slogriff Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Its the very first thing Baldino says..."The key here is the ref winding the clock as he calls forward progress stopped in the field of play" or something to that nature forward progress is completely up to the discretion of the ref...it can cause issues. Like the Gresham play, the ref called it way too fast imo and the player dropping the ball should have "happened" but because the whistle blew the play dead prior to it happening, the drop doesn't factor into the play. Its pretty screwy Ok the clouds are parting and I can see where your coming from now. Still seems really screwy and very inconsistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbit Posted January 14, 2015 Share Posted January 14, 2015 Ok the clouds are parting and I can see where your coming from now. Still seems really screwy and very inconsistent. Yes it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slogriff Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Gresham's forward progress was whistled dead. Seemed really quick for him to deem forward progress but that's the end of it, the whistle blew so it doesn't matter what happened afterwards. ...The ref wasn't even stopping the clock due to him being knocked out of bounds or even looking at the receiver. I think it was bad officiating The Dez catch was the correct call as the rule is written. Watch the play in real time speed and its obviously nothing but forward momentum and falling. Mabye this is high profile enough to change the rule though. Two hands with three steps I can see becoming enough for possession, even in the act of going to the ground As you suggested, I went back and watched the play again. I disagree with your assertion that it's obviously nothing but forward momentum. Not so sure how you can say that when the defender leg whips Bryant's right leg just after it hits the ground. I contend Dez could/would have been able to take that ball into the end zone without the tackle/contact. Everyone seems to ignore the defender had a part in this play. He controlled the ball, both feet hit the ground and the defender knocked his leg out from underneath him causing him to fall. The play was called a completed catch and down inside the one. To overturn the call you have to contend that Dez' momentum was the reason he fell to the ground and not the hit/tackle. We know his leg is taken out from underneath him and that you would reasonably expect the player to fall. To ignore this contact and assume he would have fallen anyway is pure speculation. I don't see how speculation is indisputable evidence to overturn a play where you see the defender take his leg out and he readily falls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 As you suggested, I went back and watched the play again. I disagree with your assertion that it's obviously nothing but forward momentum. Not so sure how you can say that when the defender leg whips Bryant's right leg just after it hits the ground. I contend Dez could/would have been able to take that ball into the end zone without the tackle/contact. Everyone seems to ignore the defender had a part in this play. He controlled the ball, both feet hit the ground and the defender knocked his leg out from underneath him causing him to fall. The play was called a completed catch and down inside the one. To overturn the call you have to contend that Dez' momentum was the reason he fell to the ground and not the hit/tackle. We know his leg is taken out from underneath him and that you would reasonably expect the player to fall. To ignore this contact and assume he would have fallen anyway is pure speculation. I don't see how speculation is indisputable evidence to overturn a play where you see the defender take his leg out and he readily falls. The defender was on him before he came down. Shields even knocked the ball loose forcing Dez to re-secure the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbit Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 As you suggested, I went back and watched the play again. I disagree with your assertion that it's obviously nothing but forward momentum. Not so sure how you can say that when the defender leg whips Bryant's right leg just after it hits the ground. I contend Dez could/would have been able to take that ball into the end zone without the tackle/contact. Everyone seems to ignore the defender had a part in this play. He controlled the ball, both feet hit the ground and the defender knocked his leg out from underneath him causing him to fall. The play was called a completed catch and down inside the one. To overturn the call you have to contend that Dez' momentum was the reason he fell to the ground and not the hit/tackle. We know his leg is taken out from underneath him and that you would reasonably expect the player to fall. To ignore this contact and assume he would have fallen anyway is pure speculation. I don't see how speculation is indisputable evidence to overturn a play where you see the defender take his leg out and he readily falls. The reason it was overturned was because the ball moved though. They have 30...60? seconds under that hood. They saw the ball move and invoked the Calvin Johnson rule. It is what it is. Its the Cowboys anyways, who gives a....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slogriff Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 The reason it was overturned was because the ball moved though. They have 30...60? seconds under that hood. They saw the ball move and invoked the Calvin Johnson rule. It is what it is. Its the Cowboys anyways, who gives a....... Once again, thanks for your input. It is debatable he moves the ball to left hand before the defenders contact which may or may not have caused the fall. I don't know if the defender hitting the ball before he get feet down and controls ball has any effect on CJ rule. As far as that goes the defender hit Dez arm before the ball even arrives (although incidental). Bottom-line, it seems there is a general rule that seems to have some discretion/ambiguity in its application. The fact that there is extensive debate over ball control, momentum, timing of events, was there a normal football movement, was there enough of a football move ( how subjective can you be) etc leads me to question how can they say there is indisputable evidence to the overturn call on the field. But what do I know? I'm just a stupid Cowboys fan killing time waiting for off-season workouts. Once again, thanks for your insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bh32 Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Once again, thanks for your input. It is debatable he moves the ball to left hand before the defenders contact which may or may not have caused the fall. I don't know if the defender hitting the ball before he get feet down and controls ball has any effect on CJ rule. As far as that goes the defender hit Dez arm before the ball even arrives (although incidental). Bottom-line, it seems there is a general rule that seems to have some discretion/ambiguity in its application. The fact that there is extensive debate over ball control, momentum, timing of events, was there a normal football movement, was there enough of a football move ( how subjective can you be) etc leads me to question how can they say there is indisputable evidence to the overturn call on the field. But what do I know? I'm just a stupid Cowboys fan killing time waiting for off-season workouts. Once again, thanks for your insight. Even if it was ruled a catch Dallas would of still lost..Thier was over 4min left and Dallas could not stop Greenbay from marching right down the damn field..Get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slogriff Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Even if it was ruled a catch Dallas would of still lost..Thier was over 4min left and Dallas could not stop Greenbay from marching right down the damn field..Get over it. Indeed there was over over 4 mins left. In fact, there should have been > 4:30 but the officials got that wrong too. I have little doubt GB would have come back and scored to tie or take the lead back. They likely score and maybe leave Dallas time to get a last chance to score. I would have liked to seen Romo get a chance to lead a final drive. Rodgers rightfully gets much praise for his performance but Romo played pretty well too. He was 15-19 ( 1 incomplete being the non-catch) for a 143 rating. I believe 30 QBs have had > 140 rating in a playoff game. Romo is the very first to lose the game. Thanks for your concern but I'd like to think I'm over it. Dallas didn't capitalize on their chances and they lost. I expected them to go 6-10 so I'm pleased with how the season went and as previously stated look forward to hearing about off-season workouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger.Staubach Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 They should add to the sentence of the idiot in this article for wasting time/money. http://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2015/01/23/nfl-dallas-cowboys-fan-lawsuit-88-billion-overturned-catch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.