Its not the rule its the interpretation, some say he made a football move by taking a couple steps and reaching. Like what has been said earlier its a judgement call.
And that interpretation would be wrong... he's not taking a few steps and reaching, he's falling. If he was really just taking a few steps then why "reach"? (closest defender was on the ground and not getting up). Just walk into the end zone.
Dez isn't just a brute receiver. His body control and ball instincts are incredible. Both he and the Packers DB saw the ball early on, but the DB kept running downfield instead of coming back for the ball like Dez. The DB would have easily swatted it down, no controversy. He was lucky to get his hands involved enough when Dez was coming down to jar it a little.
See? Thats your interpretation. No doubt he was falling but can you not make a football move while falling with full possession of the ball?
No, that's part of the definition of a catch. If you are falling while completing the catch, you have to land without it being jarred by the ground. There's not an interpretation problem with the rule - it's pretty clear cut.
Huh? If you admit he's falling, then he's falling... and you must maintain possession of the ball when you hit the ground after said fall. He did not make a football move, while falling, with full possession of the ball... he falls, ball hits the ground, play over. Had he made a football move prior to the ball hitting the ground (that did not consist of his fall), it would have been a catch. And again, if he has the ability to make such football move, he wouldn't have fell to do it.
It was the correct call plain and simple. Football is already too heavily favored towards the offensive side of the ball anyway. Receivers should have to secure the catch so there is no ambiguity in the call.
You are being very literal with "football move." It's not a free pass if he extends his arms while still trying to catch the football. That would mean that any receiver that is trying to secure the football can lunge their arms forward and have a completion. If he would have fallen and firmly had the ball within his grasp, rolled while firmly having the ball in his grasp and then reached for a touch down (assuming he wasn't touched and downed,) it would be a catch. He combined the catch with a reach so that is not an example of completing a catch and making a football move. Once again, if you change that rule then so many clear non catches will be completions. This was just very close and a once in a season catch. Lastly, almost every call is subjective. See holding, pass interference, roughing the QB and Kicker etc.
i see the reasons for it not being a catch, but I do think him trying to extend the ball into the goalline is/should be considered a football move. If nothing else, i figured they would have left the call stand as is because it wasn't conclusive. But yea, he should have just fell to the ground with the ball secured rather than trying to force the TD reach because just getting the catch in the first place was all that was needed.
Extending the ball towards the goal line should be a risky move regardless of the circumstance. Now all receivers know ball security is paramount just like running backs.
The Dez play wasn't anything like the Calvin play, I don't get why people are upset. He didn't make the catch, easy call
Did you think that Odell Beckham catch was a catch? I think it was. Bryant had JUST as much one-handed control of the ball as Beckham did, while taking three steps, AND simultaneously lunging toward the goal. He had complete control of the ball BEFORE the lunge, and therefore, in my opinion, he was already a runner, and no longer a receiver. Had the ref interpreted it the same way I just said, hardly anyone would have bothered to argue it. This means, the bobbling of the ball was IRRELEVANT. The ONLY issue with this call was that it was a PURELY JUDGEMENT CALL regarding whether or not Bryant did or did not make a 'common football move' AFTER securing the ball. This is the issue which will have to be addressed. The rule as written is crappy and left entirely up to the imagination of the official, and is hardly a 'clearly defined rule'. They need to specify what constitutes a 'common football move'. As far as Dez was concerned, he played exactly within the rules - he caught the ball, took steps AND made a 'common football move'. The fact that he did it extremely quickly should not be reason to penalize him and the team, rather it should have ended up being a celebrated, iconic playoff moment. Ironically, it WILL be, but for all the wrong reasons. That was a poor application of a poorly-defined rule, and everyone knows it. It was Mike Renfro-against-Pittsburgh bad.
Of course - the ball never hit the ground. It's not a judgment call at all. It's about as black-and-white a call as there is. There is no subjectivity of the ref. "Football move" is not relevant to the specific rule involved here - you just don't know the rule.
Here's the rule, again, in case you missed it the previous 3 times it was posted in this thread: Item 1: Player 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 throughout the process of contacting 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. The "Football Move" is not part of this rule. It's for a completely different set of catches.
Dez shouldn't have let the ground cause him to lose control of the ball. He had the ball and was in control of the ball prior to him lunging. But, he did lunge and it caused it to be incomplete. He's got to hold on to it. He blew it. End of story. It would have been a play to go down as one of the greatest in Dallas history...even more so if we won. Instead, it's just another incomplete pass. I feel for Dez because he deserved to have that moment with a catch. Too bad he couldn't hold on.
and Peyton chokes again! this weekend shows who is better Brady or Manning, Manning had everything in his favor (great defense, great running back, great WRs, playing at home, not too much cold) and still couldnt win.
rodgers played great with a calf injury too, romo had all year problems with the back, and he played great.
while it is debatable over who is better b/w manning and brady (i kinda lean brady), i just wouldn't use this specific game as an example to prove a side. 38 year old QBs playing with a torn quad aren't exactly the recipe for success.
