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

[Stash]

I think this asinine rule needs to be changed. Officials can hide in the grey of it with nonsense like 'football move'. It's easily fixed by including irrefutable points and eliminating any interpretation.

How many steps does a player have to take with the ball before possession is established?

1? 2? 3?

Set a specific number and if the human being's feet touch the field that many times, it's a catch, plain and simple.

Otherwise, maybe we should revisit Jeremy Maclin's play from over a month ago. I think that one may be incomplete too...

 

[Cowboy Bebop]

Sorry if it's been posted and I have missed it. Ican't seem to find it.

Despite claims of multiple angles, I haven't seen one pic/vid of the ball actually hitting the ground.

All biased aside, or arguments about completing the process, I just want to see the ball actually touch the ground.

Not trying to jump in an argument, just need one conclusive shot.

Thanks

 

[CowboyGil]

This is the alleged definitive image:

That is a catch. Ball is the very definition of secure, with Dez's arm between it and the ground. And mind you, this is after he was tripped by the defender and would have been ruled down. If you actually look at the gif of the link I provided where Mike Heriara admits Dez lunges, it becomes clear this GIF above is way after the contact of Dez had already happened and he was tackled.

And a ground can't cause use a fumble anyways, but Dez never fumbled it, because the ball came lose when he was underneath the ball and he secured it once again.

From that angle it looks like part of the ball broke the plane as he hit the ground, thus making it a TD and the play is over at that instant. Howie Long said he was ruled down before the ball popped out that's why it was ruled a catch at first and should've stood that way.

 

[CATCH17]

At the least I would expect to have heard inconclusive evidence and the initial call (complete pass) should stand.

And all of these guys like Pereria that agree with every call the officials make would agree with the ref saying there wasn't enough evidence.


How can you call Randle Cobb's pass complete and ours incomplete?

 

[khiladi]

From that angle it looks like part of the ball broke the plane as he hit the ground, thus making it a TD and the play is over at that instant. Howie Long said he was ruled down before the ball popped out that's why it was ruled a catch at first and should've stood that way.

Exactly. This was after the lunge, meaning already down. If he wasn't tackled, this would be similar to a RB, fighting for extra yardage at the goal line and sticking his hand out to break the plane, which he does, and DB hits the ball out of his hands. It's still a TD.

 

[WoodysGirl]

 

[khiladi]

If we were robbed, I don't think any team could have beaten us honestly. Romo was playing out of his mind this play-offs, with a cerebral aspect to the game I've never seen before. This was a 4th and 1, and they took a freaking shot to Dez. They were playing with a fearlessness I have not seen. That's the most disappointing aspect to it.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

This image was taking right after the ball impacted the ground.

Now answer me this. Why in hell are you still arguing this? The game is over and the Cowboys are out of the playoffs. The NFL will review the play and make any necessary changes for next year. Odds are extremely high that the review was correct and there was no catch and nothing will happen.

Either way, the game and the Cowboys season is over. Let it go. Start focusing on the draft.

What difference does the draft make if the refs can just take away all your hard work? It just happened yesterday. It's worth debating today. We can move on later. It's not as if we had 8 1/2 minutes left with the lead. We were trailing by 5 and had the ball at the 1 yard line. The right call was made on the field and the replay mysteriously overturned it. We have the right to be angry and discuss it just like any fanbase would. The fact that it won't change the play is neither here nor there.

 

[Brooksey]

I agree that that's really the only argument here: Was he reaching out to score or just in the process of going to the ground with the ball? One is a football move; the other is not. My belief is that he was trying to score but didn't really reach out with the ball (because it just looked like the act of falling to me), but I can't really say he wasn't "moving it forward" and trying to get across the line.

The only way for such a play to be resolved without debate is to remove football move from the equation. The only way I can think to do that is go back to a player just having to have two feet down for it to be a catch. In Dez's case, he had two feet down and was contacted by the defender, so when his forearm touched the ground, he would have been down.

This is the problem. It's not 100% percent or indisputable evidence that he did "Not" make a football move. He may be reaching for the goal line and the fact that that's what was called on the field is the major determining factor.

In this case you to stick with the ruling on the field.

 

[Boyzmamacita]

I think it's a dumb rule, but this is where he does not maintain complete control after the nose of the ball earlier hits the ground, and why it was not a catch.

He completed the process way before that and was down by contact.

 

[Seven]

I believe this was taken after the ball hits the ground...

Then there's that...........

 

[hairic]

There's dozens, but you won't find one where the ball is touching the ground without Dez in control of it.

 

[tyke1doe]

The ball hits the ground at the same time as his forearm, which is what causes the ball to shoot into the air. The point is that it doesn't matter one iota if the ball hit the ground, the catch was made and under Dez' control and he was making a move toward the endzone. It was the worst call ever. I told my buddy we were going to not only lose the TD on the call, but also the catch.

Now we need to get on with our lives!

The Tuck Call was the worst call ever.

At least with this call, the league has been consistent. I've seen similar plays ruled no catches. The Tuck Call is a rarely used call, and there is absolutely know evidence that Brady was trying to throw that ball. But on the recock, it's considered a throw. The Raiders got totally screwed.

 

[Nation]

He completed the process way before that and was down by contact.

I think that is what the rule should be, but that isn't how the NFL determines these. Which is dumb to me, because instead of getting rid of gray area they've added a lot extra.

 

[JBS]

There's dozens, but you won't find one where the ball is touching the ground without Dez in control of it.

This has no bearing on anything..why do people keep saying this...it doesn't matter

 

[JoeBoBBY]

i keep going back to irrefutable evidence to overturn the call on the field.....

This guy saw "irrefutable evidence" ??

Really? What person in their right mind doesnt think that was a Catch?

This dude should be fired within a month or reassigned to "other" duties...

But none of that stuff really matters to me. I wanted the win. We deserved the win. The players and coaches deserved the win. and we got robbed. And dont even bring up the PI call/No call against the Lions, that call wasnt even in the same level as this call.

This was the worst call i have ever seen in my 45 years of life.

 

[LatinMind]

What difference does the draft make if the refs can just take away all your hard work? It just happened yesterday. It's worth debating today. We can move on later. It's not as if we had 8 1/2 minutes left with the lead. We were trailing by 5 and had the ball at the 1 yard line. The right call was made on the field and the replay mysteriously overturned it. We have the right to be angry and discuss it just like any fanbase would. The fact that it won't change the play is neither here nor there.

Do you think this defense hold Rodgers on the last drive? By the end of this game the GB OL was dominating.

 

[gimmesix]

This is the problem. It's not 100% percent or indisputable evidence that he did "Not" make a football move. He may be reaching for the goal line and the fact that that's what was called on the field is the major determining factor.

In this case you to stick with the ruling on the field.

The gray area leaves it open to interpretation. If Dez was not reaching out for the goal line and merely falling with the ball, no football move, the catch was not completed through contact with the ground. If he was reaching out for the goal line, it's a football move at which point the catch is completed and he's down by contact.

The officials apparently felt there was indisputable evidence that a football move was not made. It was their judgment when looking at the review, which is why I hate the call. There's such a slim difference between it being a catch and not a catch that it shouldn't be left up to the officials to decide.

 

[Cowboy Bebop]

There's dozens, but you won't find one where the ball is touching the ground without Dez in control of it.

Can you link one please?

 

[hairic]

This has no bearing on anything..why do people keep saying this...it doesn't matter

Because the ground didn't cause the ball to come loose.

Imagine a different scenario where a receiver has nothing down, just dives for the ball, catches it, and the first thing to touch the ground is the ball. The receiver controls it on the initial fall, starts to roll over and the ball hits a defender's shoe, causing it to come loose, and the receiver controls it again without ever allowing the ball to touch the ground. You'd call that incomplete?