bullets13

No. Because by their interpretation he didn't maintain control of the ball while going to ground. So it would be different than if a running back had crossed the plain and done the same thing. Although had he lunged a little farther and reached it, they might have given it more consideration as a football move and let the play stand....

The only positive for the refs in this game is that the replay at the end completely took the focus off of the obvious blown replay in the 1st half that went a long way to helping the packers put up three at the end of the half. If they don't get three there, the play to dez would've never happened. Still, all that said, despite one blown call that MIGHT have led to Green Bay points in the first half (they still might have gotten there to kick it anyway), and another questionable call that cost the boys 7, had Murray held on to the ball and scored his 60 or 70 yard touchdown (10 point swing), and had romo or the coaches or bailey (take your pick) executed at the end of the first half (6 point swing), and had the defense been able to get a stop out of 3 or 4 chances in the late 3rd and 4th quarter, all this would've been a moot point. I thought the cowboys outplayed GB, and that GB caught several breaks, but still the boys should've been able to put this one away, with or without the dez play.

It is a stupid rule, but by the rule, it wasn't a catch... Unless its deemed he made a natural football move. I personally (as a blatant homer, I'll admit) would argue that when he 1) turned after catching the ball, 2) took two or three steps, and 3) made a notable effort to stretch to the endzone made arguably at least one, if not THREE different football moves before going to ground and losing control of the ball.

After seeing that call, as debatable as it was, what did you even bother coming on here for. You knew what you'd see. Because you wanted to be a hater? Yeah, that's what we figured.

But maybe it wasn't so bad from the side view?

I'm not sure if I know what roughing the kicker is anymore. I haven't seen it called in so long. I would assume hitting the kickers leg while its 5 ft off the ground and spinning him over to land on his back might be it. Maybe you have to rip them down by the facemask or horse collar them now?

If they score and get the 2 pt conversion a FG only ties it. And if you look at the numbers over the years, Rodgers numbers haven't been all that great at the end of games where he had to lead a drive at the end of regulation to tie or win. So who knows what would've happened.

It is in my opinion. I guess because the dive wasn't a full on stretch the replay ref saw it differently. One thing is for sure: between the obvious blown instant replay in the first half, and this one in the 2nd which was marginal at best, the conspiracy theorists claiming that the refs sabotaged last weeks game to get the boys into the Super Bowl no longer have a leg to stand on.

The cowboys are a couple of secondary players away from being a complete football team. I'll be curious what they do in the off season, and if they fill those holes, are able to resign dez, and if they do resign him, what other holes they have to poke in the team to be able to afford to keep him.

I'm sure in his mind with the amount of time he'd already controlled the ball he thought he already had the catch

O'dell Beckham AND the Lions organization both already tweeting they thought it was a catch... Oh well.

The only debate is whether or not he made a football move. The ground can cause an incompletion, even if his elbow hit first.

That's the debate. He caught the ball, took two steps as he was being brought down and stretched towards the goal line before the ball came out. It can be debated either way, with packers fans and people like you obviously saying it was an incompletion, and cowboys fans obviously saying a catch. I personally think that the two steps and stretch towards the goal line were both football moves, and thought the call should've stood, but then again, I'm a cowboys fan.

Hard to be mad about a couple of calls going against the boys. They blew enough chances that they still should've won by double digits

Riiiight.

You would've seen it had the ball not touched the ground at all.

Man, after all the bad breaks the boys have had this game, that catch is tough to stomach after he deflected that ball.

Hold them to a FG and there's plenty of time to at least have a chance

I'd say at best the original call should've stood.

From the last look it really looked like he was stretching for the goal line after controlling the ball...

Wow.

I don't think they can overturn it, but I didn't think they could let the completion stand in the first half.

Not sure of the ruling here to be honest. He took a couple of steps as he was falling after he caught it.

Holy crap what a catch!!!!

Gotta go for it.