Dallas catch reversal

Called correctly according to that rule. The more I've watched it the more I think it wasn't a catch...according to the rule.

In general the rule is good. In this case and the Calvin case it resulted in two calls that were upsetting, but many, many other times it's resulted in the intuitively correct call. I don't think they change it.
 
I'd prefer no instant replay.


Oh, and get off my lawn.
 
Last edited:
gtphd said:
No, it's a terrible rule. By any reasonable definition, that was a catch. NFL should use the college interpretation of a catch.
Click to expand...
I think if you changed the rule to make this a catch, there would be many more other plays that turned into catches that people would call terrible.

The other option would be to not precisely define what a catch is and leave it totally up to the refs. That would allow them to get every call "right", in theory...but you can pick any one of the numerous threads complaining about refs to know why that's not ideal.
 
I don't think it was a catch. Pretty sure I saw the ball hit the ground.

That said, Dallas had it coming for them, so they can stop crying.
 
Correct call based on rule.

Another play showing how dumb the rule is. Forget allegiances and rule books for a second and watch the play. He caught the öööö ball.

Having said that I enjoyed watching Dez whine about it.
 
Cowboys mad = me happy. :rotfl:

That being said, I didn't watch the game but watched the replay. They should have gone with the call on the field, which I think was a catch.
 
I never saw the ball itself hit the ground. I though Dez's hand was cushioning it. IMO it's a catch.
 
Ish said:
I never saw the ball itself hit the ground. I though Dez's hand was cushioning it. IMO it's a catch.
Click to expand...

There's an angle looking at Bryant head-on. The ball definitely hits the ground, the ground causes it to pop up loose from Bryant's left hand.
 
Questions for the people that think it should have been called a catch:

1) Did you watch the replay that showed the ball hitting the ground and moving?

2) Are you a Cowboys fan?

I have no idea how anyone could argue this call. It sucks, because he made a great play, but the ball clearly bounced off the ground and caused him to lose control.

The Calvin catch was slightly different, IMO, because it almost looked like he hit the ground and then started to get up and run to celebrate, with the ball coming loose during the transition between those two motions. By rule, that one should have also not been a catch, because Calvin really should have tucked and secured the ball before trying to jump back up.
 
johncu said:
Questions for the people that think it should have been called a catch:

1) Did you watch the replay that showed the ball hitting the ground and moving?

2) Are you a Cowboys fan?

I have no idea how anyone could argue this call. It sucks, because he made a great play, but the ball clearly bounced off the ground and caused him to lose control.

The Calvin catch was slightly different, IMO, because it almost looked like he hit the ground and then started to get up and run to celebrate, with the ball coming loose during the transition between those two motions. By rule, that one should have also not been a catch, because Calvin really should have tucked and secured the ball before trying to jump back up.
Click to expand...

Winner :biggthumpup:
 
It was a correct call by the rules. I don't agree with the rules. I especially don't agree that apparently the same rule doesn't apply to punt returners (Colts/Broncos game). The Cowboys can eat my dick. Green Bay can lick my ass. Broncos can suck my taint. öööö everyone. I have no bias in either call.
 
Dez Bryant remains the biggest idiot in sports, he's the only one that tries to make that a one handed, highlight reel catch rather than just bringing it in to his chest with both hands like any normal WR
 
my take as a person with a financial interest at stake

johncu said:
Questions for the people that think it should have been called a catch:

1) Did you watch the replay that showed the ball hitting the ground and moving?

2) Are you a Cowboys fan?

I have no idea how anyone could argue this call. It sucks, because he made a great play, but the ball clearly bounced off the ground and caused him to lose control.

The Calvin catch was slightly different, IMO, because it almost looked like he hit the ground and then started to get up and run to celebrate, with the ball coming loose during the transition between those two motions. By rule, that one should have also not been a catch, because Calvin really should have tucked and secured the ball before trying to jump back up.
Click to expand...

I am a huge Calvin fan and thought that was a catch. i am not a Dez fan nor Cowboys fan and think it was a catch. The rules need to be rewritten IMO so this is not an issue. In any other level of football, it's a catch and it's not even close.

That being said, the reason I think it was a catch is he has possession no doubt. he took three steps brought it in and then stretched it out reaching for the goalline. He could have kept it close to his body but he stretched it out for a TD. So, the "ground caused a fumble" which of course it cannot do. There is no doubt in my mind it was a catch. I stand to make significant money if GB wins the NFC. I was pulling for GB. I am not surprised the NFL overturned it as they called Calvin's catch a non-catch which was equally absurd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top