Posted:
#1
Obviously this will be shown all week and it will be debated for a while so I'm here to settle the argument once and for all. This thread may be a tad bit long but I believe it should end all debate and any semi intelligent person will agree with what I have to say. My view on the subject is that it was a very bad call, the catch itself was a judgement call but there is absolutely no way It should have been overturned. I see a ton of people quoting the rule "maintaing the catch through the ground " but not many posting the entire rule so here is a link to it.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AP_NFL/status/554385136591314944/photo/1
Three things need to happen for a receiver to make a catch and turn into a runner with possession of the ball. He must have two feet down, he must possess and control the ball, and he make a move common to the game of football known as a football move. I'm going to say this one time clearly, the rule about maintaing the ball through the process of the catch only applies if the reciever has not met one or any of these three criteria, because a player does meet the three instances of a catch he is now a runner and no longer a reciever.
The rule about the ball hitting the ground and the player "not controlling through the catch" even though It appears like he has possession by rule applies to the entire field of play however it is only truly applicable in the endzone or going out of bounds catches. The reason for this is because in if a receiver goes to the ground in the endzone or out of bounds it is impossible for that player to make a football move prior to the ball hitting the ground . For example calvin Johnson caught the ball,h ad two feet down and had possession however since he was in the endzone and going to the ground he unable to make a football move before the ball hit the ground because the play is ruled over when the ball crosses the goal line. In turn, all three criteria for making a catch were not completed and the "maintaining through the catch/ground" rule comes into play so instead of it being a catch and a touchdown it needs to be ruled incomplete.
What happened with dez bryant was not the calvin Johnson play and I challenge you to find me another play where this rule applies in the field of play excluding the endzone or a catch that was made going out of bounds. The following is a fact, dez bryant caught the ball, had the ball in his hands and brought the ball to his shoulder then stuck the ball out in one hand while taking 3 steps and reached towards the goal line. This is my opinion and the opinion of some others which doesn't matter, dez Bryant had possession prior to hitting ground and the ball hitting the ground. If dez Bryant had completed the three rules of making a catch which are again , possession, feet down, and football move then the rule about the ball hitting the ground doesn't apply because he is a runner no longer a receiver. However like I said that is my opinion, it is not the opinions of gene serantore and other officials. Their opinions were that dez reaching for the goaline was not a move "common to the game of football", that is the quote of what he told Jason garret. Making dez only have two of the three criteria to become a runner and thus still a receiver and allowing the officials to move on to "maintaining the ball through the ground/catch" rule. And that is ok, that's a judgement call, did he or did he not have possession prior to the ball hitting the ground. The ruling doesn't have much to do with the rule of controlling the ball through the catch although it seems like that, it has everything to do with whether or not possession was deemed prior to that. But this is where the mistake was made and anyone who is not an idiot or unbiased should agree and this is proven by the fact that this in itself is an argument and a debate. You may think dez had possession before the ball hitting the ground like I do or you may think he didn't like gene did, however the call on the field was a completed catch and if you think that dez Bryant catching the ball, tucking the catch by his shoulder, moving it into his left hand, and reaching for the goal line showed CONCLUSIVELY that he did NOT have possession which in turn brings the "ball controlled through hitting the ground" rule into play then you are biased or an idiot. To overturn a call on the field there must be conclusive evidence and if there is absolutely no way that someone can look at dez, before he and the ball hit the ground, and say that conclusively he didn't have possession, that was the mistake made by the refs that robbed the Cowboys of a chance to win the game. And whoever thinks this compares to last weeks call is also an idiot that was a 3 and 1 on the 45 with almost 9 minutes left not a 4 and 2 with under four minutes left with a spot at the one yard line.
Disclaimer I had the packers minus 5.5 and am an Eagles fan from philly who despises the Cowboys. However I am unbiased, objective and know football. I don't know if it was a catch or not that's a discretion call but what I do know is that overturning the play on the field was a horrendous call and took away from the game and continues this embarrassing nfl season that' makes the league look like an absolute farce.
0
Hot Forum Topics
