Dez Bryant made brilliant catch. Cowboys hosed

[LogicMan]

it was a tough call. worthy of complaint. Truth is, Detroit has some legit ones to. Close games always have that controversial call

 

[WizardHawk]

Dez did control the ball in his hand. No one is questioning that. So the question as it pertains to the letter of the rule is was he 'in control' throughout the ENTIRE 'process' of the catch? It seems pretty easy to see that he was not. His momentum was carrying him to the ground during the entire 'process' and he did not appear to be in control of his steps at any time during it.

 

[gordontrue]

No sir, he was not 'clearly making a move toward the endzone'. No way.

https://vine.co/v/ODZI5HU6gX6

There is no way to say he was intentionally diving on that catch. There is no pushoff with his feet. His first step after catch never went fully under him and neither did the second. It just didn't happen. It may be what some want to believe, but again it isn't there.

Are you kidding? He was clearly falling down.

Is there any possible way Dez could have caught the ball and just stood there? No. Because he was FALLING. He doesn't turn and head for the end zone. His momentum during his fall just takes him in that direction.

The 3rd step to me is a very intentional lunge towards the goal line. I'm surprised to hear anyone contending this fact.

 

[ducky]

"If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control"

My issue is this sequence of the rule never took place. He had full control of the ball before he hit the ground and ultimately regained possession .

He didn't have control of the ball when it was in contact with the ground. If he did, it wouldn't have moved.

 

[Kumquat]

Dez takes possession of the ball and switches the ball to his dominant hand while taking three steps, then he reaches out to try and break the plane of the goal line while he is going down after he was contacted by Shields on his way down. Shifting the ball to his dominant hand and then reaching out towards the goal line constitutes a football move. There for sure was not enough info provided by the replay to overturn the call on the field by the ref that was standing right there watching it. I mean seriously, if the ref can't overturn the earlier call when the Packer caught the ball after it clearly bounced on the ground then there is no way they should be able to overturn a judgement call on the Bryant catch.

 

[gordontrue]

I think the majority of people have issues with the rule.

That aside.. which ever side of line you are in terms of how this particular play should have been called according to the rules.... its not cut and dried either way.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

He didn't have control of the ball when it was in contact with the ground. If he did, it wouldn't have moved.

That part of the rule describes losing control and then hitting the ground.

 

[WizardHawk]

"If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control"

My issue is this sequence of the rule never took place. He had full control of the ball before he hit the ground and ultimately regained possession .

I say look at the loop again and tell me when it appears he was ever in control of his body between when he first touched the ball and when he hit the ground. Again, even though he wasn't I still say call it a catch, but according to the rules if you are not in full control of your body you must be in full control of the ball all the way through the contact with the ground.

 

[gordontrue]

I say look at the loop again and tell me when it appears he was ever in control of his body between when he first touched the ball and when he hit the ground. Again, even though he wasn't I still say call it a catch, but according to the rules if you are not in full control of your body you must be in full control of the ball all the way through the contact with the ground.

Another example of a random interpretation of a vague rule. Now there's a rule that you have to be in full control of your body in order to make a football move? When is an NFL player in the middle of a play ever in full control of his body.

Football moves like this one... where they're contorting and diving despite the fact that they've just jumped in the air or been hit by a linebacker or tripped by a defender or knocked off balance by a broken tackle... are the best kinds of football moves there are.

 

[WizardHawk]

The 3rd step to me is a very intentional lunge towards the goal line. I'm surprised to hear anyone contending this fact.

Not even close. It's the best example of not being in control of the 3 so-called steps. He was nearly horizontal and it looked more like stubbing his toe while still trying to get control than an actual step. Look at that loop again. Tell me you don't see his foot skip on that third 'step'. Go ahead, tell me. It was more of a skid than a step. There is no universe in which that can be deemed a football move.

 

[WizardHawk]

Another example of a random interpretation of a vague rule. Now there's a rule that you have to be in full control of your body in order to make a football move? When is an NFL player in the middle of a play ever in full control of his body.

Football moves like this one... where they're contorting and diving despite the fact that they've just jumped in the air or been hit by a linebacker or tripped by a defender... are the best kinds of football moves there are.

HE DID NOT DIVE. I'm not sure what part of this you are having issues with, but it didn't happen. You are clearly projecting what you want to see over what actually happened. LOOK AT THE LOOP AGAIN. It's not there.

He DID extend his arm out at the last second of the fall, but that was not a dive. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

I say look at the loop again and tell me when it appears he was ever in control of his body between when he first touched the ball and when he hit the ground. Again, even though he wasn't I still say call it a catch, but according to the rules if you are not in full control of your body you must be in full control of the ball all the way through the contact with the ground.

There are 2 statements in the rule. I agree Dez did not follow the section your are quoting.
But the rule goes on to describe something that never happened in the catch.

If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control

 

[ducky]

That aside.. which ever side of line you are in terms of how this particular play should have been called according to the rules.... its not cut and dried either way.

Actually it is as cut and dry as it gets.

Dez was falling to the ground while making a catch. If you can't see that, you are blind as a bat. Knowing that, he needs to maintain control of the football throughout that entire process. He does not do that as the ball comes in contact with the ground and is jarred loose. Incomplete pass.

There isn't a decent ref in the NFL that would have looked at that replay and made a different call.

 

[gordontrue]

Not even close. It's the best example of not being in control of the 3 so-called steps. He was nearly horizontal and it looked more like stubbing his toe while still trying to get control than an actual step. Look at that loop again. Tell me you don't see his foot skip on that third 'step'. Go ahead, tell me. It was more of a skid than a step. There is no universe in which that can be deemed a football move.

See this is where the ridiculous absolutism and finality of your views on such a subjective play tells me that discussion with you on the matter is pointless.


If you truly believe that the location of the endzone had nothing to do with the way Bryant came down and where he came down and the position of his arm and that 3rd step... then you have nothing to gain or provide in a discussion on the matter.

 

[WizardHawk]

There are 2 statements in the rule. I agree Dez did not follow the section your are quoting.
But the rule goes on to describe something that never happened in the catch.

If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control

The ground did cause the ball to come out of control. It touched the ground during that moment. It caused the ball to bounce up toward his helmet above his arm. It's so minute and ridiculous, but this is what the league intended as how the rule is supposed to be interpreted.

 

[Scooby-Doo]

The 3rd step to me is a very intentional lunge towards the goal line. I'm surprised to hear anyone contending this fact.

The fact that people are contending it pretty much eliminates the idea that it is a fact.

 

[gordontrue]

Actually it is as cut and dry as it gets.

Dez was falling to the ground while making a catch. If you can't see that, you are blind as a bat. Knowing that, he needs to maintain control of the football throughout that entire process. He does not do that as the ball comes in contact with the ground and is jarred loose. Incomplete pass.

There isn't a decent ref in the NFL that would have looked at that replay and made a different call.

I find it to be far from cut and dried.

I respect the opinion that the play was called correctly according to the current rules and it is not hard to see that viewpoint.

But to act like its an easy, obvious call that anyone who isn't as "blind as a bat" would agree with is just silly.

There absolutely is a question as to whether he was making a football move and to what extent his falling motion played a part in that... the ref who made the call said as much... and he ultimately sided with your viewpoint.

 

[gordontrue]

The fact that people are contending it pretty much eliminates the idea that it is a fact.

Fair enough, I should have used a better word than 'fact' in that context. Back to the original point of that post... I'm surprised to hear anyone contend that Dez Bryant was lunging towards the endzone purposefully.

 

[Kumquat]

It's not enough to overturn the play called on the field is the thing. I mean if the replay where the ball clearly bounces off the ground and up into the Packers receiver is not enough to call back this was not in what was a judgment call.

 

[WizardHawk]

Fair enough, I should have used a better word than 'fact' in that context. Back to the original point of that post... I'm surprised to hear anyone contend that Dez Bryant was lunging towards the endzone purposefully.

He didn't. At all. Not even a little bit.

His '3rd step' had his toe skip before he took the divot out. It was therefore dragging as opposed to pushing off. He was nearly horizontal at the time it skipped.

There is no reasonable way to infer he was purposefully pushing off toward the end zone.

Watch that loop again and follow the angle of just his helmet all the way from the catch to the ground. Ignore his feet, ball, everything else. Just look at his helmet. If he was diving/lunging toward the end zone he would have had some push that moved his body more forward than the falling was already carrying him right? Look at it and tell me you see his body going more forward after that so-called 3rd step. It simply didn't happen man.

https://vine.co/v/ODZI5HU6gX6