Billzfan23 Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 While tonight's calls were bad, the regular refs make their fair share of bad calls. Just a few I can recall: - Music city forward lateral - The push out in the back of the EZ against the Jags in 2004- Plax mugging Leodis (I think it was) in the EZ and then pushing off to catch the game winner - Ed Houchuli's famous Denver fumble fiasco - Beebe landing on his head but not being down by contact and fumbling - Bert Emanuel catches the ball for what should be a first down late in the 2000 NFC Championship game between Tampa Bay and St. Louis but it’s ruled that he doesn’t have full control when the ground causes the fumble. Let's just not kid ourselves into thinking that getting the real refs back will mean the end of bad calls. What about Megatron's catch in Week 1 last year - that's a touchdown and was ruled incomplete. That was an even worse call than the touchdown last night. http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81a77070/Controversial-call-on-Megatron-non-TD
NoSaint Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 i dont like this rule but a catch is not a catch until you have full possession and make a football move. we have seen that many times when a wr catches a ball and gets both feet down but doesnt hold onto the ball afterwards its not a catch. same thing applies to defenders trying to make a catch. granted jennings got to it first but he could not establish possession until he got to the ground. by the time jennings got to the ground where he could finally establish possession, tate had equal possession. thus when it counted the possession was tied and therefore goes to the offense i have no preference who wins this game. i see it as the right call It's not about establishing possession first. The ramifications of that would be huge. It's about controlling the ball first. From there if you maintain control while establishing possession (completing the catch) you get the ruling. Hands on it first means simultaneous is off the table unless those hands come off in the process.
truth on hold Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 What about Megatron's catch in Week 1 last year - that's a touchdown and was ruled incomplete. That was an even worse call than the touchdown last night. http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81a77070/Controversial-call-on-Megatron-non-TD Not a catch. Megatron pinched it against the ground too soon. Whether he needed to it or not to hang on we'll never know. But he should have known better not to do that. But I agree if that happened now people would be calling out hysterically for the real refs.
voodoo poonani Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Whatever happened to defenses being coached to NOT catch it and knock the ball out of the endzone?
NoSaint Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Not a catch. Megatron pinched it against the ground too soon. Whether he needed to it or not to hang on we'll never know. But he should have known better not to do that. But I agree if that happened now people would be calling out hysterically for the real refs. People were upset about that, despite it being the real rule. Everyone arguing that possession needs to be established - think about the implications of that. Any time a DB gets a pick in the open field, would the WR be able to tie him up until he completes a football move to complete the catch? No, it would be first man with hands on it getting first crack at the catch.
KD in CA Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 (edited) It should be "The Catch that while within the rules, everyone is freaking out about because talking heads have been saying what a terrible job the replacement refs are doing so we dont agree with any call they make so that they can try to make the NFL cave to referees that are asking for more money when they are an unimportant part of the game." Kinda like "The FIeld Goal, that while it went throught the uprights, vince wilfork took off his helmet and belicheat grabbed a referee simply because they thought it could be close even though it was obviously good. B-I-N-G-O, and Bingo was his name, Oh! Both guys had both hands on the ball. There was a 'real' official in the reply both who determined that the call wasn't clearly wrong. But let's not miss this chance to have something to get all worked up about today; the replacement refs story still has plenty of legs! Golden "tell me how my ass" Tate But this wins the contest by a mile. Boy, you're on a roll today, keep 'em coming!! Edited September 25, 2012 by KD in CT
Fan in Chicago Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 It's not about establishing possession first. The ramifications of that would be huge. It's about controlling the ball first. From there if you maintain control while establishing possession (completing the catch) you get the ruling. Hands on it first means simultaneous is off the table unless those hands come off in the process. I agree with you. I had DVRed the game and watched it three times to be sure. Jennings goes up, gets the ball with full control and starts falling to the ground. Tate does not touch the ball till Jennings is almost down. Jennings' rump hits the turf and he maintains control throughout the process. Tate just happens to place his hands on the ball. After Jennings is down, Tate tries to pry it out from his hands unsuccessfully. Before Tate starts making serious efforts, the official has looked down and signalled a TD. There is no possible way this is simultaneous possession. If Tate also had grabbed the ball on the way down, he would have been justified in being granted the TD. This one was not a TD by any stretch of imagination.
NoSaint Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 B-I-N-G-O, and Bingo was his name, Oh! Both guys had both hands on the ball. There was a 'real' official in the reply both who determined that the call wasn't clearly wrong. But let's not miss this chance to have something to get all worked up about today; the replacement refs story still has plenty of legs! But this wins the contest by a mile. Boy, you're on a roll today, keep 'em coming!! Wrong again - once the head ref went to the box instead of consulting his guys, he made the call unreviewable. Though the ref on the broadcast, the only to weigh in, did say they got it wrong
boyst Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 This was the third penalty/no call. The roughing the passer as Wilson ran from the pocket and got behind The push off by Tate And the possession issue. It could have been called a fumble recovered by Tate just as well. But that guy is tough, physical. I like how he plays.
Fan in Chicago Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 This was the third penalty/no call. The roughing the passer as Wilson ran from the pocket and got behind The push off by Tate And the possession issue. It could have been called a fumble recovered by Tate just as well. But that guy is tough, physical. I like how he plays. Also the holding penalty which negated an INT by GB.
26CornerBlitz Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I agree with you. I had DVRed the game and watched it three times to be sure. Jennings goes up, gets the ball with full control and starts falling to the ground. Tate does not touch the ball till Jennings is almost down. Jennings' rump hits the turf and he maintains control throughout the process. Tate just happens to place his hands on the ball. After Jennings is down, Tate tries to pry it out from his hands unsuccessfully. Before Tate starts making serious efforts, the official has looked down and signalled a TD. There is no possible way this is simultaneous possession. If Tate also had grabbed the ball on the way down, he would have been justified in being granted the TD. This one was not a TD by any stretch of imagination. 100% agreed.
KD in CA Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Wrong again - once the head ref went to the box instead of consulting his guys, he made the call unreviewable. When was the first time I was 'wrong'? I've read two articles that both said the play was 'reviewed' so I guess some of the reporters got it wrong too.
Jack Straw Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 My guess is that since you don't have to have both hands on the ball to have possession (ie. a one-handed catch), they rationalized that he was gripping the ball with his left hand the whole time (that hand does appear to contact the ball at the same time as the defender gets both hands on it). You can't really see the left hand on the replay, which is probably why it wasn't overturned. Just my guess, anyway. Sure looked like an INT though!
truth on hold Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 My guess is that since you don't have to have both hands on the ball to have possession (ie. a one-handed catch), they rationalized that he was gripping the ball with his left hand the whole time (that hand does appear to contact the ball at the same time as the defender gets both hands on it). You can't really see the left hand on the replay, which is probably why it wasn't overturned. Just my guess, anyway. Sure looked like an INT though! Interesting nuance
xsoldier54 Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 I suffer hearing about the "Music City Miracle" all the damn time. Anyone want to come up with a catchy nickname to make this game more relevant and hopefully blot out the Miracle? Seattle Zebra Attack Tate's, Golden Shover Simultaneous Disaster The Gouging of Green Bay How about the "Emerald City Error"? .
NoSaint Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 When was the first time I was 'wrong'? I've read two articles that both said the play was 'reviewed' so I guess some of the reporters got it wrong too. who caught the ball cant be reviewed. they could only review if the ball hit the ground, once the ref went to the hood instead going to talk to his guys. My guess is that since you don't have to have both hands on the ball to have possession (ie. a one-handed catch), they rationalized that he was gripping the ball with his left hand the whole time (that hand does appear to contact the ball at the same time as the defender gets both hands on it). You can't really see the left hand on the replay, which is probably why it wasn't overturned. Just my guess, anyway. Sure looked like an INT though! the easiest guess is the guy that ran in second saw both guys hands on the ball on the ground and threw his hands up. once that happened and the ref went to the hood, the play couldnt be fixed.
truth on hold Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Honestly I'm sick of the real refs and their lackies hitting the airways with how differently they would have handled it and how perfect they are. Gimme a break, those guys are only marginally better and light years from perfect. Speaking of Seattle the regular refs made an absolute mess of their super bowl appearance against steelers, that was miserable
PS 56 Posted September 25, 2012 Posted September 25, 2012 Seattle Gaff eREFtile dysfunction This is good!!!
Recommended Posts