On September 26 2012 16:24 Supamang wrote: Can someone explain the rules to me about possession and this ending controversial call?
I conceded last night that the refs probably made the wrong call and talked to my friends about that, but they brought up other points and now I'm not so sure again.
1. Possession. Do you need 2 hands for possession? Does it need to be brought into your chest for it to count as possession? Do you have to be touching the ground and does the order in which people touch the ground matter in this case?
2. Contested pass. Does it have to be 50/50 or is it just as long as it isn't 100/0 that it counts as contested?
The rule is. If two players simultaneously catches a ball with possession. Then the ball goes to the offensive team. In other words if some how two players jumps up for a ball and both players arm is wrapped up around the ball then the offensive team gets the td. But in this case it was clearly shown that the defensive player had both arms wrapped around the ball and the offensive player just happen to have one arm stuck in there. The NFL admit that it was a td but they can't overturn a referee judgement.
Do you need two hands for possession? In this situation you do as it would be clearer to know who had possession. I mean if both players only had one arm each on the football then i'd understand a td call.
Does it need to be on your chest? No it doesn't. It could be in any form of a catch. As far as possession is concern. Do you have to be touching the ground? Yes your foot needs to touch the end zone. If a player catches a ball in the end zone in mid flight and a defensive player hits him hard knocking the ball loose before landing it would be considered an incomplete pass.
Order of catch? No doesn't matter who catches it first. If an offensive player catches the ball in mid flight first and a defensive player jumps up and sticks his hands in his clutch of catching the ball then whoever comes down with the ball and maintain possession gets the ball. But if in that case where they both have possession then the catch goes to the offensive player.
But that rule doesn't apply in this situation because the defensive player had true possession of the ball. The offensive player had one arm stuck in there and the other arm wrapped around the defensive player arms not football.
On September 26 2012 16:24 Supamang wrote: Can someone explain the rules to me about possession and this ending controversial call?
I conceded last night that the refs probably made the wrong call and talked to my friends about that, but they brought up other points and now I'm not so sure again.
1. Possession. Do you need 2 hands for possession? Does it need to be brought into your chest for it to count as possession? Do you have to be touching the ground and does the order in which people touch the ground matter in this case?
2. Contested pass. Does it have to be 50/50 or is it just as long as it isn't 100/0 that it counts as contested?
The rule is. If two players simultaneously catches a ball with possession. Then the ball goes to the offensive team. In other words if some how two players jumps up for a ball and both players arm is wrapped up around the ball then the offensive team gets the td. But in this case it was clearly shown that the defensive player had both arms wrapped around the ball and the offensive player just happen to have one arm stuck in there. The NFL admit that it was a td but they can't overturn a referee judgement.
Do you need two hands for possession? In this situation you do as it would be clearer to know who had possession. I mean if both players only had one arm each on the football then i'd understand a td call.
Does it need to be on your chest? No it doesn't. It could be in any form of a catch. As far as possession is concern. Do you have to be touching the ground? Yes your foot needs to touch the end zone. If a player catches a ball in the end zone in mid flight and a defensive player hits him hard knocking the ball loose before landing it would be considered an incomplete pass.
Order of catch? No doesn't matter who catches it first. If an offensive player catches the ball in mid flight first and a defensive player jumps up and sticks his hands in his clutch of catching the ball then whoever comes down with the ball and maintain possession gets the ball. But if in that case where they both have possession then the catch goes to the offensive player.
But that rule doesn't apply in this situation because the defensive player had true possession of the ball. The offensive player had one arm stuck in there and the other arm wrapped around the defensive player arms not football.
Thanks for the explanation.
Just one more thing for clarification though, with the bolded text. You said that to have possession, you need your feet on the ground. You need 2 feet right?
Doesn't Tate touch the ground with his arms around the ball first? Even if not, watch the video full time again. What would your call be after watching that once? I dont know either. Ok, so the guy called a TD on the field. Lets watch the slow motion replay. Is there clear evidence to overturn the ruling on the field? Refer to my questions above.
Disclaimer here: Again, the PI Tate did against Shields should have ended the play hands down. My point here is that I find it ridiculous how people think its completely clear cut this catch was when it really wasn't. Like the guy above me says, it was a questionable call but people are blowing this out of proportion.
And people really are using this as a reason to dislike the Seahawks and their fans, despite the exchange I had here earlier in this thread. People getting mad at Pete Carroll for doing what any coach would do and not saying anything to take away from the efforts made from his team. People getting mad at Wilson for the same thing. People mad at Tate for doing the same thing, and for doing what any player would do and continue fighting for the ball until he hears the call from the ref.
And then you get people saying shit like:
On September 25 2012 13:03 semantics wrote: real refs would have penalized seahawks defense out of their dirty playing week 1, seahawk games turn dirty because their defense takes all chances it can get with these bad refs. But then again that's my opinion, man these tears are so delicious
right...
On September 25 2012 17:37 Probe1 wrote: Dude I don't care for NFL at all. I watch it because it is technically football but ridiculous shit like this and the whole laundry list.. I prefer to just watch honest college football.
Seahawk fans are coming across as sleezy and dishonorable. They should be a little ashamed. No one is trying to take away your win because you didn't win. Everyone lost.
Yeah, I'm sleezy and dishonorable by offering an opposing viewpoint as objectively as I can. I conceded yesterday that the call was probably wrong, but because I want to support my team I want to be absolutely sure about this. And I should be ashamed about this? Yeah I'll try being ashamed about this as soon as Steelers fans all beg for forgiveness and give our Lombardi trophy back from 2006. Back off dude.
On September 26 2012 06:54 Sadist wrote: Pathetic that ESPN has an article now saying the refs need to compromise. "Most people in the US don't have pensions, neither should the referees." Pathetic. Just because a majority of us are getting fucked over doesn't mean everyone should. That is the biggest example of crabs in a bucket thinking I have seen from them.
I am really really becoming frustrated/annoyed with society as a whole and where it is/has been moving to. Idiocracy and serfdom here we come.
Considering they are very much part-time employees, it is somewhat a demanding request.
I can't think of any other part-time job where you get a pension and a livable salary on 16 days of work a year...
they don't work 16 days a year. They have travel days during the week. And you think they don't prepare for games by watching video?
And you Mr. Free market, shouldn't their pay be dictated by their worth? Look how attrocious things have been without them. Not to mention the football industry is a MULTI BILLION DOLLAR one that is thriving.
On September 26 2012 16:24 Supamang wrote: Can someone explain the rules to me about possession and this ending controversial call?
I conceded last night that the refs probably made the wrong call and talked to my friends about that, but they brought up other points and now I'm not so sure again.
1. Possession. Do you need 2 hands for possession? Does it need to be brought into your chest for it to count as possession? Do you have to be touching the ground and does the order in which people touch the ground matter in this case?
2. Contested pass. Does it have to be 50/50 or is it just as long as it isn't 100/0 that it counts as contested?
The rule is. If two players simultaneously catches a ball with possession. Then the ball goes to the offensive team. In other words if some how two players jumps up for a ball and both players arm is wrapped up around the ball then the offensive team gets the td. But in this case it was clearly shown that the defensive player had both arms wrapped around the ball and the offensive player just happen to have one arm stuck in there. The NFL admit that it was a td but they can't overturn a referee judgement.
Do you need two hands for possession? In this situation you do as it would be clearer to know who had possession. I mean if both players only had one arm each on the football then i'd understand a td call.
Does it need to be on your chest? No it doesn't. It could be in any form of a catch. As far as possession is concern. Do you have to be touching the ground? Yes your foot needs to touch the end zone. If a player catches a ball in the end zone in mid flight and a defensive player hits him hard knocking the ball loose before landing it would be considered an incomplete pass.
Order of catch? No doesn't matter who catches it first. If an offensive player catches the ball in mid flight first and a defensive player jumps up and sticks his hands in his clutch of catching the ball then whoever comes down with the ball and maintain possession gets the ball. But if in that case where they both have possession then the catch goes to the offensive player.
But that rule doesn't apply in this situation because the defensive player had true possession of the ball. The offensive player had one arm stuck in there and the other arm wrapped around the defensive player arms not football.
Thanks for the explanation.
Just one more thing for clarification though, with the bolded text. You said that to have possession, you need your feet on the ground. You need 2 feet right?
Doesn't Tate touch the ground with his arms around the ball first? Even if not, watch the video full time again. What would your call be after watching that once? I dont know either. Ok, so the guy called a TD on the field. Lets watch the slow motion replay. Is there clear evidence to overturn the ruling on the field? Refer to my questions above.
Disclaimer here: Again, the PI Tate did against Shields should have ended the play hands down. My point here is that I find it ridiculous how people think its completely clear cut this catch was when it really wasn't. Like the guy above me says, it was a questionable call but people are blowing this out of proportion.
And people really are using this as a reason to dislike the Seahawks and their fans, despite the exchange I had here earlier in this thread. People getting mad at Pete Carroll for doing what any coach would do and not saying anything to take away from the efforts made from his team. People getting mad at Wilson for the same thing. People mad at Tate for doing the same thing, and for doing what any player would do and continue fighting for the ball until he hears the call from the ref.
On September 25 2012 13:03 semantics wrote: real refs would have penalized seahawks defense out of their dirty playing week 1, seahawk games turn dirty because their defense takes all chances it can get with these bad refs. But then again that's my opinion, man these tears are so delicious
On September 25 2012 17:37 Probe1 wrote: Dude I don't care for NFL at all. I watch it because it is technically football but ridiculous shit like this and the whole laundry list.. I prefer to just watch honest college football.
Seahawk fans are coming across as sleezy and dishonorable. They should be a little ashamed. No one is trying to take away your win because you didn't win. Everyone lost.
Yeah, I'm sleezy and dishonorable by offering an opposing viewpoint as objectively as I can. I conceded yesterday that the call was probably wrong, but because I want to support my team I want to be absolutely sure about this. And I should be ashamed about this? Yeah I'll try being ashamed about this as soon as Steelers fans all beg for forgiveness and give our Lombardi trophy back from 2006. Back off dude.
A catch made in the end zone requires two feet down and control of the ball on or past the goal line to be a touchdown
I've watched the replay many times and from every angle Tate never had total possession of the football. Remember the referee did not call it a touchdown instantly. They ran over looked at the players then looked at each other and one of them called a touchdown while the other guy called an interception. And the worse part was when they looked down it clearly should Jenning with possession of the football.
I love the Seahawks. I'm a NFC west fan. Huge 49ers fan. I thought the Seahawks played an awesome defensive game. I even told all my buddies to watch out for the Seahawks and that they're a top 5 team in the NFC. But the one thing that pissed me off the most was the russel wilson and golden tate post game interview. They should of been smart and avoided answering those questions. A true veteran QB + WR would of admit that it was wrong and that they should of moved on. But these two are rookies to the league and they want the attention and spotlight. Can't blame them tho. Ask yourself this before you agree on the call. Say the NFL or ESPN never released that "rules on the simultaneous catch". Would you of seriously thought that was a TD? Because they released that rule people (especially seahawks) start to tell themself or give reasons as to why it was a TD.
On September 26 2012 06:54 Sadist wrote: Pathetic that ESPN has an article now saying the refs need to compromise. "Most people in the US don't have pensions, neither should the referees." Pathetic. Just because a majority of us are getting fucked over doesn't mean everyone should. That is the biggest example of crabs in a bucket thinking I have seen from them.
I am really really becoming frustrated/annoyed with society as a whole and where it is/has been moving to. Idiocracy and serfdom here we come.
Considering they are very much part-time employees, it is somewhat a demanding request.
I can't think of any other part-time job where you get a pension and a livable salary on 16 days of work a year...
Don't forget preseason and playoffs. That's at least 24 days a year.
Not to mention the regular season has 17 weeks, not 16.
On September 26 2012 06:54 Sadist wrote: Pathetic that ESPN has an article now saying the refs need to compromise. "Most people in the US don't have pensions, neither should the referees." Pathetic. Just because a majority of us are getting fucked over doesn't mean everyone should. That is the biggest example of crabs in a bucket thinking I have seen from them.
I am really really becoming frustrated/annoyed with society as a whole and where it is/has been moving to. Idiocracy and serfdom here we come.
Considering they are very much part-time employees, it is somewhat a demanding request.
I can't think of any other part-time job where you get a pension and a livable salary on 16 days of work a year...
Would you call the NFL players part time? Granted, the refs don't quite put in as much work but they do a LOT more than just Sundays in the fall.
Also, considering the size of the NFL I don't see why their employees should be limited to the same retirement as "most Americans".
(I'm also of the opinion that more companies should give out pensions, so I'm a bit biased.)
On September 25 2012 15:10 Lvdr wrote: The nfl clearly will not react to anything unless it impacts it's income... Therefore I call on everyone who truly loves football to not watch next week. As long as people are buying tickets and watching games in record numbers nothing will change.
Or the players go on strike. Honestly, it would be the best solution.
I'm not sure if it's been said, but the players cannot go on strike for this reason. The only way that the NFL can be effected is by the fans not going to game and buying concession items, not buying NFL apparel, and not watching the games. Not enough people will do this.
That said, the calls are hardly worse than they usually are. People are really viewing the normal refs with rose colored glasses. Every year we're bitching about one bad call or another. The only reason these guys have more noticeable calls is because of how long they're taking to make the incorrect call. The usual refs make bad calls with confidence in them.
I don't feel like reading the same opinion of the MNF game for six more pages, but the reason that all of you are wrong, and the NFL is correct, is because of the way possession is defined. You're all looking at this play as though Jennings has possession in the air, but here's the thing he doesn't!
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3 of the NFL Rule Book defines a catch:
A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
When a player (or players) is going to the ground in the attempt to catch a pass, Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1 states:
Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
So, above we have what defines possession. Watch the play again and you'll see the following things happen: Tate gets his left hand between the ball, and Jennings chest, and then gets his right hand around to the other side. Both of Tate's feet touch the ground, at which point he adjusts his right hand to more firmly secure the ball. During this time, ONE of Jennings' feet makes contact with the ground (remember our rule on possession). The two players bend and make contact with the ground. By the time Jennings reaches the ground, which is a requirement of possession, Tate has both hands firmly on the ball. This is clearly shown by the absolute fact that Jennings could not wrestle the ball out of Tate's hands.
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:
Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
Those of you saying that Jennings had possession are wrong, and need to stop crying. Note that nowhere in that rule does it say "equal" possession is required, because "equal" is indeterminable. There is literally no way to objectively quantify who has better control of the ball; therefore, there is literally no objective way to rule on equal or unequal possession of a simultaneous catch. The player either has the ball, or he does not. It's quite clear that, while on the ground, Golden Tate has control of the ball (keep in mind how hard Jennings tried to wrestle the ball away).
Rules are in place for a reason, and the NFL doesn't make up rules in the middle of a game to appease fans. The Packers weren't screwed, they lost correctly according to the rules of the game.
If the Packers and their fans want to cry about anything, it should be their poor play that led to this happening. Eight sacks in the first half, with a total of zero points. A complete inability to run out the clock in the final, crucial moments of the fourth quarter. The missed two point conversion. A blown coverage on Tate earlier in the game. Jennings going for an interception instead of knocking it down, or (alternately) putting his fucking foot on the white line to make the pass incomplete (never touched the back of the end zone, he kept kicking his feet in the air, because he wanted the interception, when an incomplete pass gives the same result). There are a lot of things to be upset about in this game, but the call at the end shouldn't be one of them. This is no different than the people that bitched about Calvin Johnson getting screwed a couple years ago when he stupidly ignored the rules of going to the ground during a catch, and put the ball on the ground at the end of the game.
Except read the novel above your post, Klive. It's NOT A FUCKING INTERCEPTION, BECAUSE JENNINGS DIDN'T POSSESS THE BALL IN THE AIR. Your opinion, based on an incomplete, misunderstanding of the rules of football doesn't make the officials wrong. Nay, it makes you wrong, and uninformed. The rules are out there, and you can find them through Google if you search right. I took those right off of NFL.com, and to the letter of the rules, the catch was correctly awarded to Golden Tate.
It's a crazy technicality, I'll give you that, and without actually seeing the rules, I can understand why people are confused. But this is very clear cut that the refs are correct.
On September 26 2012 22:55 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: Except read the novel above your post, Klive. It's NOT A FUCKING INTERCEPTION, BECAUSE JENNINGS DIDN'T POSSESS THE BALL IN THE AIR. Your opinion, based on an incomplete, misunderstanding of the rules of football doesn't make the officials wrong. Nay, it makes you wrong, and uninformed. The rules are out there, and you can find them through Google if you search right. I took those right off of NFL.com, and to the letter of the rules, the catch was correctly awarded to Golden Tate.
It's a crazy technicality, I'll give you that, and without actually seeing the rules, I can understand why people are confused. But this is very clear cut that the refs are correct.
You're missing the even larger point in that if the offensive pass interference penalty that the NFL admits the referee missed on that play had actually been called, the play would have been nullified, there would be no argument about who had possession of the ball, and the Seahawks would have lost.
Just because the penalty isn't reviewable doesn't absolve the referees in that game from ultimately changing the outcome. It's why the NFL's statement is a non-statement. Yes, they made the correct call when it came to who ultimately had possession of the ball, but they missed the more important call that still decided the game one way or the other.
And people are complaining about the replacement officials not because they have rose-colored glasses on, but because these officials are embarrassing. Late calls, conflicting calls (multiple instances of different officials motioning in different directions when there is a turnover), missing penalties, calling questionable penalties, throwing their hat onto the field and a receiver slips on it, being yanked from a game for being a fan of one of the teams, telling a player he is on their fantasy team, the list goes on.
I love football, and will continue to watch so unfortunately the NFL will get no silent protest from me, but it's really a shame what these officials are doing to the sport this year.
What short memories people have. Anyone remember Calvin Johnson and the Lion's loss versus the Bears back in Week 1 in '10? (e: didn't realize SL mentioned this at the end but still, if people didn't read his whole post, worth reiterating).
On September 26 2012 22:55 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: Except read the novel above your post, Klive. It's NOT A FUCKING INTERCEPTION, BECAUSE JENNINGS DIDN'T POSSESS THE BALL IN THE AIR. Your opinion, based on an incomplete, misunderstanding of the rules of football doesn't make the officials wrong. Nay, it makes you wrong, and uninformed. The rules are out there, and you can find them through Google if you search right. I took those right off of NFL.com, and to the letter of the rules, the catch was correctly awarded to Golden Tate.
It's a crazy technicality, I'll give you that, and without actually seeing the rules, I can understand why people are confused. But this is very clear cut that the refs are correct.
You're missing the even larger point in that if the offensive pass interference penalty that the NFL admits the referee missed on that play had actually been called, the play would have been nullified, there would be no argument about who had possession of the ball, and the Seahawks would have lost.
Just because the penalty isn't reviewable doesn't absolve the referees in that game from ultimately changing the outcome. It's why the NFL's statement is a non-statement. Yes, they made the correct call when it came to who ultimately had possession of the ball, but they missed the more important call that still decided the game one way or the other.
And people are complaining about the replacement officials not because they have rose-colored glasses on, but because these officials are embarrassing. Late calls, conflicting calls (multiple instances of different officials motioning in different directions when there is a turnover), missing penalties, calling questionable penalties, throwing their hat onto the field and a receiver slips on it, being yanked from a game for being a fan of one of the teams, telling a player he is on their fantasy team, the list goes on.
I love football, and will continue to watch so unfortunately the NFL will get no silent protest from me, but it's really a shame what these officials are doing to the sport this year.
How is that any worse than throwing a flag at a player's face mask and making him legally blind!?
On September 26 2012 23:30 Dknight wrote: What short memories people have. Anyone remember Calvin Johnson and the Lion's loss versus the Bears back in Week 1 in '10? (e: didn't realize SL mentioned this at the end but still, if people didn't read his whole post, worth reiterating).
On September 26 2012 22:55 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: Except read the novel above your post, Klive. It's NOT A FUCKING INTERCEPTION, BECAUSE JENNINGS DIDN'T POSSESS THE BALL IN THE AIR. Your opinion, based on an incomplete, misunderstanding of the rules of football doesn't make the officials wrong. Nay, it makes you wrong, and uninformed. The rules are out there, and you can find them through Google if you search right. I took those right off of NFL.com, and to the letter of the rules, the catch was correctly awarded to Golden Tate.
It's a crazy technicality, I'll give you that, and without actually seeing the rules, I can understand why people are confused. But this is very clear cut that the refs are correct.
You're missing the even larger point in that if the offensive pass interference penalty that the NFL admits the referee missed on that play had actually been called, the play would have been nullified, there would be no argument about who had possession of the ball, and the Seahawks would have lost.
Just because the penalty isn't reviewable doesn't absolve the referees in that game from ultimately changing the outcome. It's why the NFL's statement is a non-statement. Yes, they made the correct call when it came to who ultimately had possession of the ball, but they missed the more important call that still decided the game one way or the other.
And people are complaining about the replacement officials not because they have rose-colored glasses on, but because these officials are embarrassing. Late calls, conflicting calls (multiple instances of different officials motioning in different directions when there is a turnover), missing penalties, calling questionable penalties, throwing their hat onto the field and a receiver slips on it, being yanked from a game for being a fan of one of the teams, telling a player he is on their fantasy team, the list goes on.
I love football, and will continue to watch so unfortunately the NFL will get no silent protest from me, but it's really a shame what these officials are doing to the sport this year.
How is that any worse than throwing a flag at a player's face mask and making him legally blind!?
Not sure what incident you are referring to, so I'm not sure if it's worse or not. But the officials are throwing flags around all the time, so I wouldn't be surprised if occasionally one hit a player by accident. Their hats, on the other hand, are supposed to stay on their head.
I understand bad calls have been made in the past that may have decided games one way or the other. The normal officials are far from perfect. But the replacement officials' lack of experience and more importantly lack of confidence means that the players, coaches,and fans absolutely will not give them the benefit of the doubt, and it's to the detriment of the sport. Just because there have been bad calls in the past doesn't mean that these replacement officials are immune to scrutiny. Can you remember a worse 3 weeks of officiating in NFL history? Because I certainly can't.
On September 26 2012 22:55 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: Except read the novel above your post, Klive. It's NOT A FUCKING INTERCEPTION, BECAUSE JENNINGS DIDN'T POSSESS THE BALL IN THE AIR. Your opinion, based on an incomplete, misunderstanding of the rules of football doesn't make the officials wrong. Nay, it makes you wrong, and uninformed. The rules are out there, and you can find them through Google if you search right. I took those right off of NFL.com, and to the letter of the rules, the catch was correctly awarded to Golden Tate.
It's a crazy technicality, I'll give you that, and without actually seeing the rules, I can understand why people are confused. But this is very clear cut that the refs are correct.
You're missing the even larger point in that if the offensive pass interference penalty that the NFL admits the referee missed on that play had actually been called, the play would have been nullified, there would be no argument about who had possession of the ball, and the Seahawks would have lost.
Just because the penalty isn't reviewable doesn't absolve the referees in that game from ultimately changing the outcome. It's why the NFL's statement is a non-statement. Yes, they made the correct call when it came to who ultimately had possession of the ball, but they missed the more important call that still decided the game one way or the other.
And people are complaining about the replacement officials not because they have rose-colored glasses on, but because these officials are embarrassing. Late calls, conflicting calls (multiple instances of different officials motioning in different directions when there is a turnover), missing penalties, calling questionable penalties, throwing their hat onto the field and a receiver slips on it, being yanked from a game for being a fan of one of the teams, telling a player he is on their fantasy team, the list goes on.
I love football, and will continue to watch so unfortunately the NFL will get no silent protest from me, but it's really a shame what these officials are doing to the sport this year.
You obviously didn't read my whole post, so I'll repeat this part. The scrutiny on the refs is amplified because they're screwing up the tempo of the game. The bolded parts are the parts that contain complaints that cannot also apply to the regular refs. The regular refs regularly signal in opposing directions, as turnovers can be very confusing (Note that this is the likely reason that ALL turnovers are reviewed now). The regs (my new term, yay!) are notorious for missing calls, calling ticky-tack penalties, and calling games inconsistently. The hat on the field was unfortunately placed, but as DKnight appropriately points out, the regs blinded a player, not only ending his career, but significantly diminishing his quality of life after retirement. Which is worse? I'd say the mistake the reg made is worse.
I just heard on ESPN that something like 78 or 86-87 hailmary passes have been launched at the ending of a game. Would you like to guess how many PI calls have been made? Too bad. They said that none had ever been called. I'm going to go out on a limb and say at least 50% contained a missed PI call. The reg in the booth even said that they wouldn't have called PI, because in that situation, anything goes. Your argument is, therefore, invalid. We'd very likely have the same beef with the regs.
Finally, and I'm suddenly questioning my response at all to this reply, your entire response to the call is invalid, because I was replying specifically to people saying that MD Jennings had possession of the ball... They're wrong. We all know an OPI call was missed. What we all should understand is that it probably wouldn't be called by the regs, and that it's irrelevant when you consider all the options that Jennings had to win the game there... instead, he decided to pad his stats.
On September 26 2012 23:30 Dknight wrote: What short memories people have. Anyone remember Calvin Johnson and the Lion's loss versus the Bears back in Week 1 in '10? (e: didn't realize SL mentioned this at the end but still, if people didn't read his whole post, worth reiterating).
On September 26 2012 22:55 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: Except read the novel above your post, Klive. It's NOT A FUCKING INTERCEPTION, BECAUSE JENNINGS DIDN'T POSSESS THE BALL IN THE AIR. Your opinion, based on an incomplete, misunderstanding of the rules of football doesn't make the officials wrong. Nay, it makes you wrong, and uninformed. The rules are out there, and you can find them through Google if you search right. I took those right off of NFL.com, and to the letter of the rules, the catch was correctly awarded to Golden Tate.
It's a crazy technicality, I'll give you that, and without actually seeing the rules, I can understand why people are confused. But this is very clear cut that the refs are correct.
You're missing the even larger point in that if the offensive pass interference penalty that the NFL admits the referee missed on that play had actually been called, the play would have been nullified, there would be no argument about who had possession of the ball, and the Seahawks would have lost.
Just because the penalty isn't reviewable doesn't absolve the referees in that game from ultimately changing the outcome. It's why the NFL's statement is a non-statement. Yes, they made the correct call when it came to who ultimately had possession of the ball, but they missed the more important call that still decided the game one way or the other.
And people are complaining about the replacement officials not because they have rose-colored glasses on, but because these officials are embarrassing. Late calls, conflicting calls (multiple instances of different officials motioning in different directions when there is a turnover), missing penalties, calling questionable penalties, throwing their hat onto the field and a receiver slips on it, being yanked from a game for being a fan of one of the teams, telling a player he is on their fantasy team, the list goes on.
I love football, and will continue to watch so unfortunately the NFL will get no silent protest from me, but it's really a shame what these officials are doing to the sport this year.
How is that any worse than throwing a flag at a player's face mask and making him legally blind!?
Not sure what incident you are referring to, so I'm not sure if it's worse or not. But the officials are throwing flags around all the time, so I wouldn't be surprised if occasionally one hit a player by accident. Their hats, on the other hand, are supposed to stay on their head.
I understand bad calls have been made in the past that may have decided games one way or the other. The normal officials are far from perfect. But the replacement officials' lack of experience and more importantly lack of confidence means that the players, coaches,and fans absolutely will not give them the benefit of the doubt, and it's to the detriment of the sport. Just because there have been bad calls in the past doesn't mean that these replacement officials are immune to scrutiny. Can you remember a worse 3 weeks of officiating in NFL history? Because I certainly can't.
Their hats are thrown when they believe a player has stepped out of bounds. That's why he threw it: he thought whoever it was stepped out, and he marked it as such.
To be clear, in no way am I saying that the regs shouldn't be brought back. They should be, if for no reason than to speed up the game. They will not make better calls though.
On September 26 2012 22:55 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: Except read the novel above your post, Klive. It's NOT A FUCKING INTERCEPTION, BECAUSE JENNINGS DIDN'T POSSESS THE BALL IN THE AIR. Your opinion, based on an incomplete, misunderstanding of the rules of football doesn't make the officials wrong. Nay, it makes you wrong, and uninformed. The rules are out there, and you can find them through Google if you search right. I took those right off of NFL.com, and to the letter of the rules, the catch was correctly awarded to Golden Tate.
It's a crazy technicality, I'll give you that, and without actually seeing the rules, I can understand why people are confused. But this is very clear cut that the refs are correct.
You're missing the even larger point in that if the offensive pass interference penalty that the NFL admits the referee missed on that play had actually been called, the play would have been nullified, there would be no argument about who had possession of the ball, and the Seahawks would have lost.
Just because the penalty isn't reviewable doesn't absolve the referees in that game from ultimately changing the outcome. It's why the NFL's statement is a non-statement. Yes, they made the correct call when it came to who ultimately had possession of the ball, but they missed the more important call that still decided the game one way or the other.
And people are complaining about the replacement officials not because they have rose-colored glasses on, but because these officials are embarrassing. Late calls, conflicting calls (multiple instances of different officials motioning in different directions when there is a turnover), missing penalties, calling questionable penalties, throwing their hat onto the field and a receiver slips on it, being yanked from a game for being a fan of one of the teams, telling a player he is on their fantasy team, the list goes on.
I love football, and will continue to watch so unfortunately the NFL will get no silent protest from me, but it's really a shame what these officials are doing to the sport this year.
You obviously didn't read my whole post, so I'll repeat this part. The scrutiny on the refs is amplified because they're screwing up the tempo of the game. The bolded parts are the parts that contain complaints that cannot also apply to the regular refs. The regular refs regularly signal in opposing directions, as turnovers can be very confusing (Note that this is the likely reason that ALL turnovers are reviewed now). The regs (my new term, yay!) are notorious for missing calls, calling ticky-tack penalties, and calling games inconsistently. The hat on the field was unfortunately placed, but as DKnight appropriately points out, the regs blinded a player, not only ending his career, but significantly diminishing his quality of life after retirement. Which is worse? I'd say the mistake the reg made is worse.
I just heard on ESPN that something like 78 or 86-87 hailmary passes have been launched at the ending of a game. Would you like to guess how many PI calls have been made? Too bad. They said that none had ever been called. I'm going to go out on a limb and say at least 50% contained a missed PI call. The reg in the booth even said that they wouldn't have called PI, because in that situation, anything goes. Your argument is, therefore, invalid. We'd very likely have the same beef with the regs.
Finally, and I'm suddenly questioning my response at all to this reply, your entire response to the call is invalid, because I was replying specifically to people saying that MD Jennings had possession of the ball... They're wrong. We all know an OPI call was missed. What we all should understand is that it probably wouldn't be called by the regs, and that it's irrelevant when you consider all the options that Jennings had to win the game there... instead, he decided to pad his stats.
I still don't know anything about this blinding incident, and a quick google search didn't turn anything up so I'll take your word for it, and blinding is definitely worse than slipping in the end zone. But it does sort of seem like you are comparing the worst things "regs" have done over decades of officiating the NFL to the worst things the replacements have done in three weeks. I'm not sure you could find a worse three week stretch of officiating anywhere in the history of the NFL.
"We'd very likely have the same beef with the regs" is not an argument. It's speculation. The precedent for what has historically been called on Hail Marys might be relevant except that the NFL included in their statement the admission that an offensive PI was missed. If it is some unwritten rule that everything goes on Hail Marys, there's no need to bring it up, but they are admitting that a game-changing call was missed by the official. There is a difference between a group of guys jockeying for position trying to bring down the pass and somebody being shoved to the ground while the ball is in the air.
Agreed that Jennings did not have possession of the ball, and it was a boneheaded move to go for the glory and the interception instead of just batting it down. What is irrelevant is the discussion over possession, because even though the refs were technically right about possession of the ball (which is probably more luck-based than competence-based, they have a 50/50 shot after all), the entire play would have been nullified if an obvious penalty was called like it should have been.
On September 26 2012 22:55 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: Except read the novel above your post, Klive. It's NOT A FUCKING INTERCEPTION, BECAUSE JENNINGS DIDN'T POSSESS THE BALL IN THE AIR. Your opinion, based on an incomplete, misunderstanding of the rules of football doesn't make the officials wrong. Nay, it makes you wrong, and uninformed. The rules are out there, and you can find them through Google if you search right. I took those right off of NFL.com, and to the letter of the rules, the catch was correctly awarded to Golden Tate.
It's a crazy technicality, I'll give you that, and without actually seeing the rules, I can understand why people are confused. But this is very clear cut that the refs are correct.
Simultaneous possession has always been a call that is only used during 50/50 catches where it is impossible to tell who has "more" control of the ball. It is obvious when you watch Tate's "catch" that Jennings has more control over it than he does. Even during Tate's most control over it, Jennings was able to rip it away from him when Tate tried to make it look like he had possession (on the ground, when Tate tries to keep it).
Based on the way NFL referee's have implemented this rule over the past 20 years, it's 100% an interception.
It is clear that Tate does not have the ball seconds before he hit the ground. Remember the Calvin Johnson "catch" and the whole "process" bit we just went through last year?
Two feet on the ground while he's touching the ball is NOT a touchdown. They have to be 50/50 throughout the play. Is there a point where it was 50/50? Yes. But that's not the requirement. It must be that way for the whole process. And it clearly wasn't during the play. On the ground there are several pictures from different angles showing that Tate only had an arm, while Jennings has both hands with the ball pressed tightly against his chest. This is not 50/50, and Jennings has more possession than Tate. That makes it not simultaneous possession.
There is no way the replacements are making the same amount of mistakes as the regular officials. People are bringing up examples of the regular refs fucking up all the way to the 90s. If the replacements are making as many egregious mistakes in 3 weeks than regular officials did in more than a millennium, something's up.
On September 27 2012 01:00 andrewlt wrote: There is no way the replacements are making the same amount of mistakes as the regular officials. People are bringing up examples of the regular refs fucking up all the way to the 90s. If the replacements are making as many egregious mistakes in 3 weeks than regular officials did in more than a millennium, something's up.
Normal refs make mistakes that make us holler from time to time. But they are far fewer. The normal refs have control of the game. Just watching it on TV you can notice the different play from players because of the replacements--they are far more aggressive.
The normal refs also get a lot more of the complicated and mundane calls correct. There are a lot of rules in football that most of us don't know simply because they are rarely relevant. The replacement referees keep messing them up (as would I), yet the normal refs almost always get those right.
EPT![[image loading]](http://thebiglead.fantasysportsven.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Screen-Shot-2012-09-25-at-12.56.26-PM.png)
![[image loading]](http://i1046.photobucket.com/albums/b469/ten_fiver/20120924_221621.jpg)
