1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Steratore strikes again...

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pandarilla, Jan 12, 2015.

  1. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    By rule, it was not a catch. It's clear as day that according to the rule you have to possess all the way to the ground which the player does not.

    Do we all see a bit of a flaw in the rules here? Yes, because most of us would prefer to live in a world in which that would be deemed a great catch as opposed to an incompletion.

    However, we all must remember that the reason the rule is clear is to avoid the week-in, week-out debates that happen about whether a player had control or not. We don't want that kind of world. We don't want the "gut feeling" of an official to affect the outcome of a game so we attempt to make the rules cut and dry whenever possible.

    In Bryant's case, he needs to know as a WR what the rules are and that he can't--in going to the ground--ever lose possession.
     
  2. Fin-Omenal

    Fin-Omenal Initiated

    36,936
    10,264
    0
    Mar 25, 2008
    Thee...Ohio State University
    More I see this play the more I believe Dallas was robbed...the ball is allowed to hit the ground if the WR has possesion of it. He clearly did, the nose hits the ground quite often and its ruled a catch because the player still has the ball in hand. Look no further than Cobb's catch earlier.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  3. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    Wrong. Just flat out wrong.

    Solomon Wilcotts read the rule directly out of the rulebook this morning. There's an entire rule aroung "the process of the catch". With a specific section pertaining to the player proceeding to the ground.
     
  4. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA

    ---



    Exactly it. combining these two posts, is really all that needs to be said.

    If you want to still argue the merit of the rule, sure... have at it. However, the ruling made by Steratore and his crew was exactly 100% correct, exactly the way the NFL and it's competition comittee want it called. It's unlikely that's ever going to change.
     
  5. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    *sigh*

    He did not have possession of it though according to the rule of the NFL because he did not complete the catch when going to the ground. If the ball doesn't hit the ground and then get bobbled, then yes, it's a catch. However, that's just not the case. We cant be altering the rule to fit our opinions here...
     
  6. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    It's a terrible rule if it rules Bryant's catch to be not a catch, and the Johnson TD to be not a TD.

    Turrible.
     
    Pandarilla, xphinfanx and DolphinGreg like this.
  7. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    what's the first thing, from his left arm to the ball, that hits the ground?... his elbow. His forearm then moves under the ball as the ball pops up and he brings his forearm closer to his body as you see the angle of his elbow move from past 90 degrees to less than 90 degrees. Now, the answer will be another question.. "what makes the ball pop up?" But if you're looking for irrefutable evidence to overturn on replay, you can't be asking questions? You need to know that the ball hits the ground. And I don't see it doing so.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  8. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    The narrative today from everyone to this nonsensical decision is do not insult our intelligence.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  9. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    It doesn't matter what prevents him from holding onto the ball, or makes it "pop up". The fact is he didn't maintain posession all the way through. You're looking too deep into it. The rule is simply he has to maintain possession through the process of completing the catch, which in this case is the player going to, and contacting the ground. He does not do so as the ball clearly comes out and is moving.
     
  10. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    That does matter. If the ball didn't hit the ground, then it is a catch. He can fall to the ground and bobble the ball. As long as you isn't out of bounds and the ball doesn't hit the ground, it is a catch.
     
    Paul 13 likes this.
  11. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    Yes, I believe that's correct. Something in my mind is confusing me though, because I'm pretty sure Blandino presented a situation on the radio this morning where that might not be the case though. I was also driving through crazy snow here this morning, so I might have just missed something. :lol:
     
  12. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    You don't see the ball hitting the ground in that gif? I wish I could pause the gif. The ball hits the ground when it is on the left side (for the viewer) of the pylon. It's as clear as day.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  13. GridIronKing34

    GridIronKing34 Silently Judging You

    23,388
    16,296
    113
    Nov 22, 2007
    Denver, CO
    How can you throw out a football move if you believe the process was completed before the football move?

    That's the whole point of people saying football move.

    It's up to interpretation really... Therefore it should have just stood. Aaron Rodgers would have had plenty of time to do Aaron Rodgers things and win the game.
     
    xphinfanx likes this.
  14. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    The league has been trying to make all the calls black and white. That's why they use the completing the catch all the way to the ground interpretation and why defensive players get penalized for hits to the head when it's clear they weren't aiming there. The ref's call there was the correct call. It can't be characterized as a bad call. But the interpretation is such that what most people would call a "catch" isn't anymore if the WR is falling and doesn't control the ball through the process of going to the ground.
     
  15. resnor

    resnor Derp Sherpa

    16,329
    9,874
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    New Hampshire
    Right. Stumbling over the defender and lunging for the endzone, and fumbling, was not the "process of the catch." The catch had been made, and he got his feet down. The fumble occurred after the "process of the catch" was complete. It's a garbage call.
     
    Pandarilla and xphinfanx like this.
  16. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    If the Dolphins had been in the game and the call had gone against them, I probably would have been upset, until I eventually accepted that it was the right call to overturn the ruling on the field. The fact is, the rule says it wasn't a catch and the referee was correct in changing the original call.

    Besides it happened to the Cowboys and they had a call go their way against the Lions which certainly helped them win the previous week.

    Calls seem to even out over the course of the season. For the Cowboys it only took one week for them to even out. I'll gladly admit I am not a Cowboy fan, but they lost the game yesterday and the loss had absolutely nothing to do with the referees. You can't blame the referee when he follows the rules of the game and that is all he did on that play.

    It may not be a good rule and perhaps it is rule they may want to look at after this season. Yesterday though, the rule clearly states that it was not a catch and the Cowboys have nothing to complain about, IMO.
     
  17. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    No, he was always falling. Just b/c he got his feet down doesn't change that. You see that all the time with receivers getting their feet down on those sideline passes. They get their feet down but still have to control the ball all the way to the ground. This was no different.
     
  18. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    While I'm not a Dallas fan, I found myself rooting for the comeback. (I would have then rooted for GB to respond). So I actually was upset with the call. But I wasn't upset with the ref. He made the right call. I was upset with the rule.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  19. VManis

    VManis Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,753
    9,844
    113
    Nov 10, 2010
  20. VManis

    VManis Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,753
    9,844
    113
    Nov 10, 2010

    The ball is allowed to hit the ground if the player had control of it and maintains control. Watch the very end of the first clip in this link. There is a point when Dez is on his back that neither hand is on the ball and he has to re-catch it. Hence he did not maintain control.

    http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2015-01-11/dez-bryant-catch-cowboys-packers-nfc
     
  21. jdallen1222

    jdallen1222 Well-Known Member

    2,752
    1,373
    113
    May 31, 2013
    Plantation, Fl
    That's a ****ing catch.
     
  22. Brasfin

    Brasfin Well-Known Member

    2,435
    1,672
    113
    Apr 27, 2013
    Brazil
    From this angle, looks like he was already falling to the ground when he lunged to the endzone. He made an extra effort to get to the endzone while losing his balance... unfortunately, that cost him the catch, and ultimately, the game.
     
  23. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,159
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Exactly. Go watch all the sideline catches from the past 5 years or so. The referees follow them to the end to make sure they didn't lose control of the ball.

    If you notice before the rule change, receivers just laid out for the catch and went to the ground. Now they try to roll their body so they land on their back.
     
  24. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    No, it's not. He doesn't control the ball. It's pretty obvious to see.
     
  25. jw3102

    jw3102 season ticket holder

    7,760
    3,486
    113
    Sep 4, 2010
    Maui, Hawaii
    I agree the rule needs to be looked at closely once the season is over. But as you stated earlier, it is the same call which is made when the receiver catches the ball in bounds and the falls to the ground out of bounds. He has to maintain complete control of the ball all the way to the ground or else it is ruled an incomplete pass.

    You see the pass called incomplete numerous times during the regular season because the receiver failed to maintain control of the ball and it hit the ground on the way down.

    The play yesterday was no different than all those other plays, except it was at the end of a playoff game and it was a call which was reversed by the head referee after seeing it on the monitor. It was the right call though because that is the rule.

    I suspect the rules committee will examine the rule in the off season but I will be surprised if they change the rule in any way.
     
  26. Desides

    Desides Well-Known Member

    38,949
    20,033
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    Pembroke Pines, FL
    Agreed. None of this "process of the catch" crap. That is a reception. Control is maintained all the way until he's down at the 1, and then the ball comes out after the play is over--because he's down at the 1.
     
    Pandarilla and Fin-Omenal like this.
  27. DolphinGreg

    DolphinGreg Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,227
    6,527
    113
    Dec 7, 2014
    I agree with you on that. I think this will cause some stirring. We seem to have a few glaring outliers which we as a football community would like to be able to get corrected in an efficient manor. According to the current rules, this isn't catch, but most of us would probably like it to somehow count.

    The question is how you do it without putting the game in the ref's hands and asking them to make a call based on a "gut feeling."

    The truth is, as you say, the rule will probably stay. It makes 99% of situations like this infinitely simpler and that's far more important that the few times where things are questionable such as this and the risk you take by giving refs freedom to "interpret the rules."

    They aren't judges and we certainly don't want them to be. We want them to impartially apply the rules. There's a big difference there.
     
  28. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    That's your opinion.

    That's no the rule though that's been agreed upon by the NFL and it's competition comittee.

    Therefore, it's not a catch, according to.. you know... the rulebook that says whether it's a catch or not.

    He needs to maintain control all the way, he doesn't do that when he and the ball hits the ground.

    Seriously people, this isn't that difficult to understand if you read the damn rule.
     
  29. Desides

    Desides Well-Known Member

    38,949
    20,033
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    Pembroke Pines, FL
    Know the rule before you cite the rule, please. From the 2013 NFL Rulebook (which is the most recent available on NFL.com), the "Going to the Ground" rule, aka the Calvin Johnson Rule that is the core of this thread:

    In other words, if the player is down before the ball comes out, it's a catch. If the ball comes out before the player is down, it's an incomplete pass. Dez Bryant was down before the ball came out.

    I agree. You should try that, instead of trying to act holier than thou.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  30. jdallen1222

    jdallen1222 Well-Known Member

    2,752
    1,373
    113
    May 31, 2013
    Plantation, Fl

    Looks like he loses control when he extends for the endzone. If it were in the middle of the field as someone has said earlier, he doesn't extend and it's a catch. I think if anything it should have been ruled as a fumble. But I understand that is only my interpretation, that's why we have refs to make these decisions for us. I still don't agree with the call or the rule.
     
  31. VManis

    VManis Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,753
    9,844
    113
    Nov 10, 2010
    Except when he landed the ground dislodged the ball. This is the best shot I've seen of him without the ball.


    [​IMG]
     
  32. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    That's not the way it's been interpreted since the Calvin Johnson catch/non-catch. It's not "down" like a runner would be down. The receiver has to control the ball even after he hits the ground.
     
    brandon27 likes this.
  33. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    There is nowhere where it states, "The player is down."

    Dez Bryant being "down" before the ball came out has nothing to do with whether or not it is a catch. It is all a part of the fall.
     
  34. The G Man

    The G Man Git 'r doooonnne!!!

    7,480
    5,637
    113
    Mar 18, 2009
    I agree.
     
  35. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    honestly no... i don't see it hitting the ground
     
  36. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
  37. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Actually, looking closer at the animated gif, the pylon covers the part where the ball could have hit the ground.

    So, I do hope they had a better angle that shows the ball hit the ground.
     
  38. brandon27

    brandon27 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    45,652
    19,304
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Windsor, ON. CANADA
    LOL!!

    I see others have already clarified this for you, so I won't bother. You're not understanding it properly.

    Dez clearly does not maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground. He's lost the ball, as it touches the ground when he hits. Therefore the pass is incomplete.

    I really dont understand why people are disputing this fact. The rule is there. The video is there. The call is there. The confirmation it was called properly according to the rule is there. All we're doing here is arguing because some people disagree with the rule. And that's fine. But lets not pretend it wasn't called properly, we can't call it a catch, because the rulebook says it's not a catch.

    Dispute the rule, sure... but before doing that even, I think it's important to understand the reprecussions changing the rule would have. You want to say he has posession simply because he' got 2 feet, or in Dez's case 3 feet down? OK... fine... however what it he then gets hit by a DB and looses the ball. Now what do we call it? A Completion and a fumble? Noo... it's incomplete. two feet down is only posession along the sidelines, and even then, he's got to have control all the way out of bounds, or all the way to the ground out of bounds. Changing the rule for this case, changes many other things. The rule was made, so there's a determining factor for the NFL, and officials, and even players to understand what is a catch according to the rule.
     
  39. Desides

    Desides Well-Known Member

    38,949
    20,033
    113
    Nov 28, 2007
    Pembroke Pines, FL
    The receiver has to control the ball until the end of the play. The play is over when the player is down.

    The Going to the Ground rule complicated things, but I'm sorry, that is a reception and he is down at the 1.

    He clearly does have one handed control of the ball until his body hits the ground--which is fine, because at that point he is down and the play is over.

    This isn't even a matter of a bad rule, it's a matter of when the ball came out, whether before or after the end of the play.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.
  40. FinSane

    FinSane Cynical Dolphins Fan

    19,862
    5,792
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Melbourne, Fl
    I don't know what a catch is these days going back to the 99-00 season when the changed the rules. Its all subjective now.
     
    Pandarilla likes this.

Share This Page