I believe that all scoring plays in the last two minutes are authomatically reviewed but because the play on the field was called a touchdown it could not be reversed and called an interception. Is that correct? Why is that?
That's not correct. It was reviewed and of course it could have been overturned to be an interception.
The booth ruled that there was not enough evidence to overturn the call and the call on the field of a simultaneous catch and TD stood.
In my view, they were never going to overturn that play in that stadium.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
The Following User Says Thank You to GirlySports For This Useful Post:
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Arizona Cardinals defensive tackle Darnell Dockett: "This is what the NFL has come down to, &yet they tell you to respect the shield! Lol. But they'll try to fine us for everything thing we do."
Atlanta Falcons tight end Tony Gonzalez: "I've been saying give the refs a break but that TD call was ridicules. How do you miss that? Pop Warner refs would have gotten that right."
New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees: "I love this league and love the game of football, but tonight’s debacle hurts me greatly. This is NOT the league we’re supposed to represent."
Funny how you still have people (read: Seahawks fans/players/coaches) saying it was a TD catch, but yet you have all these unbias knowledgeable people coming forward saying how bad the call was.
The rulebook also states when a simultaneous catch is ruled, you can't review who made the catch. You can only review if it was complete or incomplete.
So if the call on the field was a simultaneous catch then the review would not be allowed to overturn the call.
So the side judge who missed the PI and called it a TD had one really, really bad play.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
The Following User Says Thank You to Bobblehead For This Useful Post:
So if the call on the field was a simultaneous catch then the review would not be allowed to overturn the call.
So the side judge who missed the PI and called it a TD had one really, really bad play.
Yup...but to me the issue is that it was no where near a simultaneous catch. At one point Tate even has one hand off the ball/Jennings, in an effort to try and get a grasp on the ball where he could try and wrestle it away.
Jennings had the ball, period. Beyond that though, the ONLY reason that Tate was in position to have a shot at the ball was because of one of the most blatent pushoffs ever witnessed in pro football when he launched Sam Shields 2 yds forward.
The whole thing is a debacle and simply ruins any integrity the league claims it has.
One other thing that i cant understand, why was it ruled a TD when two officials of equal importance ruled two different things. Unless i missed it, there was no conference among the officials to determine which call was correct. It was just "TD Seattle" after the pile of players was sorted through with no confab of all the officials....then a quick review with replay which also was shown to the TV audience where it was clear there was no catch.
Its all so bizarre.
The Following User Says Thank You to transplant99 For This Useful Post:
Nope, I'll probably throw a game on in the background if I'm doing something around the apartment but I'm not going to waste my time watching the best players in the world have their efforts undermined by guys who are literally so incompetent that they were fired by the Lingerie League.
Reading the Rulebook and watching the replay again this morning, I still think that you could interpret the play as a simultaneous catch. I say this after thinking last night that it was the incorrect call. The rule book says:
Quote:
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.
I think what is argued is that Jennings gained control of the ball first, so it shouldn't be a simultaneous catch. However, looking at the replay, Tate had one hand on the ball at the very same time, and that hand never comes off the ball. We obviously know that a player can have control of the ball having only touched the ball with one hand (a one handed catch happens all the time). There is nothing in the rule that says anything about one player having "more control" than the other player. Jennings certainly has "more control" of the ball than Tate, but that doesn't make any difference according to the rule book. They both catch the ball at the same time (Jennings with both hands and Tate with one hand) and both maintain control until they are both down by contact in the end zone.
Quote:
PLAYER POSSESSION
Article 7
Item 1: Player in Possession. A player is in possession when he is in firm grip and control of the ball inbounds.
Item 2: Possession of Loose Ball. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered.
a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet or any other part of his body, other than his hands,
completely on the ground inbounds, and maintain control of the ball long enough to perform any act common to the
game. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground
or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play
and in the end zone.
The terms catch, intercept, recover, advance, and fumble denote player possession (as distinguished from touching or
muffing).
Note 1: A player who goes to the ground in the process of attempting to secure possession of a loose ball (with or without
contact by an opponent) 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,
there is no possession. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, it is a catch, interception, or recovery.
Note 2: If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of attempting to
secure possession of a loose ball at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball throughout
the process of contacting the ground, or there is no possession.
Note 3: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered loss of possession. He must lose
control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.
CATCH
A catch is made when a player inbounds secures possession of a pass, kick, or fumble in flight (See 8-1-3).
Note 1: It is a catch if in the process of attempting to catch the ball, a player secures control of the ball prior to the ball touching
the ground and that control is maintained after the ball has touched the ground.
Note 2: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, and there is contact by a defender causing the
ball to come loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the
same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goa/line prior to the loss of possession,
and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.
The rules talk about in control of the ball, but there is no definition of what "control" is in the rule book. Again, we can't say from the rule book that Tate doesn't have control just because he only has one hand on the ball. The rule talks about whoever has control first, but in this case, both players have control at the same time, and it matters not who has "more control." Neither does it matter who wrestles the ball away from the other after they are both already down by contact.
Really it comes down to the definition of control, which we don't have. I don't think anyone can say that Tate absolutely did not have control of the ball. He has a grip of the ball with his right hand throughout the whole play.
As I said in my post last night (and I wavered on what I thought of the play after that), Simultaneous catch is such a gray area. The way the rules are written, I think that you can argue that anytime an offensive player gets at least one hand on the ball, you have to call the play at least a simultaneous catch (provided that that one hand remains on the ball until the end of the play) I don't see how it matters if a defender has two hands on the ball and even has it tucked, as long as the offensive player has one hand gripping the ball, and that one hand gripped the ball at at least the same time as the defender's hands, it has to be a simultaneous catch.
A simultaneous catch ruling cannot be reviewed (is that confirmed?), so I don't know how the play could be considered a wrong call. Niether does that make it the right call, but I can't come to the conclusion after watching the replay closely this morning, and looking at the rules, that the WRONG call was made.
Of course, all of that doesn't excuse missing the obvious offensive pass interference. But that wasn't called, and is non reviewable.
Last edited by You Need a Thneed; 09-25-2012 at 09:19 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to You Need a Thneed For This Useful Post:
Reading the Rulebook and watching the replay again this morning, I still think that you could interpret the play as a simultaneous catch. I say this after thinking last night that it was the incorrect call. The rule book says:
I think what is argued is that Jennings gained control of the ball first, so it shouldn't be a simultaneous catch. However, looking at the replay, Tate had one hand on the ball at the very same time, and that hand never comes off the ball. We obviously know that a player can have control of the ball having only touched the ball with one hand (a one handed catch happens all the time). There is nothing in the rule that says anything about one player having "more control" than the other player. Jennings certainly has "more control" of the ball than Tate, but that doesn't make any difference according to the rule book. They both catch the ball at the same time (Jennings with both hands and Tate with one hand) and both maintain control until they are both down by contact in the end zone.
The rules talk about in control of the ball, but there is no definition of what "control" is in the rule book. Again, we can't say from the rule book that Tate doesn't have control just because he only has one hand on the ball. The rule talks about whoever has control first, but in this case, both players have control at the same time, and it matters not who has "more control." Neither does it matter who wrestles the ball away from the other after they are both already down by contact.
Really it comes down to the definition of control, which we don't have. I don't think anyone can say that Tate absolutely did not have control of the ball. He has a grip of the ball with his right hand throughout the whole play.
As I said in my post last night (and I wavered on what I thought of the play after that), Simultaneous catch is such a gray area. The way the rules are written, I think that you can argue that anytime an offensive player gets at least one hand on the ball, you have to call the play at least a simultaneous catch (provided that that one hand remains on the ball until the end of the play) I don't see how it matters if a defender has two hands on the ball and even has it tucked, as long as the offensive player has one hand gripping the ball, and that one hand gripped the ball at at least the same time as the defender's hands, it has to be a simultaneous catch.
A simultaneous catch ruling cannot be reviewed (is that confirmed?), so I don't know how the play could be considered a wrong call. Niether does that make it the right call, but I can't come to the conclusion after watching the replay closely this morning, and looking at the rules, that the WRONG call was made.
Of course, all of that doesn't excuse missing the obvious offensive pass interference. But that wasn't called, and is non reviewable.
Nope:
Quote:
A.R. 8.28 NOT A SIMULTANEOUS CATCH
First-and-10 on A20. A2 controls a pass in the air at the A40. B3 then also gets control of the ball before they land. As they land, A2 and B3 fall down to the ground.
Ruling: A’s ball, first-and-10 on A40. Not a simultaneous catch as A2 gains control first and retains
control.
Jennings quite clearly gains control before Tate has anything that any rational person could argue was in control.
Simply having a hand on the ball doesn't demonstrate control, you have to actively control the ball by bringing it to your body or otherwise. You are essentially arguing that if you were holding a ball in your hands and I placed my hand upon it I would be in control of the ball.
I'm kind of sad that the "big gaffe" that finally caused this issue to blow up was a judgment error (which could have been committed by anyone) and not a game management error (like the 27-yard penalty, or the 2 extra challenges). Because I think the latter is where the real refs add value to the NFL, and there have been a lot of those mistakes. Having the whole issue be about this TD/INT call is kind of distracting.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
The thing I've noticed is that for the first half or 3/4 of most games, the refs seem to do a decent job. Yeah, there are some mistakes that regular refs wouldn't make, and some games are worse than others, but that it what you would expect when complete crews are brand new.
But when the crunch time of a game occurs, the replacements are just overwhelmed. When the game is on the line, every play is critical and every player is stressed, then the officials lose control.
And it is a shame because there were a lot of amazing things that happened this weekend. The Bengals had an amazing wildcat long bomb TD on the first snap of their game. The Titans/Lions game had weeks worth of big plays and drama in that one game. There are lots of things that could have been great about this weekend. Instead, the replacement officials have yanked the rug out from under everything.
I wonder if we haven't come to the point where the cost to the NFL of using replacement officials is far greater than they ever could have imagined. And the cost to pay the regular officials may look like a bargain.
But I do thing the regular officials do need to give somewhat too. Some of their demands are unreasonable. But I hope the point comes where someone comes up with a way to give both sides a graceful way out and get the deal done.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
I will say to the players critizing and complaing about not having the real refs: Would they all be willing to kick in some of their own money to help resolve this? Something tells me if you put it to them like that the answer would be no.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
Jennings quite clearly gains control before Tate has anything that any rational person could argue was in control.
Simply having a hand on the ball doesn't demonstrate control, you have to actively control the ball by bringing it to your body or otherwise. You are essentially arguing that if you were holding a ball in your hands and I placed my hand upon it I would be in control of the ball.
I definitely wouldn't say that it's clear that Jennings touches the ball first. If simply having one hand on the ball didn't demonstrate some level of control, one handed catches wouldn't count.
As to your last sentence, they way you worded it is not correct. You are stating that someone had control first. That is covered in the rule book. However, if two players gain control of the ball at the same time, it is a simultaneous catch. Again, it does not matter whether one player has "more control" of the ball. We can't say that Tate didn't have control of the ball because he only had one hand on it. (Neither can we say for sure that he did have control of it). It is completely possible to have control of the ball, having only ever had one hand on the ball, or else one handed catches would be illegal. Maybe Jennings gets "control" of the ball slightly before Tate, MAYBE. However, the ruling on the field was a simultaneous catch, and I don't think that anyone can say definitively that that call was incorrect, according to the rule book. If that call is not reviewable, there was nothing to overturn in the review. Also, if the call was in fact wrong, I don't think you can argue that its really a replacement ref problem. The actual refs could just as easily have called the same play the same way. It's a non reviewable judgement call, and happens in a split second, within a crowd of people.
Again, from what I can see, I think the call is correct, but I think it's a very gray area. I certainly don't think anyone can review the play and the rulebook, and say definitively that the WRONG call was made.
Aside from that play, I think it's unfair that the replacement refs are being blamed. They are just doing their job, to the best that they can. I think we are seeing that reffing pro sports is incredibly difficult. Don't blame the replacement refs for making mistakes, they are being thrust into a league that is way above their heads, with FAR more exposure than they have ever faced before.
Blame the league and the striking refs, but don't blame the replacements.
I'd say give into the referees on 1 and 2 but not 3 and 4.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
The NFL's statement regarding the game last night:
Quote:
In Monday's game between the Green Bay Packers and Seattle Seahawks, Seattle faced a 4th-and-10 from the Green Bay 24 with eight seconds remaining in the game.
Seattle quarterback Russell Wilson threw a pass into the end zone. Several players, including Seattle wide receiver Golden Tate and Green Bay safety M.D. Jennings, jumped into the air in an attempt to catch the ball.
While the ball is in the air, Tate can be seen shoving Green Bay cornerback Sam Shields to the ground. This should have been a penalty for offensive pass interference, which would have ended the game. It was not called and is not reviewable in instant replay.
When the players hit the ground in the end zone, the officials determined that both Tate and Jennings had possession of the ball. Under the rule for simultaneous catch, the ball belongs to Tate, the offensive player. The result of the play was a touchdown.
Replay Official Howard Slavin stopped the game for an instant replay review. The aspects of the play that were reviewable included if the ball hit the ground and who had possession of the ball. In the end zone, a ruling of a simultaneous catch is reviewable. That is not the case in the field of play, only in the end zone.
Referee Wayne Elliott determined that no indisputable visual evidence existed to overturn the call on the field, and as a result, the on-field ruling of touchdown stood. The NFL Officiating Department reviewed the video today and supports the decision not to overturn the on-field ruling following the instant replay review.
The result of the game is final.
Applicable rules to the play are as follows:
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.
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.
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.
