Posting in the Cowboyzone

[TexasCowboy]

Once again

knees and elbows on the turf..means the play is over,
how you overlook this fact is beyond me

[Deadskins]

Once again

knees and elbows on the turf..means the play is over,
how you overlook this fact is beyond me

Once again, you couldn't be more wrong. DM posted the rule earlier in this thread. I suggest you go back and read it.

[DarthMonk]

As outlned in the NFL Case Book but organized in sequence:



Scenario 1:
A1 throws to A2 who grabs ball and is running upright in balance. A2 takes 2 steps in bounds and is then tackled. Ball comes out after a knee hits the ground.

Ruling: Completed pass and down by contact. Ball is spotted wherever it was when the knee hit. I think this is essentially how TexasCowboy sees the Dez Bryant play.



Scenario 2:
A1 throws to A2 who dives and grabs ball while airborne and body almost parallel to ground. Defender B1 makes contact with A2 while ball is firmly in his grasp and while still airborne. Body parts of A2 make contact with ground in following order. Left foot hits while ball still firmly grasped. Right foot hits while ball still firmly grasped. Left knee hits while ball still firmly grasped. Left elbow hits while ball still firmly grasped. Right elbow hits and ball pops out.

Ruling: Incomplete. A2 was going to ground in process of catching ball and must maintain possession all the way to the ground. Ruling is incomplete in this scenario whether there is contact with a defender or not.



TexasCowby - The 2nd scenario is correct. You cannot simply cite 2 feet and a knee and claim down by contact if the player is going to the ground in the process of catching the ball. This is why it matters WHEN THE FALLING BEGINS. Your only possible valid argument is that Dez had his balance and DECIDED to go to the ground. The rule specifically states "with or without contact" and if the contact (which you acknowledge and even bank on) occurs any time before a football move that follows a second step (which you also pointed out happens)

his hands open for a split second, the ball is still in play at this point...Dez then secures
it..one foot comes down, the second foot? is now entangled with the defenders leg who
is trying to jar the ball free

, then the "going to the ground during the process" rule applies.



What it boils down to is that you have to claim Dez is not in the process of "going to the ground" in frames 3 and 4 below. It sure looks like he is to me (and every expert on the matter).




The Case Book even distinguishes between these 2 scenarios:

A2 is contacted by B between first and second steps sending him to the ground and A2

a) puts hand down, regains balance, lunges, ball comes loose upon impact. Ruling: Complete if in endzone, fumble if not in endzone.

b) puts hand down but does not regain balance, lunges, ball comes loose upon impact. Ruling: Incomplete.

[TexasCowboy]

50 pages here we come

* the fall does not interfere with the receivers
ability to maintain a catch, unless you can prove
(and you can't) the ball was becoming free before
he hit the turf

* once he is on the ground there is NO continuation
and more importantly, once again having to be proved
not theorized the ball hit the turf before his body made
contact

You have failed to provide the proof and spouted
off theories and nonfactual statements from the
league

proving nothing, so just let the thread die
it's the only right thing you have left to do

[DarthMonk]

You are ignoring facts.

You are ignoring rules.

You are inventing facts.

50 pages here we come

* the fall does not interfere with the receivers
ability to maintain a catch, unless you can prove
(and you can't) the ball was becoming free before
he hit the turf

Clearly irrelevant. You either did not read the last post with explicit reference to the rules, did read it but are in denial, lack the intellectual ability to understand, or some combination of the above.

Otherwise you would understand that the ball coming free BEFORE he hit the turf is a non-issue. Read the freakin' cases outlined in the Case Book which I cited 2 posts back. They govern - not your wishes.

* once he is on the ground there is NO continuation
and more importantly, once again having to be proved
not theorized the ball hit the turf before his body made
contact

There IS continuation as cited in the Case Book 2 posts back. Read it. 2 feet and a knee do not automatically imply what you want them to.

You have failed to provide the proof and spouted
off theories and nonfactual statements from the
league

I actually did provide proof. I even gave you a valid argument you could use. I spouted no theories, only rules and facts. You apparently do not read or cannot, or both.

proving nothing, so just let the thread die
it's the only right thing you have left to do

I have logic and a rule book on my side. You are the one deluding yourself and all you have left is a free agent wide receiver who has admitted what you cannot.

[TexasCowboy]

I find it hilarious

* a league surrounded in corruption and influence from sources
unnamed is "according to you? "right" on a call, that got "butchered"
and ended in a controversy

Just stop while you are ahead cause you couldn't
be more wrong on this even if you tried

[Countertrey]

Epic denial. Reminds me of Baghdad Bob, denying the presence of US troops just blocks from where he was pronouncing victory. Pretty pathetic.

[Deadskins]

You are ignoring facts.

You are ignoring rules.

You are inventing facts.

50 pages here we come

* the fall does not interfere with the receivers
ability to maintain a catch, unless you can prove
(and you can't) the ball was becoming free before
he hit the turf

Clearly irrelevant. You either did not read the last post with explicit reference to the rules, did read it but are in denial, lack the intellectual ability to understand, or some combination of the above.

Otherwise you would understand that the ball coming free BEFORE he hit the turf is a non-issue. Read the freakin' cases outlined in the Case Book which I cited 2 posts back. They govern - not your wishes.

* once he is on the ground there is NO continuation
and more importantly, once again having to be proved
not theorized the ball hit the turf before his body made
contact

There IS continuation as cited in the Case Book 2 posts back. Read it. 2 feet and a knee do not automatically imply what you want them to.

You have failed to provide the proof and spouted
off theories and nonfactual statements from the
league

I actually did provide proof. I even gave you a valid argument you could use. I spouted no theories, only rules and facts. You apparently do not read or cannot, or both.

proving nothing, so just let the thread die
it's the only right thing you have left to do

I have logic and a rule book on my side. You are the one deluding yourself and all you have left is a free agent wide receiver who has admitted what you cannot.

It's become pretty obvious that he understands he has no factual basis for his argument, and now has only two options.

1. Accept the fact that he has been wrong all along, be a man, and admit he didn't understand the rule.
Or
2. Continue to deny, and plead with us to just end the thread and let it die, so that he can try and save face.

Either way, he knows he's wrong. To further beat the dead horse only plays down to his sad level.

[DarthMonk]

^^ Indeed. It's been fun.

Later, fellas.

[TexasCowboy]

If anything I have been right this entire time

* but of course when the real facts are in front
of you, all you do is spout off about a league
who like in the super bowl got it totally wrong

So yea you've pretty much worn this thread
out with your excuses and parrot mimics

now we let this thread go with what can
be some decency knowing this debate
is over

[DarthMonk]

[TexasCowboy]

I can see this thread now being moved to the smack talk section,
since someone needs to hijack it with his immaturity

[DarthMonk]

^^^ You are still broken down in Delusionville. We are nowhere near Smack.

[TexasCowboy]

^^^ You are still broken down in Delusionville. We are nowhere near Smack.

I am no where near delusional dude...you just can't accept the fact,
the refs got it wrong

so what's next Lynch's touchdown wasn't really a touchdown???

[DarthMonk]

I am no where near delusional dude...you just can't accept the fact,
the refs got it wrong

If anyone was ever wondering what irony is ... read this thread.

If anyone does not have the time, I will summarize the arguments of TexasCowboy's posts on this matter thusly:

[TexasCowboy]

The irony?

is how you have been unable to think for yourself this entire time,
repeatedly cow towing to a league and it's officials..who have
gotten calls wrong time after time

Yet you fail to see it and claim there was no? way he could
have caught it

bottom line

You've got no more legs to stand on let the thread
die dude it's the only decent thing you have left at
this point

[DEHog]

^^ So I'm assuming they got it right in the Lions/Cowboys game...can you please educate us on the corruption and conspiracy within the NFL!!!

[TexasCowboy]

^^ So I'm assuming they got it right in the Lions/Cowboys game...can you please educate us on the corruption and conspiracy within the NFL!!!

The real question is?

* which came first the grabs or the defense making
it's presence felt and forcing a bad pass to hit Hitchens
in the back of the jersey???

[DarthMonk]

The irony?

is how you have been unable to think for yourself this entire time,

... says the guy who apparently cannot read a rule.

I actually earned a trophy in the cowboyzone from a long-time and well-respected member there who liked my argument. He understands that the ability to change your mind is not a sign of weakness but rather, a sign of strength. Most of them there are like you - kowtowing to a white star on a field of blue.

Actually, your misspelling of cow towing (sic) is quite appropriate here. I love it.

[TexasCowboy]

The rule??

the only rule that needed applying in this case?
is down by contact. but of course you want to
deny the real rule

and just focus on 1 that is as skewered
to make outcomes fall the way they want

When you are able to think for yourself let
me know

[DarthMonk]

^^^ Hey DEHog ... not only did TC not understand what you were getting at (evidently), he still thinks 2 feet and a knee automatically imply what he wishes no matter the circumstances.



comes to mind.

[TexasCowboy]

the same place I got the rule regarding down by contact, but of course you will ignore the
clear rule regarding this cause the ones who can not think for themselves...will just mimic
what they hear and believe it as gospel truth

thread over

[DarthMonk]

the same place I got the rule regarding down by contact, but of course you will ignore the
clear rule regarding this cause the ones who can not think for themselves...will just mimic
what they hear and believe it as gospel truth

thread over

Down by contact claim addressed and refuted clearly but once again you apparently either cannot read, refuse to do so, or do but cannot comprehend.

[DEHog]

^^ So I'm assuming they got it right in the Lions/Cowboys game...can you please educate us on the corruption and conspiracy within the NFL!!!

The real question is?

* which came first the grabs or the defense making
it's presence felt and forcing a bad pass to hit Hitchens
in the back of the jersey???

Just for the record I happen to think they got that call right...but o f course if I'm to believe you the Refs only made that call because they wanted a GB/Dallas playoff game the next week

[DEHog]

^^^ Hey DEHog ... not only did TC not understand what you were getting at (evidently), he still thinks 2 feet and a knee automatically imply what he wishes no matter the circumstances.



comes to mind.

At this point I don't know what He/She thinks?? I have a lot of friends who are Boys fans and most understand the call
a few of the crazy homers argue that while he fell he a made a football move...which really doesn't matter.

I do know this...When people don't have a argument this is what they say...

thread over