[NFL] vBook: Cowboys vs Packers

gkIrish

Greek God
Messages
13,184
Reaction score
1,004
He caught it with two hands, brought the ball to his chest, and then put the ball in his left hand. If he were bracing himself for the fall (and not reaching out with his left hand), he would have just kept the ball in both hands.

His lunge comes late, so I can see how it is close. But it was ruled a catch on the field....I don't get how anyone can say he 100% wasn't lunging with the ball and overturn that.

If you watch enough NFL you see that play all the time and it's consistently called an incomplete pass. To me it wasn't even close and thus it was overturned. Gene Steratore is widely considered to be the best referee in the NFL and Pereira is widely considered to be the best rules analyst (as he created many of them) and they both agree with me.
 

Rhode Irish

Semi-retired
Messages
7,057
Reaction score
900
It doesn't matter if he changed hands with the ball 20 times or lunged or anything. The rule is if you go to the ground in the act of the catch, which he was, and lose control at any point going to or on the ground, it is not a catch. He stumbled as he was coming down with it and stumbled a few steps before going down. Within the rule he was still in the process of the catch and did not maintain control thru the process.

Again, forget precedent because we all know what that is. But how could you watch the play and think he was still in the process of making the catch when he went to the ground? It looked to me and any rational human being that the process of catching the ball was completed about six or seven yards back up the field.
 

Rhode Irish

Semi-retired
Messages
7,057
Reaction score
900
If you watch enough NFL you see that play all the time and it's consistently called an incomplete pass. To me it wasn't even close and thus it was overturned. Gene Steratore is widely considered to be the best referee in the NFL and Pereira is widely considered to be the best rules analyst (as he created many of them) and they both agree with me.

Mike Pereira is a clearly stupid human being, though. So the fact that he created the rules and is considered good at interpreting them is a good reason to be very suspect of the competency of NFL officials and the wisdom of rules they are enforcing. Every time I hear him talk I lose more confidence in the officiating, and I didn't have a lot to begin with before he started babbling on my TV.
 

Irish Insanity

Well-known member
Messages
9,885
Reaction score
584
Again, forget precedent because we all know what that is. But how could you watch the play and think he was still in the process of making the catch when he went to the ground? It looked to me and any rational human being that the process of catching the ball was completed about six or seven yards back up the field.

Because he never controlled his body after catching the ball in the air. At no point in time as he was coming down, or after, was he ever in control of his body. The process of the catch and his momentum eventually carried him to the ground where he didn't control the ball upon landing.

I'm a Lions fan and the Johnson TD was similar to this one. He caught it, came down and used his hand that had the ball in it to balance a bit. He was already down in the endzone and the ball came out. TD was waved off because his momentum carried him to the ground which was considered the process of the catch. I think it should have been a catch. But by the rules, it wasn't.
 

Rhode Irish

Semi-retired
Messages
7,057
Reaction score
900
Because he never controlled his body after catching the ball in the air. At no point in time as he was coming down, or after, was he ever in control of his body.

I mean...this is just factually wrong and I couldn't possibly disagree more. Of course he controlled his body, he had already taken three steps and was in the process of trying to get a part of it over the goal line (not complete the catch) when the ball touched the ground.

That we can have this kind of disagreement is why the rule is garbage, though.
 
Last edited:

gkIrish

Greek God
Messages
13,184
Reaction score
1,004
Again, forget precedent because we all know what that is. But how could you watch the play and think he was still in the process of making the catch when he went to the ground? It looked to me and any rational human being that the process of catching the ball was completed about six or seven yards back up the field.

Mike Pereira is a clearly stupid human being, though. So the fact that he created the rules and is considered good at interpreting them is a good reason to be very suspect of the competency of NFL officials and the wisdom of rules they are enforcing. Every time I hear him talk I lose more confidence in the officiating, and I didn't have a lot to begin with before he started babbling on my TV.

You keep basically saying the rule is bad. Which is a fine opinion, but basically irrelevant.

Was Dez falling down or running is basically the only question that needs to be answered. And to me it's clear he was just falling down. His head was not looking up, his body motion was constantly moving towards the ground, and he had no control of his lower body. So, by rule, since the ball hit the ground and moved, it was an incomplete pass. I don't know how much NFL you watch but it's really not even that close in my mind. I saw one angle of the play and immediately turned to my friends and said they are definitely overturning that.
 

Irish Insanity

Well-known member
Messages
9,885
Reaction score
584
I mean...this is just factually wrong and I couldn't possibly disagree more.

He stumbled from the second his first foot hit the ground and continued to until he managed a wimpy half lunge off of one foot while going down. At least that's how I saw it.
 

irishfan

Irish Hoops Mod
Messages
7,205
Reaction score
607
If you watch enough NFL you see that play all the time and it's consistently called an incomplete pass. To me it wasn't even close and thus it was overturned. Gene Steratore is widely considered to be the best referee in the NFL and Pereira is widely considered to be the best rules analyst (as he created many of them) and they both agree with me.

I watch an obnoxious amount of football, NFL included. The ruling just comes down to whether or not you think the "lunge" was real or not, because that would count as a football move. I think his actions from when he first secured the pass to when his left arm came down easily constituted a "football move." I thought what Dez did was secure the catch, put the ball in his left hand, and lunge for the goal line. I didn't think what he did was catch it, fall to the ground without making a move, and lose the ball. I can see why people think that's what happened, and why they think it was a good call. I just don't feel that way.
 

Irish Insanity

Well-known member
Messages
9,885
Reaction score
584
You are factually wrong man. I don't know how you can't think he is falling down.

Refs (correctly) overturn Dez Bryant's incredible catch - SBNation.com

Rhode, I will say after watching the second gif, I don't think he comes down out of control. I think the first 2 steps are in control. It is the tangled feet of the defender that causes the fall. How that aligns with the rule, I don't know.

EDIT: To me that would mean the act of the catch didn't carry him to the ground, tripping over the defender did. Which means he took 2 steps, his knee hit, and his elbow hit, all before losing control.
 
Last edited:

Rhode Irish

Semi-retired
Messages
7,057
Reaction score
900
I will admit that even watching it live I was praying McCarthy wouldn't challenge it, because even though the rule is bad and if I was reffing I would interpret it in a way that made that a completed pass, I know how the league views these plays. It is just frustrating because I think the result is clearly wrong, even in the context of the rule.
 

IrishinSyria

In truth lies victory
Messages
6,046
Reaction score
1,924
I think there's a pretty huge distinction between the Johnson non-catch and this one: Johnson did not maintain possession of the ball after it hit the turf. In my viewing of the Bryant non-catch, he comes down with it, secures the ball, and maintains control of the ball as he lunges and it hits the field. The ball only comes out after hitting the field, and he regains possession before it hits the grass.
 

irishfan

Irish Hoops Mod
Messages
7,205
Reaction score
607
Former NFL Official Highlights The Biggest Problem With The Controversial Dez Bryant Reversal - Business Insider

After the game, Mike Pereira, a former NFL official and the former vice president of officiating for the NFL, explained on FOX why the reversal was correct. But after listening to his explanation I am actually less convinced that the right call was made.

The issue comes with whether or not Bryant made "a football move" before losing control. If Bryant does make a football move, it is a catch and a fumble (that he recovered). One example of a football move is stretching the ball towards the end zone, which it appears that Bryant did.

However, according to Pereira, it was not enough of a stretch.

"If you're going to the ground, you have to prove that you have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game and do so," said Pereira. "And part of that is stretching all the way out and to me even though he moved the ball a little bit forward, they are not going to consider that a football act."

And herein lies the problem.

Pereira admits Bryant stretches the ball towards the end zone, but apparently it wasn't enough. So, now the official must determine the degree of stretching and reaching by the receiver as if they don't have enough to worry about.

Interesting read on it.
 

IrishinSyria

In truth lies victory
Messages
6,046
Reaction score
1,924
I think there's a pretty huge distinction between the Johnson non-catch and this one: Johnson did not maintain possession of the ball after it hit the turf. In my viewing of the Bryant non-catch, he comes down with it, secures the ball, and maintains control of the ball as he lunges and it hits the field. The ball only comes out after hitting the field, and he regains possession before it hits the grass.

Just to expand on this, here is the rule:

"If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."

I think there's two problems:

a: "In the act of catching a pass". This is what most of the discussion has centered around, and I agree with those that think that moving the ball from his chest to his left arm and extending it was enough to complete the catch.

b: "If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the round, the pass is complete."

To me, this does not mean that if any part of the ball touches the ground ever it is an incomplete pass. The way I looked at the play, it looked like Dez was in full control of the ball as it struck the ground. It was only as his arm bounced up from the momentum that he lost control of the ball. However, he rolled around and grabbed the ball which should have, in my eyes, made the entire thing a non-issue.
 

IrishinSyria

In truth lies victory
Messages
6,046
Reaction score
1,924
It wasn't a catch, deal with it. NFL rules.

The cowboys and packers are two of my least favorite teams on the planet, so I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I think it's an interesting discussion. It's not like the rules are very clear.
 

GoldenDomer

preferred walk on
Messages
3,160
Reaction score
166
dead-horse.gif
 
Top