Lunging for the end zone is not a football move? The ground can't cause a fumble, and Dez had control for almost 2 seconds
I guess it's live by the bad cal (last week)l / die by the bad call.
Um no. Contrary to the popular belief of the large number of unintelligent fans and the media that blew that out of proportion to cater to the large demographic, that had little if anything to do with the out come of that game. It was on 3rd and 1 with the lions leading in cowboys territory with 8 minutes left. If you need a penalty to pick up 1 yard, you don't deserve to win. Especially if you proceed to punt the ball 10 yards and fumble the game away twice on the last drive.
Not to mention the countless other calls that went Detroit's way like the bs pi on Williams where he was pushed into a db by another db, the roughing the kicker call the ultimately gave them a TD that was not called on the lions later for the exact same thing, etc.
Rogers winner.......Romo loser
Bad rule, but the rule is the rule. Black and white, correct call. Unlike last week when it was total judgement call, mysterious flag pickup never before seen in history.
The Detroit call was at least debatable. This I don't understand. Is a football moved defined? If having control of the ball and running forward is not a football move then you could catch the ball, run 60 yards straight down field, drop it, and day it was incomplete
My understanding is that if there is ANY contact with the defender after control of the ball is established then the ruling the officials used to overturn the play does not apply. While it was very minimal, there was contact after the catch and therefore changes the way the play is viewed all together. Either way, terrible call by the officials. They blew it on Cobb's catch in the final seconds of the first half also. Really bad officiating all the way around.
For all those who doubt the call...here is the actual rule... N.F.L. Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1: Going to the ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
Terry Webster wrote:For all those who doubt the call...here is the actual rule... N.F.L. Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1: Going to the ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
Nobody is questioning this rule, the question is whether he was in the act of catching, or had completed the catch and had control. Thus the "football move" debate
DanFreibergerForHeisman wrote:He was bobbling it continuously and it hit the ground. There was never control. I'm surprised everybody is so worked up about this one.
That's absolutely not true. When he looked and dove for the end zone he had complete control of the ball. It was secure in his arm. No bobble at all.
SMU-12 NCAA appearances, 1 Final Four 2014-15 & 2016-17 AAC Men's Basketball Champs
It bobbled when it hit the ground and rolled...he didn't take it all the way to the ground and a stumble after the catch isn't a football move. There was no lunge just an arm extension.
Last edited by 03Mustang on Sun Jan 11, 2015 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2923980/dez2.0.gif)
