressive. So go ahead and laugh Lions, it eases your pain of ineptitude.

 

[EPL0c0]

"The referee will have to make the determination, did the receiver have both feet down prior to him getting contacted, which sent him to the ground. If that's the case, then he doesn't have to hold onto it when he hits the ground."

Blandino last year

jesus christ

and because what constitutes "a move common to the game" is so ambiguous and subjective, it should be left to the ruling on the field.

 

[tyke1doe]

Not true. I'm quite capable of seeing things objectively. When a flag is thrown, if it's a good call, I can accept that. There are good calls made against the Cowboys every game that I don't complain about.

Well, I shouldn't have said "always." I shouldn't have used an all-inclusive term. So I stand corrected. Thanks.

 

[tyke1doe]

That's fine. I'm still laughing at the Detroit Lions who haven't won a playoff game since '91 and their stellar super bowl trophy collection. Btw our Lombardi trophy case is more impressive. So go ahead and laugh Lions, it eases your pain of ineptitude.

Now, that's the way to respond.

 

[arglebargle]

Having seen the ruling on the Indy PR fumble, and compared it to Dez's, I can't see how they ruled that 'football move', in each case. Overturned both times, and questionable both times. In opposite directions. Inconsistency abounds! You'd think the NFL would want real, professional, top notch refs handling replay, but apparently that's not what they are willing to do.

 

[tyke1doe]

Sorry my friend. Bad calls like that are not part of the game. You don't reverse a call when there is lack of evidence to overturn it. However they did. That to me is not part of the game. Its an aberration or reaction to what happened during the previous week and nothing more. Thus the failure of that call is all over the Internet. Heck, even my friends in Japan that watch Cowboys football knows thats a catch. Rules specify what a catch is and they follow the rulebook. Therefore thats a catch and the NFL took it away from us.

I could care less what Detroit fans are saying. They had their chances even when the right call was made. However, the refs took away points from us. If that was ruled a catch we would have gotten 7 points and possibly even 8 and made it an epic game. But the NFL made the decision that they wanted to make sure Dallas loses. Why else would they overturn that catch?

No, they didn't take points away from us. You don't know what would have happened had the catch been upheld. The Cowboys could have fumbled. We just don't know.
Even so, Detroit fans could say the pass interference that wasn't a pass interference took points away from them. They can say the refs took away points from them because they would have been in field goal range.
You're actually arguing my point better than I could.

 

[Canadian BoyzFan]

Possession....2 feet and control....CHECK
Football move....Lunging with the ball....CHECK



Watch from the 40 second mark of the clip, stare only at his left leg/foot. He plants so hard that a divet comes up off of the frozen tundra all while the ball is being advanced. Yet no divet when Dez originally jumps.

It's the very definition of a Football move, yet the replay booth requires clear proof that every aspect of the play and rules were not met. It shows a clear lung with forensic proof...the divet.

So bad.

 

[Zordon]

i need to start yoga or something, this whole situation is raising my blood pressure.

 

[Chuck 54]

This is insanity....I saw it hit the ground several times on TV during the game and on replays ad-nausium. People are seeing what they want to see.

Dez essentially slammed the ball on the ground trying to get to the goal line. Enough already! Argue the rule, or argue the lunge as a football move, but "never hit the ground" is just stupid denial.

 

[tyke1doe]

You get rid of trying to figure out what a "football move" is or is not.

The catch in his hands, and the feet are all I think should matter if you revise the rule.

And you think that's going to end the debate?

 

[tyke1doe]

every controversial play in history is not created equal

I'm sure many fans would say the same thing. I'm pretty sure that's what the Raiders thought when the Tuck Rule went against them. I'm sure the Oilers said the same thing when Mike Renfro's catch was ruled a no-catch yet he got both feet in.

of course I want to "frame the debate", the point you're making is irrelevant

Actually, my point is quite relevant because it's based in reality. And my point was that the Lions fans were saying almost the exact same thing last week. That is fact. Therefore, it is quite relevant, and it supports my initial point. Now if you don't want to acknowledge they were upset, that's on you. But you deeming it irrelevant doesn't make it so.

 

[Beast_from_East]

I got to let this go, my blood pressure is going to get sky high and give me a stroke.

 

[percyhoward]

Blandino: "Is it a catch?" Blandino asked during his weekly segment on NFL Network's "NFL Total Access." "The referee will have to make the determination, did the receiver have both feet down prior to him getting contacted, which sent him to the ground. If that's the case, then he doesn't have to hold onto it when he hits the ground.

"So you're going to see control. Just as the second foot comes down, there's going to be contact, now he goes to the ground. The referee determined that this was not part of the process. He'd completed the catch process, and therefore did not have to hold onto the football. We do feel that the ruling on the field stands."

This article was a great find, because all of the above commentary (made by Blandino a year ago) could have been used to describe Dez's catch that was overturned. The only difference was the conclusion.

Blandino says, "It's that close as to whether the second foot was clearly down, meaning that there wasn't enough evidence to overturn it."

Dez took three steps.

But Blandino avoids the entire question of a 2nd (or 3rd) foot being down, by saying that it was all part of the process. Even though the official on the field ruled that it was NOT part of the process, just as had been ruled in Cincy a year ago, when the call was upheld because of the ruling on the field.

 

[mmohican29]

This is insanity....I saw it hit the ground several times on TV during the game and on replays ad-nausium. People are seeing what they want to see.

Dez essentially slammed the ball on the ground trying to get to the goal line. Enough already! Argue the rule, or argue the lunge as a football move, but "never hit the ground" is just stupid denial.

It hit the ground- but it CAN- provided the ball is controlled when it hits the ground and then control is regained immediately without the ball "free" to the ground.

 

[ConstantReboot]

No, they didn't take points away from us. You don't know what would have happened had the catch been upheld. The Cowboys could have fumbled. We just don't know.
Even so, Detroit fans could say the pass interference that wasn't a pass interference took points away from them. They can say the refs took away points from them because they would have been in field goal range.
You're actually arguing my point better than I could.

Why are you so infatuated with Detroit fans? They are who they are because they a Detroit fans and nothing more. They have no weight in this matter and i'm surprised that you keep referring back to them as though they know more about football.

As for the points taken away from us. I'm sure anyone who has a logical brain would know that we would have probably scored a TD and gone up ahead. Then the ball would be given back to Green Bay and thats a totally different matter.

But thats not the point. The point is about the catch that was taken away. Why was that called reverse when the entire world who has half a brain knows thats a catch? I don't buy into what Detroit is telling about the refs. So what. Thats not the team Im rooting for so why should I care what they say.

 

[Alexander]

And you think that's going to end the debate?

I don't recall saying I thought it would. I guess this is your attempt at extending the discussion, to what end I do not quite understand.

Yes, I was laughing at Detroit fans last week. The main reason being it was over a penalty that basically would have resulted in a spot foul, with no guarantees thereafter.

This was a little bit different.

Is that hypocritical? Perhaps.

But the fact of the matter is this is an even more nebulous "rule" that honestly is so rarely enforced, it lends itself to more controversy.

The debate won't end. I wish it would. It would be nice if someone could explain this rule without sounding like a lawyer trying to take the letter of the law and spin it because they can.

 

[ConstantReboot]

The whole point of replay is to get it right. Not add even more interpretation to the equation.

That is the general problem with the rule to begin with.

You then allow an ambiguous rule to be opened up for interpretation via review.

All in all, the rule needs to be simplified.

The last thing replay needs to involve is more opinion and interpretation.

The whole idea is to allow things to become more black and white, not add more human error to the process.

The NFL has failed. They know that this really is a catch. There is not way to define it. They are using the rules as a means to frame their argument.

Calvin Johnson's rule doesn't even apply here. Since Dez had full control of the ball. This is nothing more than the NFL doing damage control. They are giving scripts to Blandino and Mike Pereira to try and deceive the public that they did the right thing. They are failing.

This will live in the NFL history books as their worst blunder ever.

 

[T-RO]

I left NBA-fandom as it became abundantly clear the league was engineering game results. Don't watch the games anymore.

What am I to think in recent years of the NFL?

There is simply no way that silly rule was even applicable in this situation. It was a catch no matter how you look at it. But two consecutive Cowboy playoff games featured more-than-curious officating when the game was on the line. And in both cases the calls came not on the field--but when all parties had time to mull over the dollars and sense.

 

[Alexander]

I got to let this go, my blood pressure is going to get sky high and give me a stroke.

I just wish the play never happened. It clanking off of Bryant's hands would at least have had some sense of finality.

 

[tyke1doe]

Why are you so infatuated with Detroit fans? They are who they are because they a Detroit fans and nothing more. They have no weight in this matter and i'm surprised that you keep referring back to them as though they know more about football.

As for the points taken away from us. I'm sure anyone who has a logical brain would know that we would have probably scored a TD and gone up ahead. Then the ball would be given back to Green Bay and thats a totally different matter.

But thats not the point. The point is about the catch that was taken away. Why was that called reverse when the entire world who has half a brain knows thats a catch? I don't buy into what Detroit is telling about the refs. So what. Thats not the team Im rooting for so why should I care what they say.

First, I mention them because it puts this issue into proper perspective. The refs aren't out to get the Cowboys because other teams, namely the Lions, have experienced the same thing.

Second, anyone with a logical brain would know not to use "probably" in arguing with certainty. Anyone with a logical brain would understand you can't say what would or should have happened because we simply don't know. And unless you have a crystal ball that reveals alternate realities, then you don't know either.

Third, no, the entire world didn't consider it a catch. Many people are clearly divided on the play. Cris Carter, one of the best receivers in the history of the NFL, said it wasn't a catch. And to add perspective, if you understand that these type plays don't JUST happen to the Cowboys, it may allow your blood pressure to decrease a bit. Relax, there's no conspiracy against the Cowboys.