dez bryant
- Thread starter jecornel
- Start date
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
Tried to make the hero play, dropped the ball.
Green Bay would have won anyway.
Green Bay would have won anyway.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
If you can't see that Dez put the ball on the ground prior to completing the process of a catch, you deserve #Owen16.
Tequilla
Active poster
And Boobs, I get the rules in how they are written. I get that with the way the rules are written the outcome was what it was. I'm also saying that the rule is more FS than Miley Cyrus' throwing motion and if your common sense can't see that Dez made that catch then I can't help you.
TierbsHsotBoobs
New Fish
He's already falling to the ground on the 2nd step. Case closed.
I agree that the rule is absolutely fucktarded. I just have no idea how to make the rule better.
Tequilla
Active poster
I get the rule ... I don't even disagree with the rule when it comes to an immediate act of tackling someone after the catch.
But in this case, the player took 3 steps, changed hands in which he was holding the football to protect it from the defender (which I absolutely consider a football move), and tried to stretch the football to the goal line (again, another play that I consider a football play). Where does the line stop between being part of the act of making the catch versus the ground causing the fumble?
NFL officials are very good normally with interpreting the rule. The official that made the original call was in GREAT position to make the call and apply judgment regarding whether or not he completed a catch and made a football play or not.
But in this case, the player took 3 steps, changed hands in which he was holding the football to protect it from the defender (which I absolutely consider a football move), and tried to stretch the football to the goal line (again, another play that I consider a football play). Where does the line stop between being part of the act of making the catch versus the ground causing the fumble?
NFL officials are very good normally with interpreting the rule. The official that made the original call was in GREAT position to make the call and apply judgment regarding whether or not he completed a catch and made a football play or not.
UWerentThereMan
New Fish
Live by refball, die by refball.
CuntWaffle
New Fish
He was falling as soon as he caught it. Those "steps" he took were momentum falling steps. He didn't catchthe ball, take 3 steps, then trip.
Stupid rule, right call, case closed.
CuntWaffle
New Fish
It should be a catch 100%. Rule needs to be changed. It has however been consistently called the past few years and by the rule book was the correct call by definition.
99.999999999% of people think that should be a catch and the NFL needs to change that rule as soon as they possibly can.
99.999999999% of people think that should be a catch and the NFL needs to change that rule as soon as they possibly can.
Tequilla
Active poster
The reason he was falling was because the defender fell in his path trying to break up the pass. There's no way in the world that he was trying to make a tackle with the way that he was flailing away.
If you really want to be anal on this kind of stuff, you could say that any catch by a receiver in some way eventually leads to him going to the ground.
It's a stupid rule as it is currently created. I'm all for the instantaneous hit or the guy dragging 2 toes to stay in bounds and if the ball hits the ground or pops loose after hitting the ball that that isn't a catch. But when someone takes 3 steps (like Dez) or 5 steps (like in the UW picture above), that's control at some point.