Are you ready for some NFL Football? 2014 Edition.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Good screen grab.  You agree that he doesn't have control in that second frame, right @phan52 ?

When his foot touches the ground for the first time, he has secured the football. He then takes two MORE steps and lunges which, to any rational person, constitutes a football move "common to the game". The ref decided that instead of making a football move, he was going to the ground. Fine. I don't blame the ref, I blame the rules. The rules as written are ambiguous. The ground cannot cause a fumble in one interpretation (football move and down by contact, which is what I see), yet the ground can cause an incompletion in another (the legal cop out).

After the game they kept referring to the Calvin Johnson play. Yet, if THAT was not a catch there is something really wrong with the rules.

That was a catch. It's like porn, you know it when you see it.

1. He initially catches the ball

2. He then takes one step.

3. Then loses control

4. Then regains control

5. Possession starts then.

6. Then he falls forward off balance.

7. Then he contacts the ground.

8. Then the ball bounces off the ground.

9. By rule it is an incomplete pass.

10. I know it when I see it.

[Golfingdad]

In your last pic, it doesn't appear that he has control of the ball again. The ball appears to be cradled, but it is not firmly controlled IMO.

I thought the exact same thing when you posted the pic.  It even kinda looks like his index and middle finger aren't on the ball, but that could also just be the stripes on the defenders uniform.

Incomplete pass

[boogielicious]

Of course if it was Larry Fitzgerald he would have.

1. Caught the ball one handed.
2. Checked out using Visa's check out feature on his smartphone.
3. Bought a nice gift for the Green Bay corner.
4. Reached out and scored the touchdown.

[phan52]

Of course if it was Larry Fitzgerald he would have.

Caught the ball one handed.

Checked out using Visa's check out feature on his smartphone.

Bought a nice gift for the Green Bay corner.

Reached out and scored the touchdown.

Larry Fitzgerald would not have lunged for the TD. He would have been content with making a great catch and having first and goal on the one yard line.

[mchepp]

I know that the catch is all that everyone wants to talk about, but this games "Turning Point" was at the end of the first half. Up 14-7 the whole botched field goal sequence and then subsequent field goal by Green Bay. The Cowboys should have been up 17-7 instead they went into half time 14-10.

You could argue then that the Cowboys again took the lead. But then gave up two touchdown drives of 80 and 90. The catch could have turned the game, but the Cowboys had their chances even without the catch.

[Golfingdad]

Of course if it was Larry Fitzgerald he would have.

Caught the ball one handed.

Checked out using Visa's check out feature on his smartphone.

Bought a nice gift for the Green Bay corner.

Reached out and scored the touchdown.

Maybe Bryant just needs catching lessons from Odell Beckham?

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Of course if it was Larry Fitzgerald he would have.

Caught the ball one handed.

Checked out using Visa's check out feature on his smartphone.

Bought a nice gift for the Green Bay corner.

Reached out and scored the touchdown.

Maybe Bryant just needs catching lessons from Odell Beckham?

That is still the catch of the year!

[k-troop]

Four pages of debate in this thread gives you the answer on the Dez catch. The video doesn't provide irrefutable proof of an incompletion. The call on the field stands.

[Slice of Life]

Four pages of debate in this thread gives you the answer on the Dez catch. The video doesn't provide irrefutable proof of an incompletion.

The call on the field stands.

Wrong. A bunch of people (most of whom don't know much above a casual watcher's knowledge of the rules) disagreeing, doesn't mean that the ref can't properly interpret the rule.

Incomplete...and overturned. Which it was.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boogielicious

Of course if it was Larry Fitzgerald he would have.

Caught the ball one handed.

Checked out using Visa's check out feature on his smartphone.

Bought a nice gift for the Green Bay corner.

Reached out and scored the touchdown.

Maybe Bryant just needs catching lessons from Odell Beckham?

That is still the catch of the year!

Quote:

Originally Posted by k-troop

Four pages of debate in this thread gives you the answer on the Dez catch. The video doesn't provide irrefutable proof of an incompletion.

The call on the field stands.

Wrong. A bunch of people (most of whom don't know much above a casual watcher's knowledge of the rules) disagreeing, doesn't mean that the ref can't properly interpret the rule.

Incomplete...and overturned. Which it was.

The video provides visual proof that it was incomplete by the way the current rule is written.  He went to ground and did not maintain possession.  Incomplete.

[saevel25]

That is still the catch of the year!

The video provides visual proof that it was incomplete by the way the current rule is written.  He went to ground and did not maintain possession.  Incomplete.

-NFL Rulebook

If you want to be literal by the rules,

Dez secured the ball when his right foot was on the ground. He stumbled a bit forward with his left foot touching the ground. He then lunged towards the goal line. By the rules he meets part (a) & (b) by securing the ball and having both feet in bounds. He then achieved part (c) quoted above by advancing the ball forward. There is no limitation to how he can advance the ball forward. Doesn't matter if he is off balance or not. A specific example of a act common to the game is advancing the ball forward. He advanced forward when he lunged off his left foot.

It was a catch.

[Abu3baid]

If you want to be literal by the rules,

Dez secured the ball when his right foot was on the ground. He stumbled a bit forward with his left foot touching the ground. He then lunged towards the goal line. By the rules he meets part (a) & (b) by securing the ball and having both feet in bounds. He then achieved part (c) quoted above by advancing the ball forward. There is no limitation to how he can advance the ball forward. Doesn't matter if he is off balance or not. A specific example of a act common to the game is advancing the ball forward. He advanced forward when he lunged off his left foot.

It was a catch.

I hate to pile on, but no it wasn't a catch.

He didn't secure the ball when his right foot first hit the ground.  In fact, at that moment he was in the process of trying to secure it by getting it over to his left hand, and he didn't lunge anywhere I'm sorry.. he basically tripped over the defenders foot or something.  By the time the ball was in his left hand he was basically falling down, and that is why you will notice he was bracing for the fall with his right hand... I think he had one other option, he could have on the way down turned his body and worked on securing the ball with both hands because he knew he was falling, however he had TD twinkling in his eyes and he paid for it..

The defender should be given a game ball because if he had allowed Dez to make the catch at the top of the jump it would have been an easy TD, but because he tipped it with his fingers it made Dez work hard on securing the ball while he was falling to the ground basically.. I think this is the ultimate decider, as there is a difference between a player lunging willfully and falling to the ground and then trying to brace the fall like what happened to Dez..

no.. it wasn't a catch.. sorry!

[dsc123]

He initially catches the ball

He then takes one step.

Then loses control

Then regains control

Possession starts then.

Then he falls forward off balance.  He tries to "advance the ball" by reaching his arm out and putting the ball ahead of his body

Then he contacts the ground.

Then the ball bounces off the ground.

By rule it is an incomplete pass.

I know it when I see it.

Fixed it for ya!

[iacas]

If you want to be literal by the rules,

Dez secured the ball when his right foot was on the ground. He stumbled a bit forward with his left foot touching the ground. He then lunged towards the goal line. By the rules he meets part (a) & (b) by securing the ball and having both feet in bounds. He then achieved part (c) quoted above by advancing the ball forward. There is no limitation to how he can advance the ball forward. Doesn't matter if he is off balance or not. A specific example of a act common to the game is advancing the ball forward. He advanced forward when he lunged off his left foot.

It was a catch.

Matt, c'mon…

He's not stretching, extending, or lunging. He's tripping and falling down.

Fixed it for ya!

[saevel25]

I hate to pile on, but no it wasn't a catch.

He didn't secure the ball when his right foot first hit the ground.  In fact, at that moment he was in the process of trying to secure it by getting it over to his left hand, and he didn't lunge anywhere I'm sorry..

He had two hands on the ball when his right foot was on the ground. It was secured. He was transitioning to his left hand, away from the defender as he was planting his left foot to catch his balance. The ball was not moving around in his hand, he was not grasping for it, or tucking it in because it was loose. He had it secured.

No were in the rules does it say a player has to be in balanced to advance the ball or secure the ball, or to even catch a ball. A guy could stumble 10 yards, as long as the ball isn't wobbling around in his hands he is advancing the ball and it should be a catch, even if he falls over and the ball comes loose.

By the time the ball was in his left hand he was basically falling down,

No he wasn't. The ball was in his left hand as he was stepping with his left foot to catch his balance and lunge forward.

I I think he had one other option, he could have on the way down turned his body and worked on securing the ball with both hands because he knew he was falling, however he had TD twinkling in his eyes and he paid for it..

Yea he knew he was falling and he pushed off with his left leg to lunge for the goal line. You can clearly see the dirt kick up as he presses hard into the ground, and extends his body. That was a willful lunge towards the goal.

I think this is the ultimate decider, as there is a difference between a player lunging willfully and falling to the ground and then trying to brace the fall like what happened to Dez..

no.. it wasn't a catch.. sorry!

If Dez was trying to brace for the fall he would have not extended his left arm outward. He would have bent his body to try to protect the ball. He knowingly planted his left foot and lunged forward. Just because he was off balance does mean he didn't willfully lunged towards the goal line.

Again the rules never state that you have to be in balance to advance the ball. The a move common to the game is advancing the ball.

Matt, c'mon…

He's not stretching, extending, or lunging. He's tripping and falling down.

Attempts to plants his left foot in the ground.

His left foot hits the ground.

He pushed off on that left foot, you can see it in the video extend very quickly as he propelled more forward than when he was originally falling. He even kicked up a lot of dirt.

I will say he was falling, or he did trip, but that does not mean he didn't make a move to advance the fall with that leg push. Just because he was off balance does not make it impossible for him to try to advance the ball by lunging.

[dsc123]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

Matt, c'mon…

He's not stretching, extending, or lunging. He's tripping and falling down.

I agree that he extended his arm more to catch it than he did to cross the goal line.  But the rule doesn't say you have to "extend your arm as far as you do when trying to catch a ball high in the air."  It says you have to "advance the ball."

The only guy who can possibly know with 100% certainty what he was trying to do said...

Quote:

"I don't understand how it wasn't a football play?" Bryant said. "I guarantee if it happened in the middle of the field it would've been legal …

"Come on, man," he continued. "I'm just saying, I think it was a catch. They took it away. …All I know is I had possession and I had possession coming down. That's possession, right? That's possession.

"I tried to stretch. Come on, man. I wasn't off balance. I was trying to stretch for the end zone."

[phan52]

NOOOOOOOOO!!

Front-running fat boy from New Jersey be going home.

[Abu3baid]

He had two hands on the ball when his right foot was on the ground. It was secured. He was transitioning to his left hand, away from the defender as he was planting his left foot to catch his balance. The ball was not moving around in his hand, he was not grasping for it, or tucking it in because it was loose. He had it secured.

No were in the rules does it say a player has to be in balanced to advance the ball or secure the ball, or to even catch a ball. A guy could stumble 10 yards, as long as the ball isn't wobbling around in his hands he is advancing the ball and it should be a catch, even if he falls over and the ball comes loose.

No he wasn't. The ball was in his left hand as he was stepping with his left foot to catch his balance and lunge forward.

Yea he knew he was falling and he pushed off with his left leg to lunge for the goal line. You can clearly see the dirt kick up as he presses hard into the ground, and extends his body. That was a willful lunge towards the goal.

If Dez was trying to brace for the fall he would have not extended his left arm outward. He would have bent his body to try to protect the ball. He knowingly planted his left foot and lunged forward. Just because he was off balance does mean he didn't willfully lunged towards the goal line.

Again the rules never state that you have to be in balance to advance the ball. The a move common to the game is advancing the ball.

We definitely don't agree on the initial assumption that he had a secured grip on the ball with both hands when his right foot hit the ground.. the didn't happen, the ball was tipped and he basically had to change what he was doing, he was in the process of then securing the ball when he moved it to his left hand but at the same time he was falling down.. I said he braced for the fall with his right arm, and that last kick or flop for life I'll call it that you call a lunge is just him doing what ever he can to advance, but this is a totally different discussion than securing the ball..

It is not a football move as long as he doesn't have a secure ball in hand.. the fact that he was in the act of securing it doesn't mean it was secured.  Once the ball hit the ground and popped out that was it.. incomplete.

This is so night and day for me, it is not even a question I'm sorry.  (p.s. I also have no horse in the race)