MNF Ending

bcl20 said:
Gerry Austin is an ex-ref as well though. If we go off of their expertise all we know is that one is wrong, not that one is specifically wrong.

I would assume that the current line judge would know as he has to deal with replay as opposed to Austin, who I don't believe has had to.
Click to expand...

The league has now confirmed that it is a reviewable call and could have been overturned last night.
 
From the "Of course they do..." department...can you imagine the **** storm if they hadn't? There would be subsequent pressure to change the result of the game...

NFL supports decision to not overturn Seahawks' touchdown - NFL.com

An (admittedly long) excerpt:

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.
Click to expand...

So when did Tate satisfy any of the items in bold (because he doesn't meet the qualifications for a simultaneous catch)?
 
Last edited:
The NFL has released a statement. Here are some excerpts:

"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."

"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."
 
thejumper5 said:
The NFL has released a statement. Here are some excerpts:

"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."

"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."
Click to expand...

Vehwy eenterwesting.
 
"No indisputable visual evidence existed to overturn the call."

That's great, but that's not the ruling the ref made. He confirmed the ruling on the field. There's a difference. Probably doesn't matter, but there is a difference.
 
bcl20 said:
"No indisputable visual evidence existed to overturn the call."

That's great, but that's not the ruling the ref made. He confirmed the ruling on the field. There's a difference. Probably doesn't matter, but there is a difference.
Click to expand...

The refs exact words were, "The call on the field stands."
 
Ok, I could have sworn they confirmed it. I guess at that point I was rambling on message boards.
 
Been a Viking fan since they started in '61.... hate everything about the Packers and love when they lose! But they got hosed somethin' awful. Could very easily cost them home field in the playoffs.:eek:
 
It's probably because they are the teams that I watch most but I feel like both my college team and my pro team were involved in the two biggest officiating debacles of all time.
 
Interesting result of last night's game:
The Sportscenter that followed the game had was the highest rated SC in 17 years.
 
Some interesting discussion today from people a lot more familiar with NFL rules than me, and many are (surprisingly to me) supporting the call. Their view stems from a) the fact a player cannot "possess" a ball before touching the ground and b) the fact Tate got his left hand between the ball and the defender's chest (and kept it there) prior to ground contact. Excerpts:

What people don't understand is that nothing was relevant while the two players were in the air - and mistakenly, that's what ESPN and others were reviewing and commenting. The relevant moment is at the time of possession (both feet on the ground or body hitting turf in bounds). Nothing else matters. At the time, Tate (if you watch the camera angle from the back of the end zone, and in this photo), has his arm and hand firmly on the ball, exactly at the same time Jennings is trying to maintain - but fails when it counts - to pull the ball into the body. The point is that both had possession and Jennings was not, at the point of impact, able to remove Tate's possession at the time of impact - which is the only point of replay that should be shown. Should be a snap-shot, a photo-finish and not a running camera - which confuses the issue. It's clear at the point of impact, at that exact instant, neither player had proprietary possession, which means by definition, the call goes in favor of the offense.
Click to expand...

Tate's left hand was positioned in between Jennings' hands and in front of Jennings' chest. Tate's left hand never lost contact with the ball and actually prevented Jennings from fully bringing the ball into his chest. Just because Jennings had two hands on the ball, while Tate only initially had one, does not exclude Tate from having equal or simultaneous possession. One handed catches are perfectly legal in the NFL, so it is absolutely possible to possess the ball with only one hand maintaining constant contact with the ball. Given that Tate's left hand was between the ball and Jennings' chest, Tate prevented Jennings from achieving full and complete possession, so it had to be joint possession; therefore, a touchdown.
Click to expand...
377191_10101492787518748_561705278_n.jpg
 
Billso said:
Some interesting discussion today from people a lot more familiar with NFL rules than me, and many are (surprisingly to me) supporting the call. Their view stems from a) the fact a player cannot "possess" a ball before touching the ground and b) the fact Tate got his left hand between the ball and the defender's chest (and kept it there) prior to ground contact. Excerpts:




377191_10101492787518748_561705278_n.jpg
Click to expand...

The problem with this is the argument the part about not being able to possess the ball before you hit the ground. In cases of simultaneous possession, the NFL casebook disagrees. Basically, if the Jennings caught the ball and then Tate caught the ball, even if they were still both in the air when Tate caught the ball, it should have been Packers ball, so long as Jennings never lost control of the ball. The wording from the casebook:

"A.R. 8.29 NOT A SIMULTANEOUS CATCH
First-and-10 on A20. B3 controls a pass in the air at the A40 before A2, who then also controls the ball before they land. As they land, A2 and B3 fall down to the ground.
Ruling: B’s ball, first-and-10 on A40. Not a simultaneous catch as B3 gains control first and retains control."
 
Yeah I heard that also - but once you hit the ground in the endzone touched there is no play for the ball. The play is dead
 
thejumper5 said:
The problem with this is the argument the part about not being able to possess the ball before you hit the ground. In cases of simultaneous possession, the NFL casebook disagrees. Basically, if the Jennings caught the ball and then Tate caught the ball, even if they were still both in the air when Tate caught the ball, it should have been Packers ball, so long as Jennings never lost control of the ball. The wording from the casebook:

"A.R. 8.29 NOT A SIMULTANEOUS CATCH
First-and-10 on A20. B3 controls a pass in the air at the A40 before A2, who then also controls the ball before they land. As they land, A2 and B3 fall down to the ground.
Ruling: B’s ball, first-and-10 on A40. Not a simultaneous catch as B3 gains control first and retains control."
Click to expand...

Great find, Jumper. However, Tate's hand was between the ball and Jenning's chest from the very beginning - so isn't Jenning's 'control' at least debatable?
 
Billso said:
Great find, Jumper. However, Tate's hand was between the ball and Jenning's chest from the very beginning - so isn't Jenning's 'control' at least debatable?
Click to expand...

One hand touching the ball is not "possession", especially when the other guy has both arms around it.

Tate's hand was between the ball and Jennings' chest because it was trapped there by the fact Jennings had both arms around the ball and was hugging it to his chest.

Also notice Tate's right arm falls away while they are both on the way down. Once that happened, any possibility Tate had "possession" disappears.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top