GB vs SEA

[zyxt9]

It wasn't even close to a simultaneous catch. Plus they didn't even discuss it.

??? sorry mitch, but you are incorrect on this. if it "wasn't even close" then why are so many arguing that the call was correctly made due to the definition of a catch including the "entire process" during which both tate and jennings had possession of the ball. yes, i get that jennings had his hands on it first, but that is NOT a catch in and of itself. before jennings reaches the ground, tate came in and grabbed hold. this is no different than a receiver going up, grabbing the ball, then while in the air defender rips it out and the pass is ruled incomplete regardless of the fact the receiver did have control of the ball while jumping in the air. by the time jennings feet are on the ground, both players have the ball and tate's feet are touching the ground at the same time as jennings. neither player let go upon landing in the end zone and the refs came in to see who had it and upon seeing both guys had possession ruled it a simultaneous catch and therefore a TD.

regular refs often disagree on calls, with one ruling a catch and the other ruling it incomplete. people are complaining these refs didn't discuss it, but how do we know precisely what was conversed by the two refs who had different opinions there. obviously the one ruling a TD convinced the one ruling a touchback that it was a simultaneous catch and therefore a TD. whether that "conversation" lasts a split second or 10 minutes is immaterial, the one saying touchback obviously did not believe in his opinion very strongly whereas the one ruling a TD did. again, that is no different than regular refs discussing plays in same timeframe and quickly one backs down and the other's view becomes the outcome of the play.

i really don't understand why people are screaming so loudly about this particular play when it actually was called equal to how the regular refs would have called it.

 

[beez]

I liked what Herm Edwards said...

If the players were revered and Jennings was the wr and Tate was the defender this would not even be in question and they probably owuldn't even have reviewed it..if they did review it, it would have been a TD..no doubt.

 

[Mitchrapp]

??? sorry mitch, but you are incorrect on this. if it "wasn't even close" then why are so many arguing that the call was correctly made due to the definition of a catch including the "entire process" during which both tate and jennings had possession of the ball. yes, i get that jennings had his hands on it first, but that is NOT a catch in and of itself. before jennings reaches the ground, tate came in and grabbed hold. this is no different than a receiver going up, grabbing the ball, then while in the air defender rips it out and the pass is ruled incomplete regardless of the fact the receiver did have control of the ball while jumping in the air. by the time jennings feet are on the ground, both players have the ball and tate's feet are touching the ground at the same time as jennings. neither player let go upon landing in the end zone and the refs came in to see who had it and upon seeing both guys had possession ruled it a simultaneous catch and therefore a TD.

regular refs often disagree on calls, with one ruling a catch and the other ruling it incomplete. people are complaining these refs didn't discuss it, but how do we know precisely what was conversed by the two refs who had different opinions there. obviously the one ruling a TD convinced the one ruling a touchback that it was a simultaneous catch and therefore a TD. whether that "conversation" lasts a split second or 10 minutes is immaterial, the one saying touchback obviously did not believe in his opinion very strongly whereas the one ruling a TD did. again, that is no different than regular refs discussing plays in same timeframe and quickly one backs down and the other's view becomes the outcome of the play.

i really don't understand why people are screaming so loudly about this particular play when it actually was called equal to how the regular refs would have called it.

I don't care. I have eyes. Defender had the ball wrapped and the WR, maybe one hand. Wasn't close. And who are these people saying correct call, even that goof former ref that comes on said it was the wrong call. I don't care, certainly not outraged - hell it was the Packers but it was a horseshit call.

Add that to what I saw with the Lions game and games around the league and these guys are a joke.

And this isn't about the two refs discussing it with each other, where in the hell was the top guy? He's the one that should be in all discussions of close calls like this, that's his job.

 

[tonyballs]

Theres been more outrage ONLY because these are replacement refs. Imagine if your star reciever caught a pass in the endzone then went to get up and the ground caused him to lose the ball after he finished the process of the catch and you lose the game beacuase of it. There would be outrage!....oh wait....

Shit like yesterday happens every year. The guy had a hand on the ball...theres no arguing that.... and he had his hand in there the same time jennings caught it. so if thats what the side jugde saw thats what he called. You cant determine who has possession during replay. Bad call/Good call who cares....get over it just like we were told to do when they ruled Calvin dropped it.

Get over it?? Buddy, if this garbage happened to the Lions, this board would be fn suicidal. It was the worse thing i have seen in my life. It needs to stop! It's getting out of control. These refs cannot handle the game.

And if you think Tate had any possession of that ball you need to get your fn eyes checked.

Like i said, i'm glad it happened to the Packers, but this shit needs to cease and desist.

 

[tonyballs]

not sure how horrible it can be when numerous guys are saying it was legit call due to the process of the catch rule and tie goes to the receiver. i'm thinking they actually got the call right when looked at from that perspective. plus, gotta remember this is a bang-bang play and refs kinda had to go over after the guys were on the ground. seeing both players with possession, they have to rule it a tie and therefore a TD instead of INT.

jennings messed it up. he was first to touch it and instead of securing the catch he allowed tate to come in. he could have swatted it down instead of trying to catch it. he could have done a volleyball-esque move and bumped it hard enough to go out of bounds. he could have twisted his body to rip it completely free of tate. instead he allowed tate to work his way in and create benefit of the doubt and the refs had to call it a TD at that point. anytime there is benefit of the doubt, it goes to the WR...whether the refs are replacement or regular.

furthermore, i've seen numerous players and former refs today who said in that situation the refs never call PI on the jump ball because there is always PI on those plays. taking that into account, the viewpoints of the refs, tate creating benefit of the doubt, i think the replacement refs are getting lynched over this because people are so upset about all their prior mistakes and the pot is boiling over to where they make a judgment call same as the regular refs would have made, yet the mob grabs the short rope and map to the shortest tree without realizing the regular refs would have likely made the same call and the same hysteria would have resulted.

as i've said before, the regular refs are not perfect and i think people need to realize the exact same call would have quite probably been made with the regular refs officiating.

You're high if you think this, bro. You cannot believe the shit you're writing, can you?

I don't even know where to begin with you. Who are all these "numerous" players and former refs saying that the call was correct? I call fn bullshit on that for one. Then you say that these guys wouldn't have called the PI on the play? Are you fn kidding me? For one, Shields was shoved to the ground by Tate before he even had a chance to go up for the ball. GAME OVER right there. And don't give me that bullshit where the right move is for the defender to swat at the ball instead of trying to catch it. Tell the Titans that. It doesn't work all the time. It was a botched call...end of story. They fucked up and needs to be taken care of. You can't overturn the game, but these fn refs need to go.

And yeah, i'm sure there are people who think the call was correct. Dennis Fithian from 97.1 is one of them but he's semi-retarded so...... The majority of people that i have heard have said it was one of the worse calls they have ever seen. I'm talking about guys on the NFL Network. Credible guys who know the game of football by the way.

 

[LKP]

Terrible call.

Glad it was against the Packers though. F'em. They never should have been it that position in the first place with that high power Packer offense. 12 points, please.

 

[schles192]

It was a bad call no bout a doubt it. Just look through this thread to see. People will say it was simultaneous but then say Jennings had it first. My English not good, but I'm sure simultaneous means at the same time, so how can one thing happen before another if they are simultaneous?

 

[zyxt9]

You're high if you think this, bro. You cannot believe the shit you're writing, can you?

I don't even know where to begin with you. Who are all these "numerous" players and former refs saying that the call was correct? I call fn bullshit on that for one. Then you say that these guys wouldn't have called the PI on the play? Are you fn kidding me? For one, Shields was shoved to the ground by Tate before he even had a chance to go up for the ball. GAME OVER right there. And don't give me that bullshit where the right move is for the defender to swat at the ball instead of trying to catch it. Tell the Titans that. It doesn't work all the time. It was a botched call...end of story. They fucked up and needs to be taken care of. You can't overturn the game, but these fn refs need to go.

And yeah, i'm sure there are people who think the call was correct. Dennis Fithian from 97.1 is one of them but he's semi-retarded so...... The majority of people that i have heard have said it was one of the worse calls they have ever seen. I'm talking about guys on the NFL Network. Credible guys who know the game of football by the way.

I was watching the NFL Network which had several people come on, from former players to refs, who were split on whether the call was right or not. Call it "media trying to drive viewership", I don't care. Having that many people analyzing it and seeing it from both sides, well at that point it makes one come to the realization that it is not a black&white situation and the regular refs quite probably would have made the same call.

As for the PI, they also researched it back to 2005 and NOT ONCE was PI called on a Hail Mary. There was ONE play where it was 1v1 and the WR pushed the DB and PI was called, but that was not a bunched up group of players. The NFL Network asked everyone they had as a guest and every single one, player and former ref, said that PI is NEVER called in that situation.

Finally, regarding swatting it to the ground, they had former DBs who all said they are taught from Day 1 to swat the ball to the ground. They pointed out that the guy who batted at it in Lions v Titans was an LB who should NOT have been the one going up after it, that the entire D is trained that the Safeties go up to swat it to the ground while the CBs and LBs are supposed to box out the surrounding WRs to prevent them from catching a potential bounce.

You want names, I don't remember their names, but it was on NFL Network all day yesterday. I'm not going to waste my time trying to research who specifically said what because frankly it won't change a damn thing.

 

[zyxt9]

It was a bad call no bout a doubt it. Just look through this thread to see. People will say it was simultaneous but then say Jennings had it first. My English not good, but I'm sure simultaneous means at the same time, so how can one thing happen before another if they are simultaneous?

Jennings had it first but was up in the air when Tate got to it as well, also in the air. They have to land with both feet to "complete the process" of the catch (also now known as the Calvin Johnson rule). By the time each player completed the process, they each had possession. Therefore, despite the fact one guy touched it first, the completion of the catch was simultaneous.

Simultaneous catch in the End Zone is reviewable by the booth which is manned by REGULAR REFS, and they did not overturn the simultaneous catch ruling on the field because there was not conclusive evidence to overturn it. Guys on the field would not have ruled that if when they arrived both players didn't have it wrapped up on the ground.

 

[zyxt9]

Get over it?? Buddy, if this garbage happened to the Lions, this board would be fn suicidal. It was the worse thing i have seen in my life. It needs to stop! It's getting out of control. These refs cannot handle the game.

And if you think Tate had any possession of that ball you need to get your fn eyes checked.

Like i said, i'm glad it happened to the Packers, but this shit needs to cease and desist.

Funny how the 2 refs who were standing over the pile as well as the REGULAR REFS IN THE BOOTH saw it as a simultaneous catch...but you, watching TV at home lay claim that Tate didn't have any possession of it at all. Reg Refs in booth are able to rule on simultaneous catch in the end zone, but they did not overturn the ruling on the field. So I guess they need to fire all the review refs who are regular refs now???

Oh that's right, the regular refs make mistakes as well. So if this was regular refs instead of replacement refs on the field, what would you demand happen in terms of "cease and desist"? Maybe the NFL stops employing refs and the people watching on TV with internet connection get to officiate the games? Cuz that would never create a shit-storm of controversy!

 

[tomdalton22]

I don't care how bad these replacement refs are. If I were the owners I wouldn't cave into the pension thing and I would demand that the NFL be allowed to hire more officals and hold them accountable. Let's not forget that the regular officials sucked too!

 

[schles192]

Jennings had it first but was up in the air when Tate got to it as well, also in the air. They have to land with both feet to "complete the process" of the catch (also now known as the Calvin Johnson rule). By the time each player completed the process, they each had possession. Therefore, despite the fact one guy touched it first, the completion of the catch was simultaneous.

Simultaneous catch in the End Zone is reviewable by the booth which is manned by REGULAR REFS, and they did not overturn the simultaneous catch ruling on the field because there was not conclusive evidence to overturn it. Guys on the field would not have ruled that if when they arrived both players didn't have it wrapped up on the ground.

Process isn't in question here because Jennings maintained control the entire time. The question is whether its simu or not which you have already said Jennings had it first.

 

[zyxt9]

Having complete control includes not allowing another to gain partial control. If u r in control, u don't allow another to get hands on it. Otherwise you are in the process of gaining complete control. If another comes in during that process then they had partial control and therefore the catch is simultaneous as they have complete control at the same time. You are hung up on only the first moment but as we all should know by now a completed catch is an entire process during which at any point if you lose complete control the end result can be a wide variety of things, including an incompletion or someone else gaining control with the end result being simultaneous possession at the end of the process.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Gain partial or simultaneous control the receiver needs both hands on the ball, not just one. It was a bad call. No way he had two hands on the ball. In fast motion, slow motion, super slow motion or hangover motion it was a horseshit call. And this isn't the Calvin rule.

 

[tigersofjustice]

Process isn't in question here because Jennings maintained control the entire time. The question is whether its simu or not which you have already said Jennings had it first.

Well it does have to do with a 'process' because there is a 'process' to a catch. The mere fact that you wrap two hands around it for a second does not make it a catch, so the fact that Jennings got his hands on it first really is meaningless as long as the WR got in there and got a hold of it too before a 'complete' catch by the defensive player.

I still think the decision was wrong but to act like there isn't a ton of wiggle room in that rule is just silly.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Well it does have to do with a 'process' because there is a 'process' to a catch. The mere fact that you wrap two hands around it for a second does not make it a catch, so the fact that Jennings got his hands on it first really is meaningless as long as the WR got in there and got a hold of it too before a 'complete' catch by the defensive player.

I still think the decision was wrong but to act like there isn't a ton of wiggle room in that rule is just silly.

But you keep saying "..as long as the WR got in there and got a hold of it too before a 'complete' catch by the defensive player." But The WR didn't have control of it, he barely got one hand in there. If anything it was an incomplete pass. Not sure how they could call that a TD.

 

[schles192]

Having complete control includes not allowing another to gain partial control. If u r in control, u don't allow another to get hands on it. Otherwise you are in the process of gaining complete control. If another comes in during that process then they had partial control and therefore the catch is simultaneous as they have complete control at the same time. You are hung up on only the first moment but as we all should know by now a completed catch is an entire process during which at any point if you lose complete control the end result can be a wide variety of things, including an incompletion or someone else gaining control with the end result being simultaneous possession at the end of the process.

That?s what your missing, with simul poss it is about the first touch and not when you hit the ground. Meaning once jennings has it the only way tate can get it is if he knocks the ball lose, which he didn't. Maybe this poor explanation will help:

A defender jumps up catches the ball at no time does he lose control, but before he can complete the catch by touching his feet down calvin catches the player in the air so CJ is holding him off the ground. Then calvin puts a hand on part of the ball and lets the player touch the ground, INT or catch for Cj? Its an INT because the defender possessed the ball first.

Tate putting a hand on the ball is irrelevant because Jennings already has it, just like you can't tackle a guy and put a hand on the ball and call it a fumble.

 

[zyxt9]

Gain partial or simultaneous control the receiver needs both hands on the ball, not just one. It was a bad call. No way he had two hands on the ball. In fast motion, slow motion, super slow motion or hangover motion it was a horseshit call. And this isn't the Calvin rule.

So next time a WR makes a catch using only one hand and never uses second hand to touch it, the pass is incomplete?

How is it not the Calvin Rule when EVERY catch requires the entire process to be completed. When Burleson got hit before taking two steps and the ball came out, refs ruled incomplete following the Calvin Rule. Every catch requires the process to be completed.

 

[zyxt9]

But you keep saying "..as long as the WR got in there and got a hold of it too before a 'complete' catch by the defensive player." But The WR didn't have control of it, he barely got one hand in there. If anything it was an incomplete pass. Not sure how they could call that a TD.

How could it be incomplete when the ball never hit the ground and the play happened inbounds?

 

[zyxt9]

That?s what your missing, with simul poss it is about the first touch and not when you hit the ground. Meaning once jennings has it the only way tate can get it is if he knocks the ball lose, which he didn't. Maybe this poor explanation will help:

A defender jumps up catches the ball at no time does he lose control, but before he can complete the catch by touching his feet down calvin catches the player in the air so CJ is holding him off the ground. Then calvin puts a hand on part of the ball and lets the player touch the ground, INT or catch for Cj? Its an INT because the defender possessed the ball first.

Tate putting a hand on the ball is irrelevant because Jennings already has it, just like you can't tackle a guy and put a hand on the ball and call it a fumble.

Ur analogy doesn't work because suppose CJ carries him out of bounds it is incomplete pass for starters, secondly if CJ is just touching the ball he is not possessing it, and finally regarding the actual play, Tate wasn't simply touching the ball but had partial control. At no point does the rule say he has to have at least 50% of control or possession, so even if he only has his arm in there enough to have 1% control and possession, the defender does not have 100% and therefore they have simultaneous possession and it goes to the WR.