NFL says call was correct

[Dirrty Bear]

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.

Agree.

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.

Agree.

3. Tate landed two feet first about the same time that he got both hands on the ball, which remained in Jennings chest area.

Disagree. Tate had both hands on the ball clearly before Jennings landed two feet.

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.

Tate had one hand with control on the ball. You can catch a ball with one hand. Just because Jennings has two doesn't necessarily mean he has "more" control. Where in the rule books does it indicate this? It doesn't. It's a judgement call. His other hand established control AND by touching both feet, established possession BEFORE Jennings touched two feet. So who really caught it? Answer: It's not 100% clear. Ergo, simultaneous catch. The league agrees. Period. End of story.

 

[Forget Favre]

Disagree. Tate had both hands on the ball clearly before Jennings landed two feet.



Tate had one hand with control on the ball. You can catch a ball with one hand. Just because Jennings has two doesn't necessarily mean he has "more" control. Where in the rule books does it indicate this? It doesn't. It's a judgement call. His other hand established control AND by touching both feet, established possession BEFORE Jennings touched two feet. So who really caught it? Answer: It's not 100% clear. Ergo, simultaneous catch. The league agrees. Period. End of story.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[warhawk]

I'm sure that somewhere on a Seahawks fan forum, they have still photos of Woodson ******* the Seattle receiver's back at the start of the final drive. There were lots of BS calls against both teams

The refs more then made up for the hump. The 3rd and 25 PI gave them everything back on the last drive. Seattle had the ball in the redzone with nothing overly funky going on with the refs and turned it over on downs. They got it back again and still couldn't get the ball legitimately in the endzone. They had their chances. Without a bad call they couldn't get it done.

Besides they got 8 sacks in the first half and should have been able to put this game out of reach by halftime so either GB's D is better then people give them credit for or Seattle's offense sucks. Eight sacks and 7 points? What?

That's a tough one for all you anti-Packer fans or Seattle homies, I know.

 

[Oshkoshpackfan]

^ I can't even imagine how our guys on defense felt after they worked so hard only to get shafted big time. They must have been deflated, pissed, and discouraged all at once. I really hope they decide to take out their MNF frustrations on the Saints. That would lift our spirits and get us back in a winning frame of mind.

For all the Seattle groupies, you know damn well who really shoulda won that game. Hell, even your own players admit it was a joke of a call. When you get players/coaches/sports writers/commentators/owners/and the PRESIDENT of the USA to say it was a BS call......I think the sea chicken hommies can burry their heads in the sand for a while along with your d!ckhead classless coach. It WAS an interception, clearly. No regular ref would have called it otherwise. The unqualified ref wouldn't be calling a pee-wee game IMO.

Dirty bear.....how the hell does one guy with two hands on the ball have just as much control of the ball as the guy who supposedly had one handed control? Get real man.

 

[PFanCan]

This is my last post on this matter, as this dead horse has been thoroughly beaten:

Disagree. Tate had both hands on the ball clearly before Jennings landed two feet.

Actually, we agree. Tate had both hands on the ball when he landed on the ground. And, he landed before Jennings. Agreed.

Tate had one hand with control on the ball. You can catch a ball with one hand. Just because Jennings has two doesn't necessarily mean he has "more" control. Where in the rule books does it indicate this? It doesn't. It's a judgement call. His other hand established control AND by touching both feet, established possession BEFORE Jennings touched two feet. So who really caught it? Answer: It's not 100% clear. Ergo, simultaneous catch. The league agrees. Period. End of story.

Agreed that one can catch a ball with one hand.

I do believe that Jennings had "more" control, so we disagree on this, but I agree that the rule book never mentions "more" or "less" control. It just says control. It also (page 13) mentions that control requires a "firm grasp" on the ball. But, other than several mentions of control being required for a catch, it never really defines what control is. That is too bad.

Your other comments about possession and landing two feet first have been well established by hundreds of published articles that this line of reasoning is not relevant. The NFL's statement simply offers a red herring to get themselves out of a sticky situation. Totally understandable. So, I disagree that possession matters in this particular debate or that the NFL "really" agrees.

In general, I find it amazing that folks continue arguing that Tate really caught that ball. I guess it's a big world out there and fans tend to be fanatic...

So, Dirty Bear: Consider the following: If Jennings had gone up and caught the ball. While he was still in the air, an offensive player came up behind him and tackled him to the ground in the endzone. While he was wrapping his arms around, his hands came into contact with the ball (as they normally would). Touchdown for the tackler? Or INT and a touchback? Seems silly to even ask, doesn't it? But your reasoning indicates a TD, no?

However, the story is ended. I agree on this, too.

 

[Dirrty Bear]

Dirty bear.....how the hell does one guy with two hands on the ball have just as much control of the ball as the guy who supposedly had one handed control? Get real man.

Control is control. Last time I checked, 1 handed catches are allowed in the NFL. Show me where in the rule books where it says 2 hands on a ball > 1 hand on a ball.

 

[Dirrty Bear]

So, Dirty Bear: Consider the following: If Jennings had gone up and caught the ball. While he was still in the air, an offensive player came up behind him and tackled him to the ground in the endzone. While he was wrapping his arms around, his hands came into contact with the ball (as they normally would). Touchdown for the tackler? Or INT and a touchback? Seems silly to even ask, doesn't it? But your reasoning indicates a TD, no?

No. At the moment of control (when the catch happens), you need to ask who's hands are on the ball? Tate had control of the ball with his left hand and never relinquished. Jennings had control of the ball with both hands initially, then only with his right hand as he came to the ground (as screen captures from an alternate angle that I saw this morning indicated).

Even had Jennings had control with both hands throughout the play, my point still stands. Two hands doesn't mean more control than one. There's nothing in the NFL rulebook that states this.

Regardless of what it looked like from replay, the call on the field was a TD. The other ref (contrary to what many believe) did not signal interception. He signaled clock stoppage (which is absurd, but that's another matter). When an INT is made in the endzone, referees signal a touchback, not time out. Go look at past footage from other games. You can clearly see this.

With the call on the field a TD, you need irrefutable evidence to overturn the call. I don't see how that could possibly be done when you consider two facts:

1. Tate's left hand actually caught the ball before Jennings even touched it. Frame-by-frame analysis shows this. The simultaneous catch is called because THREE hands were involved in the catch.

2. Tate's left hand never left the ball. Ergo, control throughout the play.

 

[13 Times Champs]

No. At the moment of control (when the catch happens), you need to ask who's hands are on the ball? Tate had control of the ball with his left hand and never relinquished. Jennings had control of the ball with both hands initially, then only with his right hand as he came to the ground (as screen captures from an alternate angle that I saw this morning indicated).

Even had Jennings had control with both hands throughout the play, my point still stands. Two hands doesn't mean more control than one. There's nothing in the NFL rulebook that states this.

Regardless of what it looked like from replay, the call on the field was a TD. The other ref (contrary to what many believe) did not signal interception. He signaled clock stoppage (which is absurd, but that's another matter). When an INT is made in the endzone, referees signal a touchback, not time out. Go look at past footage from other games. You can clearly see this.

With the call on the field a TD, you need irrefutable evidence to overturn the call. I don't see how that could possibly be done when you consider two facts:

1. Tate's left hand actually caught the ball before Jennings even touched it. Frame-by-frame analysis shows this. The simultaneous catch is called because THREE hands were involved in the catch.

2. Tate's left hand never left the ball. Ergo, control throughout the play.

Show me a picture that Tate caught the ball before Jennings touched it.

 

[longtimefan]

I think this may have run it's course.

NFL made ruling, explayers, ex refs, ex gms, ex coaches (about 99% of them) all say it was an int

All the screen shots, gifs, arm chair analysts will not change it

So I will give this one more day and see how it turns

 

[longtimefan]

No. At the moment of control (when the catch happens), you need to ask who's hands are on the ball? Tate had control of the ball with his left hand and never relinquished. Jennings had control of the ball with both hands initially, then only with his right hand as he came to the ground (as screen captures from an alternate angle that I saw this morning indicated).

Even had Jennings had control with both hands throughout the play, my point still stands. Two hands doesn't mean more control than one. There's nothing in the NFL rulebook that states this.

Regardless of what it looked like from replay, the call on the field was a TD. The other ref (contrary to what many believe) did not signal interception. He signaled clock stoppage (which is absurd, but that's another matter). When an INT is made in the endzone, referees signal a touchback, not time out. Go look at past footage from other games. You can clearly see this.

With the call on the field a TD, you need irrefutable evidence to overturn the call. I don't see how that could possibly be done when you consider two facts:

1. Tate's left hand actually caught the ball before Jennings even touched it. Frame-by-frame analysis shows this. The simultaneous catch is called because THREE hands were involved in the catch.

2. Tate's left hand never left the ball. Ergo, control throughout the play.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/spor...still-convening-to-stay-game-ready/57846092/1

The NFL issued a statement Tuesday in which the league concurred with the replay official's decision not to overturn the ruling of a touchdown. Nowhere in the statement did the league say the initial call was correct.

"We use situations that occur as learning opportunities. Not to be critical, but as learning opportunities," Hochuli said as a disclaimer. "So let's look at the rule."

Hochuli defined a simultaneous catch as one in which four hands secure the football at the same time.

It is not a simultaneous catch, he says, if one player has it in mid-air and then another joins him in the act of possessing it. The player who had possessed the ball first (in the case of Monday's game, Jennings) is the one who should be rewarded with possession.

It also does not matter if the initial grab occurs before the player hit the ground.

"I will tell you I've worked over 450 games in this league. I have never seen a simultaneous catch," Hochuli said. "To get four hands on the ball at the same time is a pretty unusual situation.

that should end your debate bear

 

[HardRightEdge]

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/spor...still-convening-to-stay-game-ready/57846092/1



that should end your debate bear

Yup. This was established by Monday. INT, no catch, no debate.

 

[DevilDon]

I totally agree, after all there was a Saints fan who almost officiated a Saints game. For so many bad calls to all go against the Packers in the 4th quarter, there had to be something up.

Why is this a surprise? I have never understood it. So he's a fan. Every single ref in the NFL is a fan of one team or another. Don't kid yourself. The point is that their calls have to hold up under scrutiny, not which team's jersey they wear on weekdays.

 

[bozz_2006]

It's called professionalism.