January 11, 201511 yr No I didn't say that at all. I was referring to what you posted. Dez did not catch the ball stop, spin and then dive. Read your own post of the definition. That is exactley what I am going by. In that post it even explains that a football move can be stretching the ball forward which occured in this play. I used that example to show that maintaining control is NOT the only factor as you have repeatedly stated. We agree my example is a complete pass BECAUSE there was a football move.
January 11, 201511 yr No I'm nt going against what he says at all. You are ignoring half of what he said. You are ignoring when he said he has to SUCCESFULLY COMPLETE the move. A foot all move is one when a receiver stretches forward with the ball...we both understand that, but in doing so he has to be able to complete that move SUCCESFULLY which he didn't. Part of him stretching the ball forward was when doing so the ball hit the ground and when it did it popped out. That is not completing the move. You are incorrect on your understanding. Once the football move criteria is met then if the ball comes loose it's a fumble. Period.
January 11, 201511 yr Jerry Markbreit used to be an official. I found this Q&A online where someone asked him about this type of play. I heard the Sunday Night Football crew discussing the review of a catch and fumble. They made reference to "the receiver must have possession, control and make a football move." Could you define "a football move" as it relates to a catch? --Steve Supica, Canton, Mich. When a catch is made by a receiver who comes down with both feet on the ground, the "football move" would be: stretching for a first down, diving out-of-bounds or running with the ball. If the "football move" is accomplished, and the receiver is then hit and the ball comes out, it is ruled a catch and fumble, instead of an incomplete forward pass. Jerry Markbreit's answers - Chicago Tribune I assume since stretching for a first down is a football move then stretching for the goal line would be as well. Read the bolded. Did he make a football move and then was hit by a defender? No was his football move after he was hit, in this case the football move being stretching the ball forward? Yes Was the football move accomplished? No because in the football move the ball hit the ground and he lost control of it. Incomp,ete pass
January 11, 201511 yr [ATTACH=CONFIG]48513[/ATTACH]What karma? Lions lost because they lost the second half. Cowboys lost because they lost the second half. Karma? No. Bad second half defense on both teams. People need to get a grip on reality and move on. I can deal with the Cowboys loss, seemingly a lot better than many can deal with the Lions loss. It's the NFL. Learn to cope.
January 11, 201511 yr You are incorrect on your understanding. Once the football move criteria is met then if the ball comes loose it's a fumble. Period. The ball came lose IN the process of the football move. That is what you are misunderstanding.
January 11, 201511 yr I'm with you Clyde. That was a football move IMO and to REVERSE the call on the field really surprised me. There was not enough evidence to reverse the call on the field IMO. He had control of the ball clearly and was reaching it for the goal line... It's a call that could have gone either way. It is what it is. Life goes on. Good season by the Cowboys. Hope the Packers can get healthy and move on to win it all.
January 11, 201511 yr The only question, as Clyde has stated many times, is if diving and stretching to the end zone is considered a football move. Good question. What constitutes a "football move"?
January 11, 201511 yr The only question, as Clyde has stated many times, is if diving and stretching to the end zone is considered a football move. Good question. What constitutes a "football move"? Yes it is but he must, as stated in the rules, must complete the football move and in this instance he didn't. He lost control of the ball while performing the "football move" Edited January 12, 201511 yr by True blue (and gold)
January 11, 201511 yr Read the bolded. Did he make a football move and then was hit by a defender? No was his football move after he was hit, in this case the football move being stretching the ball forward? Yes Was the football move accomplished? No because in the football move the ball hit the ground and he lost control of it. Incomp,ete pass Yes, three steps, contacted by defender, and reached out that would be down by contact.
January 11, 201511 yr The Rules Committee needs to revisit this rule. It is too technical for the common person to understand.
January 11, 201511 yr Yes, three steps, contacted by defender, and reached out that would be down by contact.As a huge Cowboy fan, it doesn't matter. The call was made, the Cowboys lost. Looking forward to next season for the Cowboys.
January 11, 201511 yr The Rule Committee neds to revisit this rule. It is too technical for the common person to understand. The common person doesn't necessarily need to understand the rule but the ruling itself it should make some sense to us common folk.
January 11, 201511 yr Jerry Markbreit used to be an official. I found this Q&A online where someone asked him about this type of play. I heard the Sunday Night Football crew discussing the review of a catch and fumble. They made reference to "the receiver must have possession, control and make a football move." Could you define "a football move" as it relates to a catch? --Steve Supica, Canton, Mich. When a catch is made by a receiver who comes down with both feet on the ground, the "football move" would be: stretching for a first down, diving out-of-bounds or running with the ball. If the "football move" is accomplished, and the receiver is then hit and the ball comes out, it is ruled a catch and fumble, instead of an incomplete forward pass. Jerry Markbreit's answers - Chicago Tribune I assume since stretching for a first down is a football move then stretching for the goal line would be as well. Did he have two feet down by then with possession? Because he didn't control the ball immediately because the defender got a hand in and moved it. Even though he stretched out, he might not have had possession long enough to complete the catch anyways thus the stretching wouldn't matter.
January 11, 201511 yr Is the football move not completed at the point in which the receiver's opposite elbow hits the ground and is ruled down by contact? He was ruled down before the ball ever even hit the ground because the other elbow hit first. Can we all agree on the following: Dez caught the ball with two hands. He got both feet down while maintaining possession and even switching the ball to a single hand. He lunged towards the goal line, extending the arm with the ball in an attempt to cross the goal line. His off-ball arm hits the ground, followed shortly after by the ball hitting the ground and coming loose. Is there any argument against that description of the events that took place in this play?
January 11, 201511 yr Yes, three steps, contacted by defender, and reached out that would be down by contact. Not how they have the stupid rules for comp,ete passes. Like I said, I hate the rule as I hate many other rules in the NFL, but with that said as the rule is written it was incomplete. The steps don't even come into p,ay because they all happened instantaneous and as they said on tv, in this case you can't look at the legs. Again Dez screwed up by letting the ball got the ground. Never agreed with the rule, but it is the rule and therefore an incomplete pass.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.