PonyFans.com

The mistake the referees made is that he wasn't just falling to the ground. He took three steps and after having possession was twisting to try to get to the touchdown. The right call was Cowboys ball on the one.

By the way - I think Detroit got hosed on the call last week - so not seeing this through cowboys colored glasses. It was a horrific call to have actually looked at the replay and OVERTURNED the call based on what happened. If he had just fallen straight down to the ground and the ball popped out - then its an incompletion.

A similar play happened to Aldrick Robinson last year for the Redskins. They called it incomplete and I was stunned. I think if you are catching and falling while you are catching, no matter how many steps are in-between, if you don't hold it when you hit the ground, no catch. That play made AR a goat instead of a hero.

whatever the redskins do doesn't matter.

Lebanese4Life wrote:footballdad how about you take an unbiased view and not let your cowboys hate influence you

Will do, as soon as you take an unbiased view and not let your cowboys love influence you. No 'hate', it's just too easy to root against a buffoon like Jerry.

Correct call according to the rules. Send complaints and petition to NFL rules committee

Then the rules are stupid. Unbelievable.

Nacho wrote:whatever the redskins do doesn't matter.

Maybe to you. But regardless, I used that example since it involved a Mustang, Aldrick Robinson as the receiver.

aldrick is now with a good team-the ravens.

Nacho wrote:what if he ran 50 yards, jumped over 3 tacklers, went sideways, waved to his mom, jumped up and down, ran in a circle and then fell down. what does the rule say about that?

It probably depends on whether or not he had the ball while he was doing all that.

Oldmins wrote:

Nacho wrote:what if he ran 50 yards, jumped over 3 tacklers, went sideways, waved to his mom, jumped up and down, ran in a circle and then fell down. what does the rule say about that?

It probably depends on whether or not he had the ball while he was doing all that.

or he's drunk or possibly just had a seizure.

Funny how things get started.
I didn't see "3 steps."

All Dez had to do is catch it and control it to the ground. Instead he goes for the hotdog, superflop to the pylon, bobbling it twice along the way.

BTW, this couldn't have happened to a more deserving team - or fan base.
Detroit got WAY more [deleted] by refs the week prior.

JJ got his due too - after party-bussing it with head of officiating last summer.
bwa-hahahahahaha!

mr. pony wrote:Funny how things get started.
I didn't see "3 steps."

All Dez had to do is catch it and control it to the ground. Instead he goes for the hotdog, superflop to the pylon, bobbling it twice along the way.

BTW, this couldn't have happened to a more deserving team - or fan base.
Detroit got WAY more [deleted] by refs the week prior.

JJ got his due too - after party-bussing it with head of officiating last summer.
bwa-hahahahahaha!

1. Agree on hotdoging
2. Detroit refing was bizarre throughout. Did you not watch the first half?
3. Thanks @sshole, nice to be personally insulted.

The more I look at it, the more I feel the Cowboys got hosed.
Even IF there is conclusive evidence that ball hit the ground, I cannot for certain say that the ball came loose at that very moment or afterward when he was squeezing the ball, in which case he secured and rolled into endzone.

Apparently this rule was constructed to avoid the "cheap fumble" penalizing the receiver for catching with 2 feet down and immediately getting popped and fumble.
The rules committee has got to diffentialte within this rule those incompletions/fumble issues caused by the defender hit and the plays like the Bryant catch.

NFL really blew it. Should have been a great clutch catch that very well could have lead to epic ending in OT. Classic game ruined. Yes, Packets very well could have one, but we football fans were robbed.

And the ref on the field nailed it. He clearly motioned catch and down by contact.

reminds me of the old baseball story..
A pitcher throws the ball, the catcher catches it, and the batter watches the pitch go by...no sound...
The catcher turns after several seconds, and in an exasperated tone, asked:
"Was it a ball or a strike?"
The ump calmly replies:
"It isn't anything until I call it."

It was incomplete. The refs called it. In spite of what your eyes and mind tell you.

Incomplete

peruna81 wrote:reminds me of the old baseball story..
A pitcher throws the ball, the catcher catches it, and the batter watches the pitch go by...no sound...
The catcher turns after several seconds, and in an exasperated tone, asked:
"Was it a ball or a strike?"
The ump calmly replies:
"It isn't anything until I call it."

It was incomplete. The refs called it. In spite of what your eyes and mind tell you.

Incomplete

Except that it was called complete. So you're wrong.