NFL Statement of the Hail Mary on MNF

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap10...urn-seahawks-touchdown?campaign=Facebook_news

"The NFL Officiating Department reviewed the video today and supports the decision not to overturn the on-field ruling following the instant replay review."

 

Re: NFL Statement on the Hail Mary on MNF

What a joke

 

Re: NFL Statement on the Hail Mary on MNF

Pete Carrol just pumped his fist again and thanked the dear Lord that he is still the awesomeist coach of all awesomeness!

 

I'm not sure, I think more of the outrage should be about the blown wrong call penalties / non-penalties.

Personally, looking at the catch, I think I agree with the call. Offensive WR appeared to have both hands firmly on the ball during the "mutual" catch and fall to the ground. It didn't look like his hands shifted for even a slight second. Even if Jennings caught the ball "first" in the air, the possession isn't complete until they hold it through the completion of the catch.

I don't remember the game (maybe Giants v Pats 1st SB), where a receiver had possession of the ball over top of the defender's helmet. You can use the opposing player as part of the catch. Sorry, I agree that the final catch was a catch. The outrage should be directed more at some of the blown calls during the game that led up to that point.

Just my opinion. My eyes were getting rather tired at that point last night and I haven't tried to re-watch the play yet.

 

Even the former ref that ESPN had in the booth (i forget his name)...said the Packer had control/possession of it and Tate just happened to put a hand in there or whatever and said it should have been an INT. While i can see the reason for claiming mutual catch...I don't 100% agree with it.

 

Umm. You should rewatch the play. It wasn't even close. The defender clearly intercepted the ball right after Tate shoved the other reciever to the ground. Tate had one arm on it and the defender had two arms wrapped around it with his elbows tucked in. If that is not offensive pass interference and an Interception then the game is not worth watching because it simply doesn't give the defense any fair chance.

 

So they support the decision not to overturn the call on the field. That doesn't mean the call was correct.

 

Not even close in my book....

 

Wow! Great pic and really makes it pretty clear...

 

Exactly!

Did anyone not know what the NFL's statement was going to be??
They will NEVER overturn a call, the next day.
Think about it (if you have to).

 

Yup

 

Oh I agree that Tate had offensive PI that wasn't called and Jennings had it "first" (in the air). But Jennings catching the ball isn't a catch until the catching motion is complete (feet on the ground, without the ball shifting, etc all the bogus 'catch' rules). So if Tate went up and grabbed the ball and the both came down to the ground holding the ball at the same time, then that's the point when the catch is made, not up in the air. Sorry, I guess I just could see that call as a toss up, which goes to the offensive player. Like I said, I think they've pretty well set precedent in that you can use another players body/helmet to control the ball, so why not a "jump ball" when both players have possession?

Personally, I think the ESPN and sports media is putting these replacement refs under the microscope too much. Does anyone remember years past with regular refs? I mean sometimes they can't even get a simple coin toss correct (i.e. see Jerome Bettis coin gate). LOL. Sadly the NFL has made so many of these rules more complicated (what constitutes a catch) that even the 'regular' refs are going to be inconsistent.

 

At first I was like 'hell ya he caught it. what is the controversy about?'

.....THEN I realized that Green Bay was on defense.

However I do understand your point about possession, so that could definitely explain it. And I ESPECIALLY agree with your point about the replacements being under the microscope. Everyone is acting like the regular refs never make any mistakes.

Plus what everyone is forgetting is that this was reviewed and upheld by the replay officials who are the regulars and NOT replacements. The regulars could have easily over turned it. Why no outrage at them? What no scrutiny of them?

Further everyone is slamming Goodell, but I heard a great point on the radio today...Roger is employed by the OWNERS. He's merely representing them and their wishes when he makes decisions. Instead of calling for Goodells head, why not call the Rooneys office and demand that the regular refs be returned?

 

No they couldn't

That is because the wrong call was made on the field. You can not review possession on that play. The replay officials hands were pretty much tied when they called it a TD. What's odd is that one ref called it a TD (not sure how he figured since he was on the opposite side of Tates body and the ball) and the other ref (the one with the clearer view and on the side of Tates body where he could see the ball) started to signal a touchback. What i want to know is why didn't the head ref consult with these refs to make sure the correct call on the field was made?

 

Exactly. And it brings into question the whole integrity thing, why did that ref signal TD when the other was signaling touch back? Is he a Seahawk fan? Wager? Fantasy Football? Just sucks at his job? They really need to fix this.

By the way, funny ass advatar [/quote:y91rtibv]
Here's where that stupid posession rule comes into play. If it isn't a catch till you land, roll over, and walk your first grandchild to kindergarten then when is a catch a catch? Does Tate have up to the time that the DB is deemed to have control to make a simultaneous catch? In the old days I think there's no question that the Green Bay owns the ball but if Tate gets both hand on the ball before the DB goes to the ground then there's room for discussion.

That said, I think the call was blown and the posession rule is stupid and poorly enforced. The NFL's getting exactly what they deserve in all this. They made themselves look stupid as the result of cumulative stupidity on their part.

 

Yes they could. Possession is reviewable in the end zone:

"The NFL says the replay officials were able to review whether it was simultaneous possession. This is reviewable only in the end zone and not anywhere between the goal lines. The NFL says it "supports the decision not to overturn the on-field ruling following the instant replay review."


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/stor ... 57840636/1

 

Conflicting reports about that then.

ESPN NFL analyst Gerry Austin, who has 27 years of officiating experience, said during the Monday Night Football game postgame show a possession play could not be reviewed and overturned using instant replay.

"They cannot, in replay, determine who has possession of the ball," Austin said.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/o ... 9062.story

 

Tate had both hands on the ball when they went to the ground....once they are on the ground...the play is dead.

I feel Tate had enough of the ball to go with simultaneous catch.

Yes Jennings caught it first....but Tate did get two hands on it as well.

I really have no problem with the catch...I think the actual officials could just as easily called that wrong as well.

GB should have just batted that ball into the turf...and it would not even be in question today.

HACK

 

Or the refs should have correctly called offensive pass interference and it would not even be in question today.