It is currently Sun Feb 23, 2025 4:20 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Mini Ditka wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Jennings had possession. It wasn't a simultaneous catch. It was an interception that was incorrectly ruled a catch.


See that's the point where you're wrong. To get possession he has to go to the ground and secure the ball. The other guys hands were on the ball before he went to the ground with the ball.

Ok. At least 90% of objective people who have opined on it say you are wrong and I am right. Danny Mac had a Seattle media guy on earlier that said there's no way an objective person would say that was a simultaneous catch.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:55 pm
Posts: 3392
FavreFan wrote:
Mini Ditka wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Jennings had possession. It wasn't a simultaneous catch. It was an interception that was incorrectly ruled a catch.


See that's the point where you're wrong. To get possession he has to go to the ground and secure the ball. The other guys hands were on the ball before he went to the ground with the ball.

Ok. At least 90% of objective people who have opined on it say you are wrong and I am right. Danny Mac had a Seattle media guy on earlier that said there's no way an objective person would say that was a simultaneous catch.


It doesn't matter who had the ball first. If they're on the ground and the 2nd guy gains a portion of control over the ball at any point before they get to the ground, it's a touchdown and not an interception.

_________________
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
Mini Ditka wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Jennings had possession. It wasn't a simultaneous catch. It was an interception that was incorrectly ruled a catch.


See that's the point where you're wrong. To get possession he has to go to the ground and secure the ball. The other guys hands were on the ball before he went to the ground with the ball.

Ok. At least 90% of objective people who have opined on it say you are wrong and I am right. Danny Mac had a Seattle media guy on earlier that said there's no way an objective person would say that was a simultaneous catch.

It might be one of those cases where public perception is wrong.


According to the rule it was a simultaneous catch.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Mini Ditka wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Mini Ditka wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Jennings had possession. It wasn't a simultaneous catch. It was an interception that was incorrectly ruled a catch.


See that's the point where you're wrong. To get possession he has to go to the ground and secure the ball. The other guys hands were on the ball before he went to the ground with the ball.

Ok. At least 90% of objective people who have opined on it say you are wrong and I am right. Danny Mac had a Seattle media guy on earlier that said there's no way an objective person would say that was a simultaneous catch.


It doesn't matter who had the ball first. If they're on the ground and the 2nd guy gains a portion of control over the ball at any point before they get to the ground, it's a touchdown and not an interception.

Right, but Tate never had a portion of control over it. He had a hand trapped inside Jennings catch. Again, like DT said, anyone who disagrees is just trying to be a contrarian. This is pretty much not disputed at all among the national media and even the majority of Bears fans I have heard comment on it.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Mini Ditka wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Jennings had possession. It wasn't a simultaneous catch. It was an interception that was incorrectly ruled a catch.


See that's the point where you're wrong. To get possession he has to go to the ground and secure the ball. The other guys hands were on the ball before he went to the ground with the ball.

Ok. At least 90% of objective people who have opined on it say you are wrong and I am right. Danny Mac had a Seattle media guy on earlier that said there's no way an objective person would say that was a simultaneous catch.

It might be one of those cases where public perception is wrong.


According to the rule it was a simultaneous catch.

I disagree. So do people who are paid to be experts on the nfl rules.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 2:00 pm
Posts: 30753
Packers lost, have to move on. Huge game this weekend.

_________________
2018
#ExtendLafleur
10 More Wins


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Pretty much everyone agrees by rule it was an interception.

I think that is largely due to the immediate reaction of Twitter and the talking heads.


I dont know for sure. I know if the rules I posted are correct....it's a catch. Isnt it?


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.

Jennings had possession. It wasn't a simultaneous catch. It was an interception that was incorrectly ruled a catch.

It WAS a simultaneous catch, though wasnt it? You cant gain control until you hit the ground (Calvin Johnson rule)



No, it was not a simultaneous catch. That rule exists of course; it has zero application to the play in question. Even if the refs say that was their ruling, it still doesn't make it right. If that was the case, then by extension the refs could have ruled it a safety without fear of reprisal for their incompetence.

There is no reality-based "other side" to this argument.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:28 am
Posts: 24703
Location: Boofoo Zoo
pizza_Place: Chuck E Cheese
It simply doesn't pass the eye test, Tate didn't have possession.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:


According to the rule it was a simultaneous catch.

I disagree. So do people who are paid to be experts on the nfl rules.

The replacement officials are paid to be experts too


I dont know man. Everyone thought the Calvin Johnson call was BS but that ended up being correct.

I think we'll see some different takes today


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:


According to the rule it was a simultaneous catch.

I disagree. So do people who are paid to be experts on the nfl rules.

The replacement officials are paid to be experts too


I dont know man. Everyone thought the Calvin Johnson call was BS but that ended up being correct.

I think we'll see some different takes today

Maybe. I haven't seen any yet. Everyone on sports radio and TV is not even trying to play Devils advocate. Because like DT said, it's sorta impossible to, logically.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:05 pm
Posts: 68612
pizza_Place: Lina's Pizza
Someone this morning on NFL Network said they thought it was the correct ruling of a catch. Don't remember who.

Most still believe it was an interception.

And as far as experts on officiating, there's disagreement on whether the call could have been overturned.

Former referee Gerry Austin says no, former referee Jerry Markbright says yes.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Don Tiny wrote:


No, it was not a simultaneous catch.

According to NFL rules, it most certainly is.

Don Tiny wrote:
[That rule exists of course; it has zero application to the play in question.

Of course it does. This play is the whole idea of the rule.

Don Tiny wrote:
Even if the refs say that was their ruling, it still doesn't make it right. If that was the case, then by extension the refs could have ruled it a safety without fear of reprisal for their incompetence.

No, they couldnt. Tie goes to the Passing team. No safety. Catch.



Don Tiny wrote:
There is no reality-based "other side" to this argument.

Except there is and I posted it.

Seems like you are just upset you may have rushed to judgement.



I believe, its a poorly worded rule, that was called correctly. Just like the Calvin Johnson play.

Here are the indisputable facts:

It WAS a simultaneous catch (since control cant be established til the ground is hit)
Tate's hand never came off the ball.

It doesnt matter who had more of the ball or who had more hands on it. Tate had his hand on the ball all the way to the ground.

According to the poorly written rule....good call


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
The whole world basically vs rpb, mini ditka, and some guy named Ryan.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
The whole world basically vs rpb, mini ditka, and some guy named Ryan.

Dont do that.

Im not being contrarian. I actually was arguing with this Ryan guy at first. But what he posted makes sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:28 am
Posts: 24703
Location: Boofoo Zoo
pizza_Place: Chuck E Cheese
I'm sure the NFL will agree with you
Quote:
Steve Wyche Verified ‏@wyche89

I've learned the NFL will address last night's Seahawks-Packers controversy later today.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:55 pm
Posts: 3392
Mini Ditka wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Mini Ditka wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
It doesn't matter who had the ball first. If they're on the ground and the 2nd guy gains a portion of control over the ball at any point before they get to the ground, it's a touchdown and not an interception.

Right, but Tate never had a portion of control over it. He had a hand trapped inside Jennings catch. Again, like DT said, anyone who disagrees is just trying to be a contrarian. This is pretty much not disputed at all among the national media and even the majority of Bears fans I have heard comment on it.


It has to be a touchdown because it can't be an interception. The intercepting player has to secure the ball to the ground. It's not Jennings catch because he didn't complete the catch. Tate's hands were securely on the ball.

_________________
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
The whole world basically vs rpb, mini ditka, and some guy named Ryan.

Dont do that.

Im not being contrarian. I actually was arguing with this Ryan guy at first. But what he posted makes sense.

Oh well. We clearly disagree. It happens. Like Hawg said, big game coming up this weekend against a dangerous, desperate team. Time to turn my angst in that direction.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:55 pm
Posts: 3392
What you have to understand is that because of how the rule is written the defensive player has to maintain control all the way to the ground. If the offensive player has any portion of the ball by rule it goes to the offensive team. Had the roles been reversed with Tate touching the ball first it would still be a touchdown because in the event of both players touching the ball the offense keeps the ball.

It's either a touchdown or an interception and it's definitely not an interception because he didn't maintain control all the way to the ground. He has to have the ball completely without the offensive player having any hand or arm touching the ball.

_________________
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Mini Ditka wrote:
What you have to understand is that because of how the rule is written the defensive player has to maintain control all the way to the ground.

what you have to understand is the defensive player did that.

I'm done responding to you.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Terry's Peeps wrote:
Someone this morning on NFL Network said they thought it was the correct ruling of a catch. Don't remember who.

Most still believe it was an interception.

And as far as experts on officiating, there's disagreement on whether the call could have been overturned.

Former referee Gerry Austin says no, former referee Jerry Markbright says yes.

The nfl officially announced possession was reviewable.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Keeping Score wrote:
On a side note, UMN and I whittled down the Mini Ditka mystery last night to one of these three people:

Qbo, Spaulding, good dolphin.

We're leaning heavily towards Qbo at the moment.

Its none of those


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:05 pm
Posts: 68612
pizza_Place: Lina's Pizza
Yeah saw that.

Love the statement from the NFL.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 2:55 pm
Posts: 3392
FavreFan wrote:
Mini Ditka wrote:
What you have to understand is that because of how the rule is written the defensive player has to maintain control all the way to the ground.

what you have to understand is the defensive player did that.


He didn't do that because the other guy had his hand on the ball before they hit the ground.

_________________
To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
Terry's Peeps wrote:
Someone this morning on NFL Network said they thought it was the correct ruling of a catch. Don't remember who.

Most still believe it was an interception.

And as far as experts on officiating, there's disagreement on whether the call could have been overturned.

Former referee Gerry Austin says no, former referee Jerry Markbright says yes.

The nfl officially announced possession was reviewable.

They did?

I thought they said the call was correct but the pass interference was missed.

Here is the whole statement....


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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Keeping Score wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Keeping Score wrote:
On a side note, UMN and I whittled down the Mini Ditka mystery last night to one of these three people:

Qbo, Spaulding, good dolphin.

We're leaning heavily towards Qbo at the moment.

Its none of those



Yes it is.

Nope.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:10 pm
Posts: 9673
Location: Schaumpton
pizza_Place: Piece Pizza and Brewery
Peter King wrote that since the play occurred in the endzone, simultaneous possession is reviewable. Important to remember that since it was ruled a touchdown immediately, which is the crux of the problem, that you'd need 100% video evidence to overturn.

Just based on this thread alone, you can't definitively say it. 99% sure, but that shouldn't be enough to overturn.

_________________
Team Cutler.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:31 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102665
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
rogers park bryan wrote:
According to the poorly written rule....good call
Even though my eyes tell me differently, this is the way I am starting to lean. Seems to be kind of a grey area with the rule, and it appears to have been called correctly according to how the rule is worded.

Kinda like the Calvin Johnson call, this appears to be a bad, horrible rule more than bad call.




These officials are bad, but the other ones make mistakes too. Hell, a few years ago on Thanksgiving with the entire country watching, a real NFL ref couldn't even get a 'heads/tails' call correct.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:28 am
Posts: 24703
Location: Boofoo Zoo
pizza_Place: Chuck E Cheese
Noted NFL stooge King is one of the few people that think the call was reviewable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Terry's Peeps wrote:
Yeah saw that.

Love the statement from the NFL.

I agree with Danny Green and Gold. The statement boiled down to "What you saw last night is not actually what happened. Your eyes are lying to you."

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:10 pm
Posts: 9673
Location: Schaumpton
pizza_Place: Piece Pizza and Brewery
My mind is doing the same thing Frank. Poorly written rule that will be addressed in the offseason

_________________
Team Cutler.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 115 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group