Dez Bryant made brilliant catch. Cowboys hosed

[Cincyfan78]

I think they determined that his arms were under the ball and that he maintained control of the ball through the contact with the ground. The ground didn't cause the ball to shift or bounce out of his hands.

Exactly.

The WR never lost control of the ball like Dez did.

 

[Kumquat]

Exactly.

The WR never lost control of the ball like Dez did.

Ball bounced off the ground twice and into his belly. That is called using the ground to make a catch.

 

[BoBlake]

Ball bounced off the ground twice and into his belly. That is called using the ground to make a catch.

Video? Pictures?

 

[Cincyfan78]

Ball bounced off the ground twice and into his belly. That is called using the ground to make a catch.

Let's just say you're right about this one...

Does that change Dez's catch? If the packer's catch should have been incomplete that doesn't mean that because they screwed up there, they should have just allowed Dez's catch.

Though, to be honest, I think you're wrong...the guy caught it, and doubled over...hands still on the ball, and the nose touches the ground...never lost control.

Either way, it doesn't change anything about Dez's drop. It was, and is, and will continue to be...an incompletion.

 

[Kumquat]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9uag-ClYRMs


Try that on for size.

Tried finding one of that specific play but not successful. Someone help a brotha out.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9uag-ClYRMs


Try that on for size.

Tried finding one of that specific play but not successful. Someone help a brotha out.

gohusk:

"at least you have consistency with this"

 

[Oldschool739]

He has no reason to complain either. His linemen cut block on every play AND they tripped our WR in Pittsburgh, then ran up his back - no flag for DPI.

His team had a 14 point lead.

Twice.

If you blow that, you deserve to lose.

Awwww, it's still stings huh ?.......Ravens 30 Steelers 17....

 

[Kumquat]

Let's just say you're right about this one...

Does that change Dez's catch? If the packer's catch should have been incomplete that doesn't mean that because they screwed up there, they should have just allowed Dez's catch.

Though, to be honest, I think you're wrong...the guy caught it, and doubled over...hands still on the ball, and the nose touches the ground...never lost control.

Either way, it doesn't change anything about Dez's drop. It was, and is, and will continue to be...an incompletion.

My point is there not being conclusive enough evidence to overturn the ruling on the field.

 

[BoBlake]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9uag-ClYRMs


Try that on for size.

Tried finding one of that specific play but not successful. Someone help a brotha out.

Those all looked like incomplete passes to me. You?

 

[BoBlake]

My point is there not being conclusive enough evidence to overturn the ruling on the field.

LOL....you're actually still going with "the ball didn't hit the ground".

 

[Kumquat]

LOL....you're actually still going with "the ball didn't hit the ground".

I'm going with he had possession and made a football move in switching it to one hand, pushing off with his foot in a lunge to the goalline, and extending himself to try and cross the goalline. In that case, ground doesn't matter.

 

[bigdeal701]

Those all looked like incomplete passes to me. You?

Then why were they upheld? No different than Dez's catch either.

 

[Wazmankg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9uag-ClYRMs


Try that on for size.

Tried finding one of that specific play but not successful. Someone help a brotha out.

Calvin was falling as he caught the ball, Cruz was not. Cruz was basically tackled and upended in mid air. I have no problem with those 2.... Calvin = incomplete and Cruz = complete. The original Calvin one was bs though. I wish the Denario Alexander one from 2 years ago was still out there. It was exactly like Dez's, the catch was upheld and the NFL defended it the next day.

 

[bigdeal701]

Calvin was falling as he caught the ball, Cruz was not. Cruz was basically tackled and upended in mid air. I have no problem with those 2.... Calvin = incomplete and Cruz = complete. The original Calvin one was bs though. I wish the Denario Alexander one from 2 years ago was still out there. It was exactly like Dez's, the catch was upheld and the NFL defended it the next day.

Bullshit, Cruz did not control the catch all the way to the ground just like Dez. Funny how as long as it isn't Dallas its a catch. There is no difference in the two.

 

[WizardHawk]

I'm going with he had possession and made a football move in switching it to one hand, pushing off with his foot in a lunge to the goalline, and extending himself to try and cross the goalline. In that case, ground doesn't matter.

There was no lunge at all. You are inventing what you want it to be when you watch it. You are not looking at it objectively at all. He was falling out of control the entire time and that is so clear I just don't see how any reasonable person can come to any different conclusion. He was falling and trying to get his feet under him.

He had no reason to try to dive or lunge if he wasn't out of control as the defender was falling and wouldn't have stopped him anyway.

 

[geezer]

 

[Hank Kingsley]

There was no lunge at all. You are inventing what you want it to be when you watch it. You are not looking at it objectively at all. He was falling out of control the entire time and that is so clear I just don't see how any reasonable person can come to any different conclusion. He was falling and trying to get his feet under him.

He had no reason to try to dive or lunge if he wasn't out of control as the defender was falling and wouldn't have stopped him anyway.

Stay away from those herb shops, it's affecting your vision.

Clear lunge. Totally in control of what he was attempting to do as he was falling.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

My problem is I don't feel there was enough evidence to overturn the call on the field. There is a case to be made that he had possession and made a football move. The replay does not show conclusive evidence that it was otherwise and so you are supposed to go with the call on the field.

There was a play during the game where the Packers receiver put his arms under the ball and falls on it and it is called a catch which is then challenged. In the replay you can clearly see the nose of the ball bounce off the ground twice but the refs still did not overturn the replay due to not enough evidence. I mean cmon. if there wasn't enough evidence to overturn that then there wasn't enough to overturn the Dez catch.

You've seen and read enough about this play to know the rule and understand that it was not a catch...You simply do not want to accept what the rule is.

If you're falling...(it does not matter if you're being tackled or not)...to the ground in the process of the catch, you must control the ball to the ground, meaning the ball cannot touch the ground...2 steps, 3 steps, having clear possession, changing hands, does not matter if the ball touches the ground... finally you cannot make a football move until the catch has been secured.

That said, I've been where you are, I know it's hard to take...you'll live.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

There was no lunge at all. You are inventing what you want it to be when you watch it. You are not looking at it objectively at all. He was falling out of control the entire time and that is so clear I just don't see how any reasonable person can come to any different conclusion. He was falling and trying to get his feet under him.

He had no reason to try to dive or lunge if he wasn't out of control as the defender was falling and wouldn't have stopped him anyway.

I don't see how any reasonable person can say conclusively that he was intentionally lunging or not.

 

[bigdeal701]

There was no lunge at all. You are inventing what you want it to be when you watch it. You are not looking at it objectively at all. He was falling out of control the entire time and that is so clear I just don't see how any reasonable person can come to any different conclusion. He was falling and trying to get his feet under him.

He had no reason to try to dive or lunge if he wasn't out of control as the defender was falling and wouldn't have stopped him anyway.

No lunge at all huh, yeah and big brown bears don't shit in the woods either.