NFL 2012 Season - Page 77

On September 27 2012 09:07 Ferrose wrote:


Well batting it down isn't too reliable either because you get



or



>___>

I think someone mentioned this but people make too big of a deal of one play at the end of games deciding the outcome. If you really deserved to win, you wouldn't be in a position where one play at the end costs you the game. Think about it, if the Packers 2 point conversion earlier in the game had worked, Tate's TD would have only tied the game (unless Seattle was really ballsy and went for 2).

On September 27 2012 09:29 Sadist wrote:


that is a shitty argument. If they were down by x amount of points who knows how they would have played with the added pressure.

On September 25 2012 14:06 LuckyFool wrote:
If we don't have real refs by Thursday I'm not watching that game. If the NFL doesn't feel a need to start doing something teams/players/fans will have to. This is absurd and unacceptable.

Literally every single Packer is saying super shit stuff about the NFL right now on twitter. Rodgers saying everything about it was awful. I heard the Packers locker room went ballistic when they showed the replay right after the game in the locker room.

On September 27 2012 09:29 Sadist wrote:


that is a shitty argument. If they were down by x amount of points who knows how they would have played with the added pressure.

On September 27 2012 01:39 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:


Except that looking at precedent bases this on rules that no longer apply. If possession is all or nothing (which it is now, regardless of what it may have been in the past), then they both have possession. They are attempting to make the game as objective as possible. In doing so, it makes this the correct call, no matter how you try to discredit the explanation. The rule is quite clear, and does not state anything about equal or unequal possession.

If previous referees were using equal vs unequal possession since this exact rule was put into place, then we should be upset with the previous referees for inserting doubt and subjectiveness into the game. The exact purpose of the rules is to remove subjective opinion from the game, and make everything as black and white as possible. That's why this rule is written the way it's written, that's why the force out rule was eliminated, that's why all hits below a QB's knees are roughing calls, all facemasks are 15 yards, etc, etc. Precedent simply does not apply, because the rules have changed over the past couple of years to eliminate subjectiveness from officiating.

These are the exact reasons that the Calvin Johnson TD "drop" that DK posted was ruled incomplete. It's quite clear that Johnson had control throughout the play, but the officials are expected to call plays to the letter of the law, not to how what the "feel" happened on the field. It may have been called a TD five years ago, but it cannot be now. This play may have been called an INT five years ago, but it cannot be called as such now.

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.

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.).

On September 27 2012 06:24 Dknight wrote:


You realize the screenshot has them both still in mid air and possession is determined when either both feet are down or another part of their body touches first? Tate can still wrestle the ball out of his hands during this process. Just because Jennings may have had it first doesn't mean he came down with it.

On September 27 2012 01:53 BluePanther wrote:

Not true. This is an official case study that goes alongside the rules.

A.R. 8.29: First-and-10 on A20. B3 controls a pass in the air at the A40 before A2, who then also controls the ball before they land. As they land, A2 and B3 fall down to the ground.

Ruling: B’s ball, first-and-10 on A40. Not a simultaneous catch as B3 gains control first and retains control.
That's black in white in my view. That case study is exactly what happened. Jennings clearly gets higher and gets the ball before Tate.