1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

NFL says call was correct

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Crazy Packers Fan, Sep 25, 2012.

  1. dansz15

    dansz15 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +35
    There was no way the league would say it was an interception. It would cause pandemonium further beyond the s***show already occuring. Plus, if they overturned the game it would set a lethal precedent that all games can be reviewed after they are played on a last second game winning play. Just realistically it wouldn't make sense.

    Nothing will ever change the fact that last night may go down as the biggest blown call of all time in the NFL. Hoculi can finally rest peacefully I guess.

    Either way we got screwed out of it. Time to move on and focus on taking our frustrations out on a lowly NO team. How they respond next week is what I am most interested in. It can either be bad or maybe the wake up call the team needed. Can't knock the opponents in their first three games though, SF, SEA, and CHI are all good football teams.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Dirrty Bear

    Dirrty Bear Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Messages:
    11
    Ratings:
    +1
    "The key phrase in the NFL's statement on the controversial Golden Tate touchdown catch is this:
    A player (or players) jumping in the air has not legally gained possession of the ball until he satisfies the elements of a catch listed here...
    I completely understand the disbelief over the call as it does appear that M.D. Jennings 'had it' before Golden Tate, but in the strict interpretation of the rulebook, possession happens as two feet hit the ground. Therefore, 'simultaneous possession' must be ruled at the moment when players' feet hit the ground. It may defy logic - I described it last night to a friend as 'technically right, logically wrong,' particularly when you're arguing the idea of 'control,' but the NFL supports the call on the field after review. People will see this NFL release and maintain their viewpoints, I'd guess, but in my humble opinion, this was closer than the collective national conversation and outrage implies."
     
  3. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    if it was really "a few dollars" you would have a point, but its a lot more than that.
     
  4. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,568
    Ratings:
    +650
    Dirrty Bear, the problem with your conclusion is that Jennings "had it" and Tate never did. Simultaneous possession assumes that both players have possession of the ball. On that play, only one player had possession. Having your arm trapped against the chest of the man who caught the ball does not constitute "possession".
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. dansz15

    dansz15 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +35
    Bingo. That is what blows me away, Jennings clearly had possession in the chest. I was listening to sports radio on the way home and long time ref Tunny said that was not simultaneous possession and it should not have been considered. He stated he didn't even have both hands on the ball when they hit the ground.

    Next time, KNOCK THE DAMN BALL DOWN. Chances of it ending in a flukey TD are less than this debacle last night.
     
  6. Crazy Packers Fan

    Crazy Packers Fan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Messages:
    391
    Ratings:
    +115
    We sure do well with these last-second passes in the end zone, don't we? (Pittsburgh 2009, Giants last year)
     
  7. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,216
    Ratings:
    +626
    The NFL states that the call is correct under the assumption that it was a "shared reception". This was just a way to cover their butts. The NFL is acting cowardly. Shame on them.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    I'd tell my son to suck it up; it's only a game.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Female Packer

    Female Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Messages:
    16
    Ratings:
    +3
    I feel your pain. Just watching it on t.v. it's hard to come back from that horrible call. I didn't even want to watch the ESPN.
     
  10. Kitten

    Kitten Feline Cheesehead Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    5,093
    Ratings:
    +1,427
    Of course they are going to stand behind the refs. They can't just come out and attack the refs. That's just not going to happen it would cause absolute chaos.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Wood Chipper

    Wood Chipper Fantasy Football Guru

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,068
    Ratings:
    +1,410
    This game has left a bad taste in my mouth. I have watched football for 11 years and cannot recall a play this obvious being incorrectly called. (Besides the Cardinals/Packers 2009 wild card ot game)
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. bytheriver

    bytheriver Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    Messages:
    9
    Ratings:
    +0
    The "it's just a game" statement is true....it is just a game, but the bigger picture is the integrity and honesty of the officials and players. When you are trying to teach your kids to follow the rules, be respectful, be honest,etc. ...and for right or wrong these are the people many kids look up to as a role model....this job as a parent becomes a lot more difficult.
     
  13. dansz15

    dansz15 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +35
    I think even that Cardinals no call does not hold a candle to this. At least one could say they missed hands to the face. This was just blatant favoritism or something else. Who knows.
     
  14. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    NFL replacement official Lance Easley was apparently deemed not capable of officiating at the Division 1 college football level, less alone the NFL, Jim Corbett of USA Today reports.
    Working as the side judge Monday night, the longtime Southern California high school and junior college official signaled the winning catch by receiver Golden Tate in the Seattle Seahawks' last-play, 14-12 win against the Green Bay Packers -- a call the world believes he blew by turning an obvious interception into a touchdown.
    He wasn't deemed good enough to become a Division I college official this summer, according to Karl Richins and his staff of Division I college officials at Stars and Stripes Academy for Football Officials in Salt Lake City.
    "I got to know Lance at a June academy I worked at in Reno and when he came to my academy in July," Richins said. "He's a very polite, good Christian gentleman, a good father to his son, Daniel, who was at my academy as well.
    "But was Lance ready to work at the NFL level? Absolutely not."
    Richins' staff determined that Easley, vice president of small business banking at Bank of America in Santa Maria, Calif., wasn't ready for Division I, the highest level of college officiating, never mind the much faster NFL game.
    Richins said the biggest mistake Easley made was agreeing to become a replacement official in the first place. He said Easley had never officiated at a level higher than Division III and never voiced a desire to reach the NFL.
    "I'm getting e-mails saying, 'Boy, you must be proud,'" Richins said on Tuesday. "This is not what we intended for our officiating students to do. We train officials to work at the Division I level.
    "At no time do we say, 'We can train you for the NFL.' After three days at our academy, Lance was determined by our staff not to be ready for Division I officiating."
     
  15. milani

    milani Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2012
    Messages:
    245
    Ratings:
    +52
    At first I thought it was because of the rule about going below the knees but then I was reminded that this does not apply when the QB is out of the pocket.
    As for the NFL Statement it ranks right up there with the Warren Report as far as lack of credibility.
     
  16. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,834
    Ratings:
    +2,674
    I don't get it either, Frank.
    What do they expect an opposing player to do?
    Pull out an inflatable instant wall out of his pocket, throw it in front of the QB to stop him?
    There are some hits that just CANNOT BE HELPED and it's a bogus flag on them.
    Does the NFL not realize this?
     
  17. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,834
    Ratings:
    +2,674
    Ya mean my sarcasm isn't really sarcasm???????

    http://www.packerforum.com/threads/i-think-i-could-be-an-nfl-scab-ref.39468/
     
  18. Forget Favre

    Forget Favre Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,834
    Ratings:
    +2,674
    Well, let's see here....
    On the one hand I award it to one of the longest and best well known teams with a great winning history and class of the NFL.
    On the other hand I give it to the home team since I want to go home and see my mommy in one piece.
    Um......
    Um........
    Touchdown Seattle!!

    Caption #2 by FF:
    Hey guys! I'm the newest scab ref! I have never even put on this snazzy stripped shirt.
    What does it mean? What do I do here? A little help here?
    Seahawks coach: Just call a touch down.
    Scab Ref: Um... OK... Touchdown!
    *Crowd erupts*
    Seahawks coach: Thanx!
    Scab Ref: Wow! That was cool! Touchdown!
     
  19. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,521
    Ratings:
    +869
    Bear,

    Possession when landing is not the issue here. It's about control and who got it first. Stop me when you disagree:

    1. Jennings got two hands on the ball. Tate had one.
    2. Jennings pulled the ball to his chest. Tate had his hand between the ball and Jennings chest. His right hand was on Jennings right arm.
    3. Tate landed two feet first about the same time that he got both hands on the ball, which remained in Jennings chest area.
    4. They both fell to the ground with both bear hugging the ball.
    5. A scrum ensued and all hell broke loose.

    I hope the above described the situation fair and square. Now, as you will see below, the rules don't focus on who touches the ground first. It's all about who controls the ball first. Don't confuse the definition of a catch with the definition of control.


    The rulebook is clear (paraphrased below):

    1. A catch is made if a player controls the ball and maintains that control through landing on the ground with two feet or body (page 13).
    2. Control only requires a firm grasp on the ball. It is only one requirement of a catch. This is mentioned throughout the rulebook within clarifications of various rules (see Article 7, page 13 for an instance).
    3. A simultaneous catch is not possible if a player controls the ball before the other. (page 47).

    Jennings had control first, and never relenquished control throughout the entire process. Therefore, not only did he invalidate any simultaneous catch claim, but he actually was the only person who caught the ball.
     
  20. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
  21. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,568
    Ratings:
    +1,452
    PFanCan,
    All great points. I was about to dispute your notion that possession was not the issue, because the call was simultaneous possession and not simultaneous control. However, then I looked into the rules and found this nugget under simultaneous catch: "It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control." So I now happily agree with you. Jennings did have control first so it doesn't matter about what Tate was doing when Jennings established possession (by touching the ground).
     
  22. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453

    Wow.....Just wow. NFL Must have found these style refs on craigslist.
     
  23. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
    Good pics for evidence of BS calls.

    Wilson was so far out of the pocket/tackle box that he should have been considered a probable runner during this play. Thus it should have been legal to hit him just about any way, minus helmet to helmet. Either way, I saw about 5 blatently obvious calls that even my 10- year old son pointed out were BS. Maybe they could have hired him instead.
     
  24. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,568
    Ratings:
    +1,452
    I'm sure that somewhere on a Seahawks fan forum, they have still photos of Woodson humping the Seattle receiver's back at the start of the final drive. There were lots of BS calls against both teams
     
  25. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    None with the effect of the last bs call.
     

Share This Page