Raysfan12 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Good game for the Packers and a sort of a payback for the bad call in the 'Boys-Lions game a week ago. Hopefully the Colts could put pressure on Peyton and Andrew Luck leading the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CS85 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That ridiculous call is just another example of why I prefer college football.Ah yes, that fabulous institution that is totally devoid of corruption and scandal. Quote "You are nothing more than a small cancer on this message board. You are not entertaining, you are a complete joke." twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Houston Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Since one of the teans I hate is gone, I want to see anyone but Green Bay take it, merely because I dont want my cousin and uncle getting more spoils than they do already. "And then I remember to relax, and stop trying to hold on to it, and then it flows through me like rain and I can't feel anything but gratitude for every single moment of my stupid little life... You have no idea what I'm talking about, I'm sure. But don't worry... you will someday." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 "An act common to the game" ARGH they made "football move"even more annoying.Glad we have the NFL to tell us what we all saw was completely wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That ridiculous call is just another example of why I prefer college football.Ah yes, that fabulous institution that is totally devoid of corruption and scandal. That's not what I was saying and you know it. My point was that the type of nonsense we saw in Dallas last week and Green Bay today doesn't happen nearly as often in college football. Well that, and college football is just more entertaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy B Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I get why it was ruled incomplete, but it's an awful rule. It's the worst rule in the NFL and I said the same thing when the Bears benefited from it. Dez Bryant caught the ball and you don't need a process to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockstar Matt Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That was the absolute correct call.You're an idiot.How was it not? That's called that way hundreds of times every season. You have to control the ball to the ground. You're the biased one, I couldn't care less who wins this game.Lunging for a touchdown is a football move.It's not like he gathered his feet and then dove. He was going to the ground and when he went to the ground, the ground clearly jarred the ball loose. In the NFL, that is very rarely ruled a catch.I think you nailed it right here. By rule, they probably got it right but it's a bad rule (like the now defunct Tuck Rule). If you have two (3?) feet down, a knee and an elbow as well, and lunge for the endzone where the ball then came loose, that would be a catch at all levels except apparently the NFL. It just sucks because Dez had made a heck of a catch when we absolutely needed a play from our superstar in a big time moment. Cowboys - Lakers - LAFC - USMNT - LA Rams - LA Kings - NUFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Caught the ball with two hands, brought it down in the right hand, switched it to the left hand, lunged for the end zone... I guess he forgot to file the proper paperwork before he hit the ground? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burgundy Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 It's a dumb, ambiguously defined rule, but it was applied in a consistent manner to similar plays. Therefore, it was the correct call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See Red Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That was the absolute correct call.You're an idiot.How was it not? That's called that way hundreds of times every season. You have to control the ball to the ground. You're the biased one, I couldn't care less who wins this game.Lunging for a touchdown is a football move.It's not like he gathered his feet and then dove. He was going to the ground and when he went to the ground, the ground clearly jarred the ball loose. In the NFL, that is very rarely ruled a catch.I think you nailed it right here. By rule, they probably got it right but it's a bad rule (like the now defunct Tuck Rule). If you have two (3?) feet down, a knee and an elbow as well, and lunge for the endzone where the ball then came loose, that would be a catch at all levels except apparently the NFL. It just sucks because Dez had made a heck of a catch when we absolutely needed a play from our superstar in a big time moment.Exactly. It's a bad rule, nobody would argue that, but based on how it's called consistently in the league, they got it right in my opinion.It sucks that NFL games so often come down to their ridiculous, ambiguous rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzcut Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 If the referee is anyone but Gene Steratore, it's at worst first and goal from the ½ yard line. The CCSLC's resident Geelong Cats fan. Viva La Vida or Death And All His Friends. Sounds like something from a Rocky & Bullwinkle story arc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 It's a dumb, ambiguously defined rule, but it was applied in a consistent manner to similar plays. Therefore, it was the correct call.Fair enough. My question is this; what more did Bryant need to do? I've watched the replay numerous times now and I still can't figure out why it wasn't a catch. I'm seriously asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CS85 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That ridiculous call is just another example of why I prefer college football.Ah yes, that fabulous institution that is totally devoid of corruption and scandal. That's not what I was saying and you know it. My point was that the type of nonsense we saw in Dallas last week and Green Bay today doesn't happen nearly as often in college football. Well that, and college football is just more entertaining.I just watched a game between the Cowboys and Packers, so apologies if I've devolved into the mulligrubs. It's akin to observing a peanut-butter-covered Jane Fonda in a clown suit being anally ravaged by a limbless minotaur, the action all called by a drunk Gilbert Gottfried. Quote "You are nothing more than a small cancer on this message board. You are not entertaining, you are a complete joke." twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That ridiculous call is just another example of why I prefer college football.Yup. My thoughts exactly. Even with the off the field crap, the college game is still head and shoulders above the NFL on the field at this point.I mean my God, what an absolute clown college these playoffs have been. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That ridiculous call is just another example of why I prefer college football.Ah yes, that fabulous institution that is totally devoid of corruption and scandal. That's not what I was saying and you know it. My point was that the type of nonsense we saw in Dallas last week and Green Bay today doesn't happen nearly as often in college football. Well that, and college football is just more entertaining.I just watched a game between the Cowboys and Packers, so apologies if I've devolved into the mulligrubs. It's akin to observing a peanut-butter-covered Jane Fonda in a clown suit being anally ravaged by a limbless minotaur, the action all called by a drunk Gilbert Gottfried. C'mon, that would be some seriously awesome television. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unocal Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 NFL reffing is really bad. It's really never been the same since 2012. Even when the replacements were sacked, it's never been the same. I prefer 1990s football to today's NFL product honestly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaRadniz29 Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Dear CBS, if you're going to have Jim Nantz talk, you might want to turn down the music or shut up and let me (and the viewership) listen to Aerosmith uninterrupted...C'mon Man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burgundy Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 It's a dumb, ambiguously defined rule, but it was applied in a consistent manner to similar plays. Therefore, it was the correct call. Fair enough. My question is this; what more did Bryant need to do? I've watched the replay numerous times now and I still can't figure out why it wasn't a catch. I'm seriously asking.I don't know that there really is anything more he could have done, other than not losing possession of the ball as the ball hit the ground. If it just wobbled in his hands a bit it's probably a catch, but since he completely lost contact with the ball after it hit the ground, he's considered to have not completed the catch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2001mark Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 That catch call was correct though it is a stupid rule.It'll probably disappear within a couple few seasons. Jerry Jones has money. @2001mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicfurth Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 It's a dumb, ambiguously defined rule, but it was applied in a consistent manner to similar plays. Therefore, it was the correct call.Fair enough. My question is this; what more did Bryant need to do? I've watched the replay numerous times now and I still can't figure out why it wasn't a catch. I'm seriously asking.Probably should've included a discount double check? Or leaped into the stands? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.