To talk about more than that play, I thought the Cowboys missed out on some big opportunities. The strip of Murray when he was going to score was huge. Also, though his numbers were really good, I thought Romo had some bad moments taking some unnecessary sacks. He had all the time in the world but still went down. One of which I believe set up the 4th down play in question.

The biggest mistake I thought they made was on the 3rd and 1 right before the half and instead of running for the yard in which they were running all over the packers defense all day, Romo in pure Romo fashion costs his team big time in a big game when he audibled the play at the line and went back into shotgun....he shoulnd't have changed the play, worse scenerio they don't get the 1st and have to kick a FG. Instead he audibles out of the play and drops back into shotgun, fumbles the snap and gives Packers a shot and they stop Cowboys from scoring. I also believe Packers scored after that right before the half with a FG, i may be mistaken. Either way I thought that was the biggest mistake the Cowboys made.

On a side note: That's why you pay Dez the big bucks and put up with his antics. Dude makes plays.

 

Yes

HellBird is a Cowboys hater. Nothing to see here. Move along all.

Hellbird, I'm not sure if you're just being obstinate or what.

 

I can't make it any clearer than I have and others seem to have gotten it.

I'm not at all. I think it's very clear that he had to maintain control when he goes to the ground. Not sure why you don't see it that way.

 

Everyone knows that is the rule.

 

Are you actually ignoring that rule and are just stuck on the football move rule? I don't know but even the interview you linked the first thing the official says is that he didn't maintain control when he went to the ground.

 

Please go back and listen to the interview lol, it is the first thing he says. Are you ignoring that or did you simply miss it?

HellBird is a Cowboys hater. Nothing to see here. Move along all.

??? I could care less about the NFC.

 

I just cant believe that everyone on TV and even now on Mike and Mike are saying that he didn't maintian control when he went to the ground, yet you all on BGP continue to ignore that very important fact. I don't understand what planet you are on that don't know that is a rule.

I'm not at all. I think it's very clear that he had to maintain control when he goes to the ground. Not sure why you don't see it that way.

 

Everyone knows that is the rule.

 

Are you actually ignoring that rule and are just stuck on the football move rule? I don't know but even the interview you linked the first thing the official says is that he didn't maintain control when he went to the ground.

 

Please go back and listen to the interview lol, it is the first thing he says. Are you ignoring that or did you simply miss it?

 

I already addressed that. He added the qualifier when Eisen asked him. If it didn't matter why would he even address it and say they looked at it?

 

The purpose of the "football move" requirement is to distinguish between the type of catch where a receiver immediately goes to the ground vs one where he runs a few steps and THEN goes to the ground and loses control. The "football move" wording is key. I've already stated that once the football move requirement has been met it can NEVER then be an incomplete pass.

The biggest mistake I thought they made was on the 3rd and 1 right before the half and instead of running for the yard in which they were running all over the packers defense all day, Romo in pure Romo fashion costs his team big time in a big game when he audibled the play at the line and went back into shotgun....he shoulnd't have changed the play, worse scenerio they don't get the 1st and have to kick a FG. Instead he audibles out of the play and drops back into shotgun, fumbles the snap and gives Packers a shot and they stop Cowboys from scoring. I also believe Packers scored after that right before the half with a FG, i may be mistaken. Either way I thought that was the biggest mistake the Cowboys made.

Yep. That was huge. It allowed Green Bay to capture some momentum going in to the half.

Clyde, do me a favor and simply listen to the link you provided. From the 20 second to the 45 second portion of the interview he clearly explains why it was not a catch.

 

Please listen, you provided the linnk, I think you should listen to that part because that is the entire reason why it was an incomplete pass period.

??? I could care less about the NFC. I just cant believe that everyone on TV and even now on Mike and Mike are saying that he didn't maintian control when he went to the ground' date=' yet you all on BGP continue to ignore that very important fact. I don't understand what planet you are on that don't know that is a rule.[/quote']

 

Trusting the media. Interesting.

Not sure we're going to make any more headway on this one. Ref on TV stated that if the lunge towards the endzone was more pronounced that it would have been considered a football move and it would have been a completion. They did not see enough to classify it that way, so now the rule of completing the catch through contact with the ground is in effect.

Why did Cowboys only have Romo throw the ball 19 times?! He was playing great, but they didn't lean on him like they should have IMO.

 

Still happen GB won, but I don't give them much of a chance next weekend.

Best thing, Mrs, Crunch said incomplete as the play unfolded, before replay. Gotta love her!!

You trust in Mike and Mike... I trust in the man who made the best catch in NFL history.

I already addressed that. He added the qualifier when Eisen asked him. If it didn't matter why would he even address it and say they looked at it?

 

Because Eisen asked him about the football move.

 

Again, like i said before we can act like that was a football move (we already disagree if just the act of making a football move and losing the ball counts a s a catch, i say it doesn't' but you say it does.) So we can act like just for argument sake that it was a completed football move, he still had to maintain control of the ball as he went to the ground because as the official stated, going to the ground WAS PART OF THE CATCH, and that was because he never established as a runner yet because it was still in the process of making the catch.

 

When he went to the ground, it wasn't after running and him diving, it was him falling to the ground as part of the catch. So when he did that he did not maintain control of the ball.

 

Every Official interviewed has said the same thing and you are always up on the rules, I'm surprised you didn't know that one. If you did know about that rule, then why are we debating it because clearly you could see he didn't maintain control when he hit the ground.

Because Eisen asked him about the football move. Again' date=' like i said before we can act like that was a football move (we already disagree if just the act of making a football move and losing the ball counts a s a catch, i say it doesn't' but you say it does.) So we can act like just for argument sake that it was a completed football move, he still had to maintain control of the ball as he went to the ground because as the official stated, going to the ground WAS PART OF THE CATCH, and that was because he never established as a runner yet because it was still in the process of making the catch. When he went to the ground, it wasn't after running and him diving, it was him falling to the ground as part of the catch. So when he did that he did not maintain control of the ball. Every Official interviewed has said the same thing and you are always up on the rules, I'm surprised you didn't know that one. If you did know about that rule, then why are we debating it because clearly you could see he didn't maintain control when he hit the ground.[/quote']

 

 

Keep telling yourself this and you may start to believe it.