- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: .
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:17 pm to BayouBengals03
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:17 pm to BayouBengals03
quote:
I don't think I'm really melting. Dallas didn't lose this game because of officiating, like many were claiming of Detroit last week.
MELT!!
I'm just fricking with you
0
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:17 pm to TH03
I see more melt from the Cowboys haters. Why, I have no idea 
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:17 pm to DelU249
No
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:18 pm to rocket31
quote:
clearly a completed pass
I don't think it was clearly either.
I would argue it was a catch, by rule.
Either way, whether or not it was a catch comes down to interpretation. That makes it pretty hard to reverse that call, IMO.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:18 pm to TH03
It was not a catch per the NFL Rule. You can argue the rule all you want to, but not the call. It was correct. Not a catch.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:18 pm to BayouBengals03
quote:
IMO
because you're so qualified
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:21 pm to BayouBengals03
quote:
I argue it was a catch, by rule.
Uh, no. You clearly do not know the rule.
quote:
NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino tweeted shortly after the game: "Bryant going to the ground. By rule he must hold onto it throughout entire process of contacting the ground. He didn't so it is incomplete."
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:21 pm to BayouBengals03
Of course the current and former professional refs defend overturning without addressing if it met the requirements for any overturned call. They've been ignoring replay rules on these type of calls for years. The problem is no one in the media calls them out on it, instead people debate the call. It is not fully clear if a football move was made; it is not fully clear if he was falling from the moment he started the catch.
Personally, given the current rules, I think it probably wasn't a catch. But this was a replay situation, replay rules are most important. And replay rules are clear, ruling on the field stands when it's a debateable situation.
Edit:And because some people's idea on debating rules is calling everyone a "______ fan," I also hate the Cowboys.
Personally, given the current rules, I think it probably wasn't a catch. But this was a replay situation, replay rules are most important. And replay rules are clear, ruling on the field stands when it's a debateable situation.
Edit:And because some people's idea on debating rules is calling everyone a "______ fan," I also hate the Cowboys.
This post was edited on 1/11/15 at 4:24 pm
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:21 pm to TheChosenOne
1. He is falling as this is not debateable.
2. If you are falling then you never have complete control of your body on the possession; therefore, I don't understand how anyone constitutes that as a football move. Honestly doesn't seem debateable at all.
3. Additionally, the ref called it a catch based on him catching the ball to the ground. GB challenged a completion not the fact it was a fumble or not.
2. If you are falling then you never have complete control of your body on the possession; therefore, I don't understand how anyone constitutes that as a football move. Honestly doesn't seem debateable at all.
3. Additionally, the ref called it a catch based on him catching the ball to the ground. GB challenged a completion not the fact it was a fumble or not.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:21 pm to TH03
quote:Is it baseball season?
because you're so qualified
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:22 pm to Colonel Flagg
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:25 pm to ATLsuTiger
If we were to hypothetically believe that there is a debate on football move and the replay inconclusive. We have to also hypothetically believe the ref made the call on the field based off of a football move. If he did this then that would have been stated prior to the review. It was not.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:25 pm to Joker
quote:
It was not a catch per the NFL Rule. You can argue the rule all you want to, but not the call. It was correct. Not a catch.
I don't know why there's 20 pages. It's CLEARLY not a catch.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:31 pm to arrakis
quote:
I don't know why there's 20 pages. It's CLEARLY not a catch.
All I can say for people who have no perspective on what CLEAR evidence looks like, pay more attention to all the NFL plays that aren't overturned every week with more clear evidence than this one. If the NFL would call this play "incontrovertible visual evidence," then they have dropped the ball (pun not intended) on a bunch of other calls that met that standard far better than this one.
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:32 pm to Colonel Flagg
I've seen enough one handed reaches for the goaline to know that's what Dez was attempting there.
This post was edited on 1/11/15 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:38 pm to DelU249
no 
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:40 pm to DelU249
Yes
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:43 pm to ATLsuTiger
Maybe Dez should have possessed the ball before getting greedy and trying to score . If he pulls that ball into his chest we aren't having this conversation
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:44 pm to fleaux
He possessed the ball and reached for the goaline. By rule that is a catch
Posted on 1/11/15 at 4:46 pm to fleaux
quote:
However, according to Pereira, it was not enough of a stretch.
"If you're going to the ground, you have to prove that you have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game and do so," said Pereira. "And part of that is stretching all the way out and to me even though he moved the ball a little bit forward, they are not going to consider that a football act."
And herein lies the problem.
Pereira admits Bryant stretches the ball towards the end zone, but apparently it wasn't enough. So, now the official must determine the degree of stretching and reaching by the receiver as if they don't have enough to worry about.
LINK
Get ready for the "Dez clause"
This post was edited on 1/11/15 at 4:47 pm
Page 21 of 47
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News