Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

What's funny is that during the Colts-Bengals game I sent a message to my friend after Moncrief's TD reception that "if that was Calvin Johnson they would have said he didn't complete the process of the catch" ... A week later the 'rule' comes into play. When Bryant caught it I said - to myself/at the TV - before it was even challenged; "will be funny if they overturn that" ... so it definitely wasn't surprising.

Dumb rule, the call is subjective based the "football act" part of it (I believe reaching for the endzone is a football act so I would have ruled it a completion) though it can be interpreted either way. Of course any neutral observer would say he caught the ball, clearly caught the ball and took 3 steps and reached out towards the endzone which is typical of Dez Bryant if you watch Cowboys games. The rule is the rule, it's a bad rule, it's got grey area though the league tries to spin it as a B&W rule, and like the majority of the NFL's oversized rule book, it isn't consistently officiated.

Lance Moore's 2-pt conversion in the SB comes to mind.

I am a Cowboys fan and I admit that under the current rules it was the cotrect call, but three things bother me:

1) In every one of these overturned catches (Calvin Johnson vs. Chicago, Louis Murphy vs. San Diego, Dez Bryant vs. Green Bay) the refs in the field marked completion. it was later, under instant replay, that they changed the decision.

2) The rule is ambiguos about the "football move" after a catch. I will put a play inspired in the Colts-Cowboys game of week 16 (in that game, Colts punter Pat McAfee threw a surprise pass to a wide open player that was incomplete). Let's say that in that situation the player grabs the ball, but he stumbles about 5 yards and drops the ball just as he hits the ground. If he doesn't bobble it, that should be a cach and a fumble, not an incompletion, but I bet that instant replay would call an incomplete pass.

3) Yesterday, referee Gene Steratore failed to put 26 seconds on the clock after the play, that by rule he should because of the overturn (the clock kept running as Dez Bryant rolled into the endone). This is considered a big downgrade in officiating circles and Steratore (who was one of the favorite referees to be assigned the Super Bowl) should be watching home on Super Sunday.

I remember very well a TD catch made by Raiders WR Dokie Williams in a game vs. Pittsburgh in the mid-80s when he only got a foot down (he was lightly pushed and the other feet went out of bounds). The refs called that Williams was pushed and that was the reaon he couldn't come with both feet down and validated the TD, but replay showed that even without the push he couldn't had both feet down). But back then all those plays were touchdowns.

John Stallworth first TD in Super Bowl XIII and Charlie Brown TD in Super Bowl XVII are two instances when the receiver didn't came with both feet in the field, but they were pushed by the defenders, so the TD's were good. Nowadays, they would been incomplete passes.

The Vikings have been victimized by two bogus "push out" completions.

1) Late in the Hail Mary game Drew Pearson caught a 25 yard pass to the 50 on 4th and 16 which kept the winning drive alive. I believe it was Nate Wright who pushed Pearson out, and there's no way that he would have come down in bounds anyway, but they called it complete.

2) The Cardinals' Josh McCown to Nate Poole for a 28 yard TD with 4 seconds left in the 2003 season finale to knock the Purple out of the playoffs. Poole wouldn't have come down in bounds either.

I think the current NFL rules regarding catches are ridiculous.
If you showed the Dez Bryant catch to 100 non-football fans
and asked them if he caught the ball, 99 of the 100 would say yes.

The difficulty with the "football act" part of the equation is that the football act has to be completed. Bryant lost the ball during the football act, if you interpret it that way. But I don't even think that's true; he was coming down with the ball in only one hand, and that hand was on top of the ball. Of course he lost the ball when it hit the ground; he didn't have control of it.

To go a different way, I don't think Eric Wright's strip of Cris Collinsworth in SB XVI and subsequent Niners recovery would have happened under today's rules. It would have probably been ruled an incomplete pass because Collinsworth had yet to make a "football move". Same probably holds true for John Henderson's fumble in SB IV.

In consecutive Dallas-SF matchups in 1995 (including the 1994 NFC title game) the 49ers overwhelmed the Cowboys with an early scoring barrage, fueled by Dallas turnovers. In each game, Michael Irvin caught a pass, was immediately hit, and fumbled. In the NFC Championship, SF scored on the subsequent possession to take a 14-0 lead. In the 1995 regular season game, it was returned for a TD. I don't think either of those plays are upheld today. Both of them would have been incomplete passes.

JohnH19 wrote:2) The Cardinals' Josh McCown to Nate Poole for a 28 yard TD with 4 seconds left in the 2003 season finale to knock the Purple out of the playoffs. Poole wouldn't have come down in bounds either.

It's been a while since I saw that one. I actually thought it was a good call. The Browns had two games in a row decided on a play like that. They lost to the Cardinals 21-27 after Kellen Winslow Jr. was forced out after catching a ball in the end zone. It was very questionable as to whether or not he would have gotten both feet in had he not been forced out. The next week they beat the Jets 24-18 after Chris Baker was forced out after catching a pass in the end zone. I believe it was Mike Carey who deemed Baker would not have landed in the end zone. This call I believe was wrong.

I was glad when the league fixed the force out rule. Now receivers have to clearly get both feet in. No judgments needed by officials anymore.

The Gray TD in the '75 MNF tilt between Washington and St. Louis was an awful call. It is arguably the worst call of all time. The Otis Taylor "catch" along the sideline in the '69 AFL title game might be #2.

The Don Maynard play in the '68 AFL title game is weird. Some years it would have been a catch; other years it would not have been a catch. Therein lies the problem. A catch should be a catch no matter the year.

By stripping Maynard of the ball, Atkinson created a live fumble situation. Don had pulled the ball down & tucked it under his arm.

But Ralph, with today's gloves a baby can almost palm a football. It was obviously in his grip, the problem for Dez was that he was falling, falling...falling...