Packers-Seahawks

[EbylHusker]

It's actually very obvious. It's not just about who has hands on the ball at the top of the jump. The catch continues all the way to the ground. Watch the replay again, you'll see Tate remove his right had. Jennings remains in control and full possession of the ball all the way to the ground, even pulling it to his chest.

 

That is an interception.

[ZRod]

It appears to me that Tate goes up with both hands as does Jennings. It looks like Jennings get two hands on the ball and pulls it towards his chest, while Tate also gets two hands on the ball at basically the same time. My issue comes in where Tate removes his right hand as they are coming down, which is still part of the catch in progress. This can best be seen right at the start of the video I posted where Gerry Austin is breaking it down.

 

When Tate removes that right hand, I feel like Jennings now has two hands on the ball and has it pulled to his chest, wrapping it up. Tate only has one hand on the ball, but he's not really possessing it, Jennings is. Tate then puts his right hand back on the ball and struggles for it with Jennings.

 

To me, Tate had far less claim on the ball when he removed his right hand. Jennings actually caught it, Tate only had a hand on it.

I agree with everything you said but the bold. Tate went up with both hands but Jennings caught it with two hands and Tate had one hand in the vicinity of the ball.

 

Not the greatest video but if you freeze it at 0:15 and quick click to get it without the blur you'll see what I'm talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtYeeFpPPz0

[EbylHusker]

Actually, you're right, ZRod. I went back and looked at the ESPN video I posted, and Tate goes up with two hands, but one of them is on Jenning's wrist. Even more evidence it was an interception. Nice catch, there.

 

http://espn.go.com/v...clip?id=8422506

 

There is the ESPN video.

[ZRod]

The rules might be clear about that, but it's not clear he had "control" of the ball for the split second at the pinnacle of his jump, just before Tate got both his hands on the ball.

I think it's pretty clear, he caught the ball with two hands maintain his possession while bring it into his chest and landing on the ground, without Tate ever establishing any kind of possession. I think the funny thing is Tate wouldn't even say that he caught the ball post game, just that he competed for it.

[T_O_Bull]

I can imagine that many of the owners are calling Goodell already and telling him to get the real refs back, and give them whatever the F they want.

Give them what ever they want is not a phrase that billionaires use.

T_O_B

[T_O_Bull]

Yes, for the most part the refs are doing their best. There are always exceptions. For anything. Great.

 

The NFL is a f'ing joke. Sadly, none of this will hurt their multi-billion dollar industry, which is all they care about and is why the appropriate refs are not back yet.

Dead on Eby.

T_O_B

[Foppa]

Take away the crappy refs, and in reality the Packers have no one to really blame but themselves. You scored all of 12 points on the road. Really? When does scoring 12 points on the road win anything? You scored zero points in the first half, and got owned by the Seattle defense. And it wasn't like the refs were doing Seattle any favors either. Maybe if Aaron Rodgers spent less time blowing the smoke away from his finger gun and more time completing passes and not getting sacked, they'd be the same team from last year.

This is a dumb viewpoint. The point is that the Packers won this game fair and square, but the refs blew it. There are ifs ands and buts in every football game.

 

Not really. I don't even get how this call is debateable. If you are a Packers fan (and you are) you'd already stop whining about what 99.9% of what the NFL and their fan base already knows was BS and start looking at how a year ago GB would've been up by 4 TD's at the end of the game and this wouldn't have been an issue. But keep crying and blaming the same pathetic refs that shaft every team in the league equally to cover up the fact that Green Bay is hardly the great team that couldn't even make the Super Bowl last year with legitimate refs. Just be fortunate that Green Bay plays in a weak division. Detroit is overhyped, Chicago has Cutler, and Minnesota just used its only miracle of the season. Green Bay will make the playoffs. Just not sure if fans will even care about the NFL by that point.

[zoogs]

Oooh man, I still don't know. Watched the ESPN video, although it keeps freezing up on me.

 

At the 0:15 mark is when Jennings' first foot touches the ground. For him to have "possession" of the ball, we're talking about a point where both feet are touching the ground, right?

 

By this point, Tate already has his paws in there and is attempting to wrest control. Jennings may have the better grasp of it, but it does appear as if Tate has his hands on the ball. Well, actually, I guess that is the main question. Tate has his arm well stuck in there - but does he have hands on the ball, or is his arm just stuck somewhere inside, adjacent to and touching the ball? Does that constitute possession?

 

There's a half-second glimpse from the front where it looks like Tate's arm is actually behind the ball. I wouldn't say it leaps out at me as obvious but when I paused on that frame I thought, yikes, Tate might not really have a claim on the ball here. I don't know if I can say this is enough to overturn. The bigger fiasco probably was the call made on the field in the haphazard way that it was.

 

That and the ignoring of the OPI.

[EbylHusker]

I think so.

 

I'm willing to accept the NFL's judgement on it. I wouldn't buy into some conspiracy that they're trying to prop up their case for the replacement refs being acceptable by judging the non-overturn as sound. So unless you think that is the case, I guess it comes down to the NFL looking it over and deciding there wasn't enough to overturn.

 

Dunno if I entirely agree with it still, but I can accept it.

[Paul in WI]

Yes, for the most part the refs are doing their best. There are always exceptions. For anything. Great.

 

The NFL is a f'ing joke. Sadly, none of this will hurt their multi-billion dollar industry, which is all they care about and is why the appropriate refs are not back yet.

Dead on Eby.

T_O_B

 

Ditto. I made a decision not to watch the NFL when they announced that they were using scabs, and it sounds like a good call.

[tschu]

Take away the crappy refs, and in reality the Packers have no one to really blame but themselves. You scored all of 12 points on the road. Really? When does scoring 12 points on the road win anything? You scored zero points in the first half, and got owned by the Seattle defense. And it wasn't like the refs were doing Seattle any favors either. Maybe if Aaron Rodgers spent less time blowing the smoke away from his finger gun and more time completing passes and not getting sacked, they'd be the same team from last year.

This is a dumb viewpoint. The point is that the Packers won this game fair and square, but the refs blew it. There are ifs ands and buts in every football game.

 

Not really. I don't even get how this call is debateable. If you are a Packers fan (and you are) you'd already stop whining about what 99.9% of what the NFL and their fan base already knows was BS and start looking at how a year ago GB would've been up by 4 TD's at the end of the game and this wouldn't have been an issue. But keep crying and blaming the same pathetic refs that shaft every team in the league equally to cover up the fact that Green Bay is hardly the great team that couldn't even make the Super Bowl last year with legitimate refs. Just be fortunate that Green Bay plays in a weak division. Detroit is overhyped, Chicago has Cutler, and Minnesota just used its only miracle of the season. Green Bay will make the playoffs. Just not sure if fans will even care about the NFL by that point.

That's not the issue.

 

You could make that point about almost any game. The officiating has to be competent. I'm not worried about the rest of the season, but the notion that this was somehow Green Bay's fault for not being up by more points is laughable. Forget the fact that close games happen in football and need to be fairly officiated. Forget how Seattle's drive was over until a BS roughing penalty, then was over AGAIN until a DPI call that was actually OPI. Then the blown call at the end. Whether or not Green Bay played to their potential is the last thing that matters when talking about the integrity of the game. Clearly I'm biased here, but I was equally outraged over the ending of the Pats-Ravens game...and I hate the Pats. Was that somehow the Patriots fault for not being up by 4 touchdowns too? No, you can't just say that about every bad call at the end of games.

[CheeseHusker]

It occurred to me this morning that today is the 30th anniversary of this:

 

 

I'm also a St. Louis Cardinals fan who had to see the Denkinger highlight again last night, since ESPN decided it was a worthy comparison.

 

I got a knack for picking teams that get on the wrong side of historic referee f-ck ups.

[tschu]

[Blackshirts007]

I thought it was a really good call

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[zoogs]

 

Yeah, this is pretty awesome.