Didn't get to see it live. Just saw it on replay on Youtube after listening to the game on the radio. Totally fucked up that the refs reversed the call. He took two steps with the ball. How is it not a catch? Then he went to the ground and it came loose. But the ground can't cause a fumble, though it wasn't a fumble anyway because he kept possession. Don't see how they could overturn such a crucial play.

That's why I stopped betting about 3/4 into the season when there was too much weird shit happening with upsets. The refs took this game away from Dallas with a horse-shit overturn. I would be furious if I were a Dallas fan, let alone Jerry Jones. They got robbed.

Fuck the NFL, bunch of cheats trying to fix games.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seG9n-bQ87I

Learn the rules.

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.

Dean Blandino (FL’s VP of officiating) elaborates:

“The process of the catch is a three-part process — control, two feet down and then have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game,” Blandino said. “If you can perform all three parts, in that order, you have a catch. If not, and you’re going to the ground, you must control the ball before you hit the ground.”

Odd rule? Perhaps. Ref mistake? Quite the opposite.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George

Really he didn't lose control of it until he rolled over.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Per rule, correct call. Per common fucking sense and eye test, brutal and needs to be changed.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

I respectfully disagree.

After he took two steps, he was no longer in the act of catching the ball. Bryant definitely met the first two criteria you cited in the rule. As for the third, "then have the ball long enough to perform an act common to the game", he did this as well. In fact, he had the presence of mind to extend his arm to try for the touchdown.

Blown call, if not a corrupt overturn. If anything, it should have been Dallas ball 1st and goal from the 1/2 yard line.

It's one thing to blow the call on the field, but the standard should be much higher on the review to overturn such a crucial play. It's unconscionable that they did in face of the evidence against the overturn.

Good call, bad rule. Hope they change it like they did the tuck rule.

_________________
Sex isn't dirty, sex isn't a crime. It's a loving act between two or more consenting adults.

-Hank Kingsley

I understand that the ball touched the ground and that it moved, but he never lost possession of it nor did he trap it. I saw the explanation, but it still seems crazy to me.

I think they've taken something that should be relatively easy to determine, hyperanalyzed it, and and confounded the whole damn thing (I was going to say the whole "process" but I'm sick of that word).

They should have ditched the Ice Bowl II references when they knew it wasn't going to be all that cold outside today.

I did not expect the Colts to win.

No one knows what the "process" is. The process of catching a football in mid air, trying to score a touchdown, and brace your fall is not as clear cut as the process for cooking rice.

_________________

It was a catch. Horrible call.

_________________
You know me like that.

Not as bad a call as Skol vodka and liptons tea. Woah. I feel so poopy.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

I thought it was a catch. Glad a "Fail Mary" type break was given.

I was eager to see Jerry and/or Christie's faces after the call. I believe Christie's office must've given Roger a call and told him to tell FOX fuck off.

I thought there was enough reaching towards the end zone to point towards a football move. Had he not stretched out, he's probably able to control the catch.

_________________
"All crowds boycotting football games shouldn't care who sings or takes a knee because they aren't watching." - Nas

And made a football play of stretching out to get the TD.

It was a terrible call, especially to be reversed that way.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

It's debatable if it's the correct call per the rule. The rule only applies if he doesn't make a football move. 3 steps, ball changing hands and a stretch is a football move, IMO. Which means it would be a bad call.

Its also Karma!

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

I was in the opposite endzone seats. It was clearly a correct reversal from my view!!!

I honestly thought it was a catch and I figured it was a makeup call for Dallas getting that series of awful calls in their favor last week. The explanation that I heard on the radio on the way home made sense. Its a bad rule now and it was a bad rule when Calvin Johnson got screwed by it. They discussed it that off season and chose to keep it in place so it makes sense to some people.

_________________
That's my purse! I don't know you!

I think they could have just come out and said catch is good and if Eddie Guns was there he would have said

"The player caught the ball, made 3 steps, displayed control of the ball, then outstretched in a football move and the ground caused the fumble.. 1st and Goal, Dallas"

The issue if the refs not differentiating between the player going to the ground and making a football play, which is sad because there does need to be included in the thought process that it is obvious the player is trying to make a play. If no play was attempting to be made, 88 goes to the ground on the 2 -3 yard line with a catch, unless of course, he hits the ground and the ball comes out from that event.

Its not that I dont see how they came to the call, just think that the call especially at that moment was terrible.

Either way, just get rid of the damn rule. Player catches the ball and goes to the ground, catch/TD os good, no matter what the fuck happens because of the ground. Sick of these debates on whether or not the ball wiggled....COME ON MAN!

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”

Horseshit call and the reason why the NFL is tempting fate.

_________________
Soccer 1,2,3
Spanish Honor Society 1,2,3,4
Forensics 1,2,3,4

"Smiles with Nostrils"

"...no Hmong, go find some blacks"

How about the fact that Cribbs was determined to have control of that punt tonight.

Yes, that is another one, Chris. Even with as bad as the Broncos were playing, it was just a terrible call that could have determined the outcome of the game

That is the part that really bothers me. Any of the phrasing you want to use-- football move, act common to game, blah blah blah-- would be complete with reaching out towards the goal line to try and score. He makes that catch on the 3 yard line and its likely not even challeneged/reviewed. Call on the field was a completed catch, and there was nothing in any replay shown to indicate otherwise.

Jerry Jones should never be shown on TV.

_________________

Christie dropped his turkey leg in disbelief.

That little girl in blue had 50 on the Packers money line.

_________________
You know me like that.

The ground can't cause a fumble, but it can cause an incompletion.

_________________
-- source

wow, Bears fans calling this a horseshit call? amazing! totally unbiased.

as furious said, right call. bad rule. there's a difference.

No

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

he took two steps but was falling. so he was required to hold onto the ball throughout the play and he didnt.

id like to see the rules more cut and dry though. if the ball touches the ground its not a catch. period.

_________________
the world will always the world. your entire existence is defined by your response.

This isn't the Packers, there's no thread.

You can clearly see him trying to stretch the ball to the goal line. They don't believe he stretched it far enough after taking 3 steps.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

if he took 2 or 3 steps and looked like he leaped towards the line it would be a catch.

but he took 2 or 3 steps as he was falling to the ground, so it was incomplete.

the rule is weird, the call was right.

_________________
the world will always the world. your entire existence is defined by your response.

He reached the ball towards the goal line. That's a football move. Beyond that he was always in control of the ball.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!