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 thay description of the events that took place in this play? As has been stated over the last few years, the receiver still has to maintain control of the ball when they hit the ground if it's part of the catch and in this case it was. Same as when Johnson got hosed on the same call a couple years ago for the Lions. It's a stupid rule. But it is a rule.
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? He didn't immediately have possession from what I remember. The DB got a hand in and made the ball move initially...
January 11, 201511 yr Yes, three steps, contacted by defender, and reached out that would be down by contact. Wrong, he was contacted by the defender before he took the 3 steps. He jumped up with the defender to catch the ball and is when contact was made.
January 11, 201511 yr He didn't immediately have possession from what I remember. The DB got a hand in and made the ball move initially... Do you believe he had possession prior to getting both feet down?
January 11, 201511 yr As has been stated over the last few years, the receiver still has to maintain control of the ball when they hit the ground if it's part of the catch and in this case it was. Same as when Johnson got hosed on the same call a couple years ago for the Lions. It's a stupid rule. But it is a rule. I don't necessarily agree that the events of this play are the exact same as the Johnson play. I see a true football move being made after maintaining possession through two full steps. To me, the rules define the end of the play as the time in which a player is ruled down by contact, assuming he has established full possession prior to, and through the duration of the football move. I won't admit to being an expert on the rules. That is simply how I have interpreted them through the years. FWIW, I'm not a fan of either team (NYJ shoutout). This ruling just doesn't sit right with me. Especially since it was overturned from the original call.
January 11, 201511 yr http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/1/11/7528695/refs-correctly-overturn-dez-bryants-incredible-catch
January 11, 201511 yr 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. I'm actually a Packers fans no I just saw it on Twitter from a few of my Lions buddies. Thought it was funny and I also thought the Lions should have won the previous week if not for a few bad calls.
January 11, 201511 yr Read the bolded. Did he make a football move and then was hit by a defender? No s This is where I've been trying to get you to. This is the CRUX of the debate. You kept insisting that the ball coming loose was the issue. So now I'll ask why you think the move he made is different than the move Markbreit describes as a football move when stretching for a first down.
January 11, 201511 yr Just like the rule states, when going to the ground you must maintain complete control of the ball and Dez did t so not only didnt he complete a football move he also dodnt maintain control when going to the ground which is another rule for a reception. Edited January 12, 201511 yr by True blue (and gold)
January 11, 201511 yr The ball came lose IN the process of the football move. That is what you are misunderstanding. Now you're back to where you were. Let's map it out. Did he have control of the ball while on his feet? Yes so... Did he then make a football move? IF you answer YES to this one it can NEVER be an incomplete pass. Once it's been determined there was indeed a football move then it can NEVER be an incomplete pass.
January 11, 201511 yr 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" There is no wording that says "complete the football move." What has to be completed is possession through the ground IF there is no football move .
January 11, 201511 yr This is where I've been trying to get you to. This is the CRUX of the debate. You kept insisting that the ball coming loose was the issue. So now I'll ask why you think the move he made is different than the move Markbreit describes as a football move when stretching for a first down. I don't. I think it's the same thing and is what I have been referring to the entire time. But he did not succesfully complete the move which is what I've said. That and the rule about having to maintain control when going to the ground for it to be a catch was another reason it was ruled incomplete.
January 11, 201511 yr There is no wording that says "complete the football move." What has to be completed is possession through the ground IF there is no football move . Sure there is. When it says "accomplishing" a football move. He didn't accomplish it when he lost control of the ball while trying to make the football move.
January 11, 201511 yr Now you're back to where you were. Let's map it out. Did he have control of the ball while on his feet? Yes so... Did he then make a football move? IF you answer YES to this one it can NEVER be an incomplete pass. Once it's been determined there was indeed a football move then it can NEVER be an incomplete pass. He didn't make a football move unless you count falling to the ground a football move. Every ref on Twitter and even Cowboys party bus friend Dean Blandino says it was called correctly.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.