Good to know NFL

Yes

Tony Romo is now the GOAT, thanks Dez

It wasn't a catch 2 weeks ago.....

I don't think either of those TD's were catches.

Neither were catches.

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

WAAAAAAAAA

That was clearly a TD. Took 5 steps before diving to endzone. Completely different than getting tackled to ground and losing the ball.

---

Exactly.

He was clearly running towards end zone.

Lol, so now it's 5 steps? Why not 10?

Point is the rule sucks and needs definition. Cowboy fans have been miserable watching the playoffs and yet that exact same type of play cost us getting into the NFC championship game at the end if the 4th quarter. The only difference was the ref in our game had a different opinion. Sucks!

Went home and watched Dez replay last night. The subtle differences between the plays are, well, subtle. In both plays the player demonstrated control, then extended the ball toward the goal line. The problem, I think, is what would have been called if the ball had come loose either a millisecond before hitting the ground or breaking the plane. Would a fumble have been called on either play?

Just count the number of footfalls after the balls were caught. No need for melodrama.

3 steps in both cases. The shoulder blades of the Eagles' receiver turned more. How many degrees do the shoulder blades need to turn? Is it a TD just because it was a crossing route?

Need to look at it from when it could have been ruled a fumble, not from the perspective of what demonstrates a catch.

BMX Bandit said:

---

And the not subtle difference is that ertz turned and started running, which Dez didn't do

---

Exactly. I think the rule is idiotic as written. But dez was immediately stumbling, and Ertz was fully in control and upright until his third step.

Hi, Im Brett said:

---

WAAAAAAAAA

That was clearly a TD. Took 5 steps before diving to endzone. Completely different than getting tackled to ground and losing the ball.

---

Looked like he got tripped on his 3rd step to me.

We've all seen the risk of extending the ball toward the goal line. It can get knocked out and hit the pylon for a touchback, etc. The Cowboys won a game this season on a play like that.

I would have loved to see the ruling if the Ertz had dropped the ball 1 inch before crossing the goal line.

Btw I saw a highlight from past Superbowls and I don't recall the particulars but receiver catches ball standing flat footed in the end zone. Defender takes 1 to 2 steps after catch and blows him up, they called it incomplete. No one complained or even questioned it yet it was clearly a TD.

Well, well, well...

94chem said:

---

Well, well, well...

---

Your errors above haven't changed.

Jesus ****ing christ.


The people in the NFL says it should have been a catch, but that the rules were applied accurately at the time. It was a statement about needing to amend the rule rather than saying the refs got it wrong.

And from what I heard yesterday, they will be rewriting the rule with language to make anything like Dez's catch a by-the-rules catch. The guy that was talking about it did point out that "making a football move" was not in the old rule and will not be in the new rule either.

Rule should have been fixed after the Megatron TD catch in Chicago was taken off the board, 8 years ago.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22858626/nfl-simplify-language-defines-completed-catch

Quote:

---

The proposal, tweeted Wednesday by senior vice president of officiating Al Riveron, establishes three elements of a catch: control, in bounds and a "football move."

---

Apparently the "football move" is recommended to be part of the new rule. I don't understand why there has to be a broadly subjective element. Why isn't "control and in bounds" good enough? Determining control is already subjective, but much less so than determining if someone made a "football move".

This definition also opens up ridiculous possibilities. Let's say the receiver catches a fade in the end zone and gets both feet down then goes out of bounds. Or a diving out of bounds catch dragging the toes. Neither of those catches has a "football move" involved, but both are obviously catches.

Trust the NFL to take an opportunity to fix a ridiculous controversy and instead turn it into an equally ridiculous controversy

Control. 2 feet. COMPLETION.

ITS THAT SIMPLE.

Unthought Known said:

---

Control. 2 feet. COMPLETION.

ITS THAT SIMPLE.

---

So someone jumps up and catches the ball and gets two feet down for a millisecond and then gets killed by the safety immediately. You want that to be a catch and then a fumble when the ball comes flying out? It would be easier to ref, but I think a lot of people would hate the rule. It would definitely be a huge change from the way they have called it in the past.

mavsfan4ever said:

---

Unthought Known said:

---

Control. 2 feet. COMPLETION.

ITS THAT SIMPLE.

---

So someone jumps up and catches the ball and gets two feet down for a millisecond and then gets killed by the safety immediately. You want that to be a catch and then a fumble when the ball comes flying out? It would be easier to ref, but I think a lot of people would hate the rule. It would definitely be a huge change from the way they have called it in the past.

---

Man. I would hate for him to die in that situation. But if he dies you have to give him the catch.

But sereiously, you are right. They are including a football move like reaching for the goal line.

I think this just swings the pendulum back the other way. Now the controversy will be whether or not it's a fumble or an incomplete pass.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/football-101/0ap3000000852291/Football-Town-A-roster-move-that-opened-up-old-wounds

Secure, 2 feet or another body part, football move.

So tucking the ball, taking another step, reaching the ball, are all football moves.

Common sense wasn't always so common in the NFL.

03_Aggie said:

---

I think this just swings the pendulum back the other way. Now the controversy will be whether or not it's a fumble or an incomplete pass.

---

We will have more fumbles and they admitted it.