The Everything NFL Punter Thread - 2014/2015 Season

Status
Not open for further replies.
God damn fuck this jesus christ.

I guess this is how the Lions must have felt but this might be worse. Stafford just tossed it out there going for the penalty while this was an amazing catch that gets overturned by the lamest rule in all of football.

It's good to know Seattle will smash GB at least I guess.
 
Last edited:
The calls were shitty on both sides all game in the Cowboys/Lions game and quite frankly, overall, Dallas got the short end of the stick (as usual) even if the biggest controversy was surrounding one that went against the Lions. And the controversy over that was as much about the refs announcing the penalty and then suddenly changing their mind with no explanation as it was whether or not the call was actually correct (which I think it was but you could definitely argue defensive holding as much as the DPI or offensive facemask).

There were a couple meh calls in Dallas/GB most all in the first half; the ticky-tack DPI and the personal foul against what's-his-face for instigating a fight were questionable but not really incorrect. Still, one could say the defender incidentally got his feet tangled with the receiver (I think that's bogus but that could just be my bias, shouldn't run over the receiver like that bro) and no call should've been made. Offsetting flags could've been thrown in the latter case, or even against Dallas because what's-his-face's hard block was right around when the whistle was blown and a fair play (if not a bit unnecessary). Witten also got some pretty nutty spots on Dallas' last drive of the half but the second, more egregious one was challenged and overturned at least. Matthews got away with a blatant roughing the passer against Romo on the touchdown play immediately after the DPI and Cobb earned a completion on a blatant non-catch at the end of the half which ultimately put three points on the board.

Seems to me Dallas got the short end of the stick yet again, as the calls in their favor were blatantly incorrect whereas the ones against GB were kinda take-it-or-leave-it. The second half was mostly good but holy shit that call... It's not at all comparable to the Detroit one. That call was both more questionable (in that it could've gone either way) and Detroit subsequently choked by not going for it on 4th in 1 in Dallas territory, then shanking the punt, then not playing defense. The Dallas play was already fourth down and that call directly robbed them of seven points and possession of the ball when they're already down points.

I'm just calling things as I see them, does it make me a homer just because I think the team that got hosed was the one I root for? *shrug* It's not my fault my team is always getting screwed by the refs.
 
Last edited:
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/1/11/7528695/refs-correctly-overturn-dez-bryants-incredible-catch

The rule regards "completing the catch," which includes any fall you take after making a catch that is inherent to the catch even if you make what can be interpreted as a football move. Why? Because that falling action was a part of the process of the catch, and the football action doesn't change things happening that are a part of the process if they have not finished yet. Take Calvin Johnson in 2010 (i think - opening day vs the bears controversial catch), for example. He even made a football move, but because he was still stumbling and lost the ball to the ground, the pass was determined incomplete.

How does this translate to the Dez Bryant catch? Although he may have made a football move, his falling was a part of the process, happening prior to the football move. if he loses it during any move that is a process of the catch, it is an incomplete pass.

By rule, the call was correct. The rule states that the process must be completed entirely, including any falls that the reciever takes as he catches the ball even if he makes a move with the ball afterwards.

The problem is not the call, the problem is the rule, but as a person who commonly plays receiver myself I can tell you that it is a good rule. If I catch it and fall as I do, and lose it on the ground, it certainly does not feel like I completed the process of the catch - the result of a change would be an even worse definition regarding two feet, which would make no sense and be really out of place. In fact, this would mean a stationary receiver who is hit a split second after catching the ball would have been a complete pass and a fumble, which is NOT true by general logic. I can see why many people disagree with the rule, but if you want to have the best of both worlds - meaning that both catches that look like catches and two feet, the result would be an outrageously spongy rule that would have no real definition. The only way to do this without it being ridiculous is the current rule: completing the process of the catch, the process being anything until you make a football move and the continuation of any action in the catch.

Now please, if you would like to address the issue of the rule, go ahead, but criticizing the call is absolutely stupid and butthurt. Like worse than the pats (joe flacco) butthurt.


Also, if you feel like dissing Mike Pereira, just remember he was the former vp of officiating, but he also has expressed discontent with refs calls several times before - including the previous week on the DPI flag that was picked up.

Kumiho said:
It's always easy to just blame the referees for losses, ain't it?
Click to expand...
People love to do it, its a good thing that most people here are at least remotely intelligent since otherwise we would end up with a giant complaining fest.
Mr.E said:
Fucking bullshit. The only reason he dropped the ball is because he had unquestionable control, then lunged forward with the ball in his grasp and tried to stretch out his arm out to get the touchdown.
Click to expand...
Really, look up the link to the calvin johnson touchdown that got overturned (week 1 vs the bears like 2010). It really shows you the process, and any move you are forced to make while making the catch doesn't suddenly end by the mere presence of a "football move". Console yourself all you want, but you can't change the rules and you look like a pats fan so shut up.
 
Mr.E said:
It's funny how literally nobody in the commentating/analyst crew agrees, most of which are former NFL players/coaches so I'm pretty sure they know their shit just as well. For better or worse, Pereira almost never disagrees with his boys (as a former ref).
Click to expand...

You are exaggerating so hard it's not even funny. I heard Bill Cowher in the pregame show of the next game say it was the right call to reverse it. I guess it's not "literally everyone", is it?

EDIT: Next time specify if you're talking about a specific analyst crew :(

When watching the replay again, I can see that Dez had a lot of momentum going due to his speed and incredibly high leap. As he came down to the ground, those one or two steps he took were part of his landing and I believe NOT a football move. If you watch the ball throughout the entire motion of the catch, you can also see that it changes positions a couple times as Dez was trying to control it. It was up by his shoulder and he moved it down toward his hands. His apparent lunge toward the goal line looks more like falling forward from his fall than a conscious play for the end zone, but that's a little more debatable. I think it's a tough call but in the end I believe it was correct. And I was rooting for the Cowboys too.

I'm just calling things as I see them, does it make me a homer just because I think the team that got hosed was the one I root for? *shrug* It's not my fault my team is always getting screwed by the refs.
Click to expand...

Ironically you deny being a homer and then make the most homerish statement possible. You should know perfectly well that no team gets hosed more or less than any other team when you average it out, you're just operating on extreme confirmation bias right now because you're upset your team lost.
 
Last edited:
^But I wasn't talking about the CBS pregame crew man, I was talking about the Fox crew on the postgame show... :[ They all disagreed with the call and Howie Long was particularly indignant like "he took three steps..." before Pereira was like LOL STEPS DON'T MATTER REF BOIZ 4 LYFE !!!!!

As for Jownage, Megatron's catch was a bang-bang play. (Ha, like I need to look it up bro...) He caught it while airborne, then rolled over and slammed the ball into the ground in one swift motion. I can kinda understand the call but most people already didn't like it and this one was far more egregious. Dez fucking took three steps before turning and falling/lunging toward the endzone. Plus, you know, there's the fact there was already controversy over the fucking rule four years ago so this issue shouldn't have happened again anyway.

And it's not like the rule is even clear here. You can hang your hat on "the call was correct; the rule is bad" rhetoric all you want. The rule is vague, "football move" is discretionary which is precisely why the rule is bad. So then I have to question why was the call on the field overturned? This isn't like when the Packers challenged the DPI to see if the ball was tipped or not. There's no straight yes or no here, so it's baffling to me they overturned a call which is entirely discretionary to begin with.

WaterBomb said:
Ironically you deny being a homer and then make the most homerish statement possible. You should know perfectly well that no team gets hosed more or less than any other team when you average it out, you're just operating on extreme confirmation bias right now because you're upset your team lost.
Click to expand...

Ah, statistics. However, such statistics only hold true over an infinite period of time (assuming no actual bias/discrimination). I've kept personal stats for a few games that all but prove my luck is complete shit and has not at all fucking "evened out" over the periods of time since I started keeping such stats. Is that true for Dallas? Yeah, it was a homerish statement because I don't know for certain. It certainly feels to me like Dallas gets screwed more than they get the good side of the refs, though. It could also just be because I watch Dallas games more closely because, you know, they're my team so I pay more attention.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand how the colts mediocre d is doing this. I think they want it more

Wow that colts returner just got TRUCKED. You could hear that hit across the stadium
 
I care so little about this game since either way I'm obligated to root for the winner. :( Better than rooting for the Pack but I don't really want Seattle winning back-to-back either, and the Pats are the Pats, so...
 
Poor Cribbs.
I hate the good ole concussion fumble so I'm glad it was overturned (even though it should've been Denver's ball)
 
I'm just upset because Romo is literally held together by gorilla glue and hope and now he's been dicked out of his first conference championship game by one of the stupidest rules in all of sports.

Am I salty? Hell yes. The Cowboys have overcome so much bullshit this year - defensive injuries and free agency, Romo's back issues, Brandon Weeden - only to have their season ended by a rule which apparently is going to go completely unquestioned by Mikey Mike and the Bucky bunch, despite it now having cheated two of the greatest wide receivers of this generation out of what probably should have been catches (though I will admit the Calvin Johnson incident at least had more room for doubt).

I guess I'm rooting for the Packers now in order to validate the Cowboys losing. Goddamn I'm pissed.
 
*cue complaint about fumble overturning*
That was so bang bang its stupid to complain about it.

How is the rule unclear? Steps are a non-factor, and a football move is defined as a motion independent of the catch itself, not forced, done under the players own power and control. Falling forward is not a football move, and reaching forward is not a football move if the reach is inherent to the falling motion of the player (in calvins case, he was about to fall and lost the ball trying to stand up, i.e. as a result of the process of the catch). The rule is much more clear than what people may want it to be, and two feet is even worse than what it is now.
 
xJownage said:
*cue complaint about fumble overturning*
That was so bang bang its stupid to complain about it.

How is the rule unclear? Steps are a non-factor, and a football move is defined as a motion independent of the catch itself, not forced, done under the players own power and control. Falling forward is not a football move, and reaching forward is not a football move if the reach is inherent to the falling motion of the player (in calvins case, he was about to fall and lost the ball trying to stand up, i.e. as a result of the process of the catch). The rule is much more clear than what people may want it to be, and two feet is even worse than what it is now.
Click to expand...

Here's the play in question:

dez-bryant-catch-against-green-bay-replay.gif


Now, I don't know what you see here, but what it looks like to me is that Dez was able to gather himself and intentionally reach for the goal line under his own power, not just because he was falling forward? I realize that it's impossible to figure out Dez's intent just from the replay, but that's the point. It's ambiguous whether or not Dez was making a football move, and in the case of ambiguity the call is supposed to stand. In order to overturn a call on the field, there has to be incontrovertible evidence that contradicts the original call. There is no way that anyone can look at that replay and say that it was 100% not a football move, with absolutely no room for ambiguity.

More importantly, the fact that the ground can force an incompletion is in and of itself stupid. The ground can't force a fumble; if a player has complete control and is already down when the ball comes out (and as you can see on the replay, the ball is forced out by Dez's elbow hitting the ground, which would make him down if he were a runner), it's not a fumble because the runner is already down. The fact that this changes when it becomes a forward pass completely defies logic and shows tuck-rule-levels of arbitrarily pedantic rules.

tl;dr NaCl

At least the Mavericks are doing well...
 
Another one and done for the statistically greatest qb ever. Go ahead and take your sb wins. I'll take my 5477 55 TDs. Fuck ya'll i'm out.
 
I picked the Colts over the Broncos cause Manning has looked toast for the last month and a half. That means that if I wasn't a massive homer I'd be 8-0 in tipping this postseason (but being a homer is more fun)
 
Walrein There is only one question I am going to ask and the answer is obvious, your perception of his movement is so wrong I am not even going to bother responding. Would he have fallen forward regardless of whether or not he wanted to? Was that a part of his motion in going to catch the ball?

Hint: then answer to both is yes.
 
xJownage said:
Walrein There is only one question I am going to ask and the answer is obvious, your perception of his movement is so wrong I am not even going to bother responding. Would he have fallen forward regardless of whether or not he wanted to? Was that a part of his motion in going to catch the ball?

Hint: then answer to both is yes.
Click to expand...
I disagree, actually. Near the end of his fall you can see him twist to his right, extending his left side towards the end zone. At the same time he pushes off with his back foot, more so than he would have if he was stumbling. It's definitely not conclusive, but it's there for you to look at and consider if you would be willing to take off your dismissive hate goggles for two seconds.
 
Dez fell forward because he tripped over Shields' leg, otherwise he would've ran standing into the endzone. That's where it seems to me he has clear possession: he caught it cleanly, pulled the ball down and landed two feet in. Good catch. Then he tripped over Shields' leg and saw the pylon as he was falling, so he tried to tuck the ball in his left hand and stretch for the goalline. Now the question is did he fumble or was he down?

Then for some unfathomable reason the refs decided he didn't even catch the ball in the first place. Because, you know, indisputable evidence and all.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top