Jetsmanjb Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 The Cowboys got robbed... that was definitely a catch. Proves to me that NFL analysts and refs are just nerdy non athletic goons. Three steps, two knees down, and an elbow down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyjet Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 As per the rule it's NOT a catch. The rule sucks ask Calvin Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patriot Killa Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 All these really great thoughts you have about the playoff games could definitely find a nice spot in the playoff thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 The Cowboys got robbed... that was definitely a catch. Proves to me that NFL analysts and refs are just nerdy non athletic goons. Three steps, two knees down, and an elbow down. n-DEZ-BRYANT-large570.jpg You missed the part of the rule requiring posession all the way through, which didn't happen because the ball hit the ground and he juggled it thereafter. The Megatron play was different because he put the ball on the ground as he was getting up and then loss control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyjet Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Either way=no catch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyLV Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 The catch rule definitely does not follow the "50 guys in a bar" argument. I thought it was debatable that it hit the ground and he secured it while in the end zone. One of those calls I think should be upheld regardless of the call on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsmanjb Posted January 12, 2015 Author Share Posted January 12, 2015 Funny how both rulings got overturned in favor of the team playing at home. I would really love to see Jerry Jones talk about that play and how ridiculous it was to overturn it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefjetE Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Karma from the non calls last week vs Detroit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 rules and sh*t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRONX DUDE Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Rules are make to be broken. Tuff luck Boys. By the way I also thought it was a catch and I was rooting against the Cowboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patman Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I thought it was a catch because I thought he took three steps with the ball in his hand, hit the ground and recovered his own fumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I agreed with the officials on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lupz27 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I thought it was a catch, he gained possession, got 2 feet down, and then made IMO a football move, reaching for the pylon IMO is a normal football move, so then when the ball came loose it was after the completion of the catch, and should have been a completion ball on the 1 foot line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaSteve Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 It was a catch. The rule needs to change. Cut and dry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackout Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 The Cowboys got robbed... that was definitely a catch. Proves to me that NFL analysts and refs are just nerdy non athletic goons. Three steps, two knees down, and an elbow down. n-DEZ-BRYANT-large570.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papz187 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I thought it was a catch, he gained possession, got 2 feet down, and then made IMO a football move, reaching for the pylon IMO is a normal football move, so then when the ball came loose it was after the completion of the catch, and should have been a completion ball on the 1 foot line. Agreed 100%. By the rules it was a catch IMO because he had possession and made a football move by reaching for the goal line. Just by watching the play and using your two eyes it was a catch, period. Cowboys got screwed on that one. Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRONX DUDE Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I thought it was a catch because I thought he took three steps with the ball in his hand, hit the ground and recovered his own fumble. You guys cheated again. No soup for you!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRJETS Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 The Cowboys got robbed... that was definitely a catch. Proves to me that NFL analysts and refs are just nerdy non athletic goons. Three steps, two knees down, and an elbow down. n-DEZ-BRYANT-large570.jpg Payback is a bitc... Detroit got robbed last week in favor of the Cowboys so I got no sympathy for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetlife33 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I was rooting for the Cowboys and I didn't think it was a catch in real TV and then replay I still felt that way. Im not saying I'm 100% right and another persons opinion is wrong, just how I felt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 According to the rules as currently written, it was not a catch, The receiver has to maintain possession after hitting the ground, which the receiver clearly didn't do. From the best viewing angle, it is clear the ball went into the air, out of the receiver's hands completely. When he re-caught the ball, he was out of bounds. Incomplete. Unlike most here, I like the rule. It almost completely eliminates judgment calls. Did the receiver retain possession throughout the reception, including hitting the ground, or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJ Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 It was a catch ... until he hit the ground and lost control of the ball .. at which point it wasn't a catch and lost all possibility of it ever being a catch again. For all of eternity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 It was a catch. The rule needs to change. Cut and dry. yup. **** em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nico002 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 People just dont get this rule. the megatron play was not a catch because he lost control through the process of the catch. The Bryant play was a catch because the process ended the second he transitioned into a football move, ie reaching for the pylon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 People just dont get this rule. the megatron play was not a catch because he lost control through the process of the catch. The Bryant play was a catch because the process ended the second he transitioned into a football move, ie reaching for the pylon. But the ball popped out of his hands before he reached for the pylon. Thus, not a catch, as stated by the ref who reviewed the play, and the expert ex-ref in the booth who also said it was not a catch. The real proof will come tomorrow or the next day if the NFL says it was a catch, similar to their commenting on the blown PI reversal in the Lions-Cowboys game. I'll bet they don't say it was really a catch, because the rule, and the replay, are clear in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsmanjb Posted January 12, 2015 Author Share Posted January 12, 2015 It was a catch. The rule needs to change. Cut and dry. Exactly. Plays like this one shouldn't even be reviewable. There was a referee standing right there, and clearly, he would've been able to see whether or not it was indeed a catch. Which of course is why he ruled him down at the 1 yard line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Exactly. Plays like this one shouldn't even be reviewable. There was a referee standing right there, and clearly, he would've been able to see whether or not it was indeed a catch. But if you look at the replay, the ref was not looking at the player at the moment the ball popped out of his hands, but was looking instead at where he thought the ball should be spotted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetsmanjb Posted January 12, 2015 Author Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't like the way they use instant replay to get all anal and nitpicky about every single rule. It's just OCD and not how the game used to be played. In all honesty it is unnecessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcJet Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 The rules make it easy to decide. If you're a runner with possession, the ground can't cause a fumble. If you're catching a pass and going to the ground, better hold on to it all the way through. This takes all the guesswork out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j4jets Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I thought it was a catch, he gained possession, got 2 feet down, and then made IMO a football move, reaching for the pylon IMO is a normal football move, so then when the ball came loose it was after the completion of the catch, and should have been a completion ball on the 1 foot line. Exactly. Got two feet down n was diving towards the EZ (dive was part of the football move). He wasn't going down, rather diving ahead, reaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 I don't like the way they use instant replay to get all anal and nitpicky about every single rule. It's just OCD and not how the game used to be played. In all honesty it is unnecessary. In the past, a lot of games have hinged on blown calls. Just as this game, which probably would have gone the wrong way without the replay. The replay system is generally a good thing. The Lions-Cowboys game is a rare exception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 The rules make it easy to decide. If you're a runner with possession, the ground can't cause a fumble. If you're catching a pass and going to the ground, better hold on to it all the way through. This takes all the guesswork out of it. Not quite right. If a runner stumbles and falls w/o being contacted by an opposing player and the ground knocks the ball out of his hands, that's a fumble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcJet Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Football move doesn't matter. If he's going to the ground while catching the pass, he has to complete the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcJet Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Football move is a different rule for when a receiver loses the ball when he's upright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jvill 51 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So when does "the process of the catch" end? Is it 4 steps and a football move? 3 steps and 2 football moves? Or is it a completely arbitrary judgement call, meaning the ruling on the field shouldn't be reviewable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 So when does "the process of the catch" end? Is it 4 steps and a football move? 3 steps and 2 football moves? Or is it a completely arbitrary judgement call, meaning the ruling on the field shouldn't be reviewable? It ends once the player has struck the ground and has maintained possession throughout the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.