theENGLISHseahawk":1cyuoig3 said:If that Bryant call was reversed against Doug Baldwin -- I'd be seriously pissed. This place would be in meltdown.
You have to have complete control going to the ground.SeahawksEast":1lvsnsex said:So, he caught the ball, was moving forward with three clear steps towards the end zone, falls to a knee with ball still in possession and then his forearm hits down with the ground popping the ball loose.
I think the Hawks match up better against the Pack than the hulking Dallas O line but methinks the Cowboys got jobbed.
salamander":1mp92wzt said:Probably the right call by the book, but not really in the spirit of the rule. Next year I think they specifically classify reaching the ball for a marker a football move.
SeahawksEast":1co79ocx said:So, he caught the ball, was moving forward with three clear steps towards the end zone, falls to a knee with ball still in possession and then his forearm hits down with the ground popping the ball loose.
I think the Hawks match up better against the Pack than the hulking Dallas O line but methinks the Cowboys got jobbed.
BlueBlood":1c7hvbzg said:Come on apologizing for the cowboys?? It wasn't a catch period.
Agree. Bad call pure and simple. But they lived by the refs last week and died by them this week. Seems fair to me.theENGLISHseahawk":1t2e80ko said:If that Bryant call was reversed against Doug Baldwin -- I'd be seriously pissed. This place would be in meltdown.
I tend to agree. It's hard for me to see that as a legit overturn. Looked like he caught it, then extended, then the ground knocked it out. I know that "completing the catch" is a squishy place, but that was close.chevelle03":2j5zhaai said:I think that should be a catch since he basically took a step and reached for the goal line AFTER he caught the ball, then it came loose.