You are here

Jump to content


Photo

The touchdown that bothers me


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

#41 buybuydandavis

buybuydandavis

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,854 posts

Posted 23 July 2017 - 05:56 AM

Explain how this pertains to the current roster, or the upcoming season. 

 

It doesn't. 

 

Last I checked the "Dallas Cowboys Forum" was not named the "Current or Upcoming Dallas Cowboys Forum". We routinely talk about events and players going back to the 90s. 


  • gamewatcher likes this

Dead cap money is *dead*. It's not resurrected by keeping a guy on the team and paying him a salary this year, it is only pushed off onto a future year, and now you've added this year's salary to his cumulative cap hit. 


#42 THE OZ OF COWBOY COUNTRY

THE OZ OF COWBOY COUNTRY

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,248 posts
  • LocationBeaumont Texas

Posted 23 July 2017 - 01:20 PM

People have posted frozen frames of the ball in contact with the ground numerous times on this site.

http://media.culture...-Bay_190837.jpg


That he was short of the end zone isn't the key fact with Dez, it's that they ruled he didn't establish possession before going to the ground. I think the real difference with Beasley' play is the turning and diving to the end zone after having caught the ball facing the other way.

Both of them are catches. It's a conspiracy. Photo shopped images mean nothing. I believe it was a catch and I always will be live it is a catch. Cause I'm just stupid like that.

The ground cant cause a fumble after the reciever establishes his self as a runner. Dez took three steps, thusly establishing himself as a runner. And yes I'm making up words and rules to stay my stands. Believe. Believe. Believe.- I DO. I said I DO to the Dallas Cowboys decades ago and that I DO is til death do us part. I will not lose faith I will not stop believing. I would argue with Jesus, if Jesus said that wasnt a catch. IT WAS A CATCH.

#43 Rogers

Rogers

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,476 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 23 July 2017 - 02:09 PM

Both of them are catches. It's a conspiracy. Photo shopped images mean nothing. I believe it was a catch and I always will be live it is a catch. Cause I'm just stupid like that.
The ground cant cause a fumble after the reciever establishes his self as a runner. Dez took three steps, thusly establishing himself as a runner. And yes I'm making up words and rules to stay my stands. Believe. Believe. Believe.- I DO. I said I DO to the Dallas Cowboys decades ago and that I DO is til death do us part. I will not lose faith I will not stop believing. I would argue with Jesus, if Jesus said that wasnt a catch. IT WAS A CATCH.


I'll let the photoshop comment pass - and get a laugh from it. Nothing wrong with admitting that fandom blurs perspective.

The refs disagreed on the steps, believing they were made in the act of going to the ground and that Dez had not and could not establish himself as a runner who had the ability to make a move other than go to the ground. It's a fine distinction, but Beasley was able to turn around and adjust his direction a little as he dove for the end zone.

#44 kskboys

kskboys

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 43,704 posts

Posted 23 July 2017 - 06:13 PM

The Dez Bryant catch, no catch. The ball never touched the ground. When Dez hits the ground too much of the ball is sticking up for the ball to hit the ground. So He caught it, bobbled it, then caught it again. Touchdown.

Sorry, no.   The ball clearly(More like ultra clearly) hit the ground.   There is absolutely no doubt of it.


My doctor told me to start killing people.   Well, not  in those exact words.   He said I had to reduce the stress in my life.    Same thing, really. 


#45 Geno T

Geno T

    Professional Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,833 posts
  • LocationAustin TX, Branson MO, Cape Cod MA, SoCal, Belgium, various points beyond

Posted 24 July 2017 - 01:21 AM

The TD that still bothers me, @39yrs later, is Jackie Smith's endzone drop vs Pittsburg in the '78 SB.

"The only stat that matters is the final score." — Bobby Layne

 

 


#46 InTheZone

InTheZone

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,797 posts

Posted 26 July 2017 - 04:45 PM

that is a football move but in the case of Dez he was just short of the plane before losing control of the ball...

1.288 inches sort but short none the less

Either it should've been ruled a catch at the 1.288 inch line(down by contact) or a td, I believe the ball touched the ground but he didn't lose control until the ball came up and he regained it in the end zone.

And if catching two handed with 3 steps down, getting tripped and down by knee, elbow, and contact isn't enough then nothing is ever considered a football move.

#47 Rogers

Rogers

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,476 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 26 July 2017 - 09:10 PM

Either it should've been ruled a catch at the 1.288 inch line(down by contact) or a td, I believe the ball touched the ground but he didn't lose control until the ball came up and he regained it in the end zone.

And if catching two handed with 3 steps down, getting tripped and down by knee, elbow, and contact isn't enough then nothing is ever considered a football move.

 

So, he didn't lose control until he lost control?  The ball coming up after contacting the ground IS losing control - that can't happen in order to maintain control "through the catch".  Accordingly, with the refs deciding he didn't establish himself "as a runner" before going to the ground, they ruled absolutely correctly on the loss of control.   The ONLY question is did they rule correctly that he hadn't established possession/established himself as a runner before losing control.  One point I would make is it would be false to claim Dez only went down because he was tripped.  Dez was going down regardless of that.   The question is whether he could be both in the act of going to the ground and at the same time establish himself as a runner.   I believe ultimately they felt the steps were merely incidental while in the act of falling rather than demonstrating that he had the ability to make a cut or change directions (a "football move").


  • kskboys likes this

#48 5 Lombardis

5 Lombardis

    Professional Starter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,071 posts

Posted 27 July 2017 - 12:28 AM

In all 5 seasons in which we won the Suoer Bowl, we won the Lombardi because we made plays consistently that led to winning in each big game. In other words, we won fair and square because we earned it. In all the other times we lost in the playoffs, we got beat fair and square, because the other team made plays when we didn't.

I have seen every down of every Cowboys playoff games in its entire history, and I can honestly say I can only think of 2 really bad ref calls that had a major impact on the game.

1. In SB XIII against Pitt, the pass interference call against Benny Barnes was a horrible call. It changed the momentum. Did it cost us the game? No. Pitt made more plays when they had to than we did. We had our chances but didn't make as many big plays as Pitt.

2. Against GB in the 2014 divisional playoff round- the "no catch" call. We've all talked this to death. If we had scored there, there is zero guarantee we keep Aaron Rodgers from scoring on us. The pack made two key first downs after the bad call when our defense could not stop them. We had our chances and just didn't make enough plays.

You don't win Super Bowls on luck and you don't lose because of bad luck either. Winners always find a way to win.

 

SB V is the one game where the officiating arguably cost us a Lombardi.  Two plays in particular.  Duane Thomas fumbles the ball going into the endzone and it is recovered by Dave Manders in what should have been a Cowboy TD but instead the Refs ruled that the Colts recovered.  Also the 75 yard Colt TD pass to John Mackey may or may not have been touched by Mel Renfro.  The ball bounced off another Colt player and under the rules at the time had to be touched by a Cowboy before another Colt player could touch it.  Mel Renfro swears he didn't touch it and if he didn't it wasn't a valid TD.  So two controversial calls cost us 14 points in a game we lost by 3 on a last second FG.



#49 Flamma

Flamma

    Professional

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 883 posts

Posted 27 July 2017 - 09:33 AM

Ok so we all remember the Dez Bryant touchdown, that would have led to us winning the Superbowl?

This last year, week 6 against Green Bay. 2nd down we are on G.B 2 or something. Beasley comes in motion from left to right passes Dak. Dak snaps the ball Beas turns up, Dak releases hits Beasly. Of coarse number 11 takes 2 or 3 steps dives ball comes out touchdown. Now I know the ball crosses the line but he was going to the ground. Just like Dez, just like Calvin Johnson.

https://youtu.be/DL5svfnvWpQ. Around 20 seconds.

https://youtu.be/uQxp-A5uvkA Dez catch

https://youtu.be/T19FUdG42EUand then this. It just seems the NFL doesn't know what They are looking at anymore.


BTW Cowboys 2016 season is on. Good we looked awesome

At one point they considered Beasley a runner.  Now he's no different than anyone else running with a football.  So as soon as the ball crosses the GL it's a TD.  They did consider Dez the same.  He caught the ball, and upon impact with the ground lost it.  Since he was not considered a runner it's an incomplete pass.

 

This is what bothers me about the Dez play.  Take the same exact catch, but except for the ground causing the ball to jar loose, a defender knocks it out after the ball crosses the GL.  Is it still an incomplete pass?



#50 Rogers

Rogers

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,476 posts
  • LocationTralfamadore

Posted 27 July 2017 - 12:49 PM

At one point they considered Beasley a runner.  Now he's no different than anyone else running with a football.  So as soon as the ball crosses the GL it's a TD.  They did consider Dez the same.  He caught the ball, and upon impact with the ground lost it.  Since he was not considered a runner it's an incomplete pass.
 
This is what bothers me about the Dez play.  Take the same exact catch, but except for the ground causing the ball to jar loose, a defender knocks it out after the ball crosses the GL.  Is it still an incomplete pass?


I'm confused. You said they considered Beasley a runner, then said "they did consider Dez the same", then talked about the play with Dez saying "since he was not considered a runner".

in any case, even though I'm not sure why what might have been called in a different scenario would bother us with regard to the actual scenario on the Dez play, the bottom line is still that a player has to be deemed to have established possession before a catch can be ruled, and if an opponent knocks the ball away before he has established possession it is ruled incomplete.


  • kskboys likes this

#51 Reid1boy

Reid1boy

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,904 posts

Posted 27 July 2017 - 03:55 PM

That play was over immediately after it was over. It's time to move on to the next play.

 

By the way, that goes for every play after that. The only play that matters, is the next one.

when you are a player... sure. But why the hell are you on a football forum except to talk about stuff you are not involved with.


  • kskboys likes this

#52 gamewatcher

gamewatcher

    Pro-Bowler

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,030 posts
  • LocationCorpus Christi, Texas

Posted 28 July 2017 - 02:11 AM

Have you ever tried to catch a fly with your hand as it flies by. It's like got ya, open hand to check, fly comes out, dang! Did I catch a fly or not? Maybe I just trapped the fly or maybe I just didn't make a fly catching move OR I just didn't possess the fly. Life imitates football :)

...Hey!...I've done that many times....

If I think I've got him I'll put my closed hand up to my ear to listen for the buzz...lol

...no buzz no fly!...I'm not sure about the fly-catching move though!?!... :unsure:  


  • thestar4ever likes this

D84XPP3.png

 

"You have made me very angry ...very angry indeed !..  sleazy-422.gif

 

https://youtu.be/3Ai40JoNyYE


#53 buybuydandavis

buybuydandavis

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,854 posts

Posted 28 July 2017 - 04:10 AM

The refs disagreed on the steps, believing they were made in the act of going to the ground and that Dez had not and could not establish himself as a runner who had the ability to make a move other than go to the ground. 

 

The call on the field was completion. The requirement to overturn the ruling on the field is "indisputable visual evidence", while in fact it is being disputed years later.


Dead cap money is *dead*. It's not resurrected by keeping a guy on the team and paying him a salary this year, it is only pushed off onto a future year, and now you've added this year's salary to his cumulative cap hit. 


#54 northerncowboynation

northerncowboynation

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,040 posts
  • LocationChatham, ontario

Posted 28 July 2017 - 01:59 PM

Jackie Smith in the end zone, flopping around like a beached fish. Saw it on you tube. The worst catch I've ever seen or no catch

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=VbO2wlxYeWw

It's called the Jackie flop for a reason!


The fly catching move? Oh that's simple! It's like the celebration move ya know. Got ya fly. Spin spin and spike fly on the wall. Like whap, splat take that damned fly. Then you celebrate with your kid or whomever else may be in the room. The dog works too  :D. You should see my dog try to catch flies, it's hilarious.  

that's frickin hilarious girl. Where does your mind come up with that stuff. lmao



#55 kskboys

kskboys

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 43,704 posts

Posted 28 July 2017 - 04:36 PM

The call on the field was completion. The requirement to overturn the ruling on the field is "indisputable visual evidence", while in fact it is being disputed years later.

Which is really the only problem I have w/ the whole mess.    I don't see how they saw indisputable evidence.  


  • cowboyfan927 and buybuydandavis like this

My doctor told me to start killing people.   Well, not  in those exact words.   He said I had to reduce the stress in my life.    Same thing, really. 


#56 buybuydandavis

buybuydandavis

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,854 posts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 10:44 AM

Which is really the only problem I have w/ the whole mess.    I don't see how they saw indisputable evidence.  

 

If they had called no catch on the field, that would be bogus but it was a stupid rule full of hazy definitions. Fine.

 

But the overturn was simply fraud or incompetence.  


  • kskboys likes this

Dead cap money is *dead*. It's not resurrected by keeping a guy on the team and paying him a salary this year, it is only pushed off onto a future year, and now you've added this year's salary to his cumulative cap hit. 


#57 kskboys

kskboys

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 43,704 posts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 08:04 PM

If they had called no catch on the field, that would be bogus but it was a stupid rule full of hazy definitions. Fine.

 

But the overturn was simply fraud or incompetence.  

Yeah, if they'd have called it incomplete on the field, that shouldn't have been overturned either.

 

Bottom line, this was really a judgment call.   No matter how you write the rules, there will calls that are simply a coin toss.    And that's what this was, a coinflip as to opinion. 


  • buybuydandavis likes this

My doctor told me to start killing people.   Well, not  in those exact words.   He said I had to reduce the stress in my life.    Same thing, really. 


#58 buybuydandavis

buybuydandavis

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,854 posts

Posted 29 July 2017 - 09:57 PM

Yeah, if they'd have called it incomplete on the field, that shouldn't have been overturned either.

 

Bottom line, this was really a judgment call.   No matter how you write the rules, there will calls that are simply a coin toss.    And that's what this was, a coinflip as to opinion. 

 

What do indisputable mean?


Dead cap money is *dead*. It's not resurrected by keeping a guy on the team and paying him a salary this year, it is only pushed off onto a future year, and now you've added this year's salary to his cumulative cap hit. 


#59 Flamma

Flamma

    Professional

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 883 posts

Posted 30 July 2017 - 01:30 AM

I'm confused. You said they considered Beasley a runner, then said "they did consider Dez the same", then talked about the play with Dez saying "since he was not considered a runner".

in any case, even though I'm not sure why what might have been called in a different scenario would bother us with regard to the actual scenario on the Dez play, the bottom line is still that a player has to be deemed to have established possession before a catch can be ruled, and if an opponent knocks the ball away before he has established possession it is ruled incomplete.

Sorry, I meant to write "didn't".



#60 dhal22

dhal22

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 460 posts
  • LocationAtlanta, Ga

Posted 30 July 2017 - 05:40 AM

The TD that still bothers me, @39yrs later, is Jackie Smith's endzone drop vs Pittsburg in the '78 SB.


That and the 'fumble ' by Danny White after 'the catch ' by Dwight Clark. Or the tear away jersey rule that prevented Pearson from scoring before Danny's 'fumble '.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users