Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Were the refs right on the Greenbay Seattle Catch?.. Please Clarify

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Were the refs right on the Greenbay Seattle Catch?.. Please Clarify

    Aside from the blatant OPI, I still don’t see how this is such an obvious interception according to the rule of the simultaneous catch. From what I see, they both touched the ball at virtually the exact same moment. Tate’s hand was behind Jennings’s, so if Jennings’s hand is 5 inches long, and the ball was travelling approximately 60 mph, it would have taken the ball about one half of a one hundredth of a second for the both players to be touching the ball. That being said, the ball does not stop moving forward until Tate is touching it, as you can see in the video.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpV5xIJax4s This video shows nice HD slowed motion pictures.

    From this point we can attempt to determine who has “more of the ball” and whose body the ball is closer to as many people do, but none of these factors are requirements for controlling the ball. The only requirement for control is to have the ball in at least one hand without it wiggling, which both Tate and Jennings have from essentially the apex of their jumps all the way to the ground. Although Tate’s right hand is not always in contact with the ball, his left palm is. Doesn't a one-handed palm-catch away from the body count for just as much of a catch as 2-handed grasping clutch near the body?

    Please correct me if I am wrong. I am simply trying to educate myself and others.

  • #2
    They missed the PI, but it was a simultaneous catch. I say it is a fair call and could have gone either way. If simultaneous catch would be a reviewable thing, the call also would have stood as called on the field because I saw no evidence that said otherwise.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Giants5699 View Post
      They missed the PI, but it was a simultaneous catch. I say it is a fair call and could have gone either way. If simultaneous catch would be a reviewable thing, the call also would have stood as called on the field because I saw no evidence that said otherwise.
      It was not a simultaneous catch. Tate never had possession of the ball. AND, Simultaneous catches are reviewable in the endzone, but not on the field of play

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by NYFG View Post
        It was not a simultaneous catch. Tate never had possession of the ball. AND, Simultaneous catches are reviewable in the endzone, but not on the field of play
        Although Jennings clearly had possession of the ball in 2 hands, wasn't Tate holding the ball in his left palm all the way to the ground as well? Does this not cons***ute a simultaneous catch?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by MaekloTau View Post
          Although Jennings clearly had possession of the ball in 2 hands, wasn't Tate holding the ball in his left palm all the way to the ground as well? Does this not cons***ute a simultaneous catch?
          Jennings had possession of the ball before Tate got his arm under the ball; Tate got his arm under the ball after Jennings (and the ball) were on the ground. Merely touching the ball does not mean possession.

          Comment


          • #6
            Who cares?..........you would need a high speed camera 5 ft from the play to get definitive info (clue- there was none)........its all conjecture and media hysteria

            Comment


            • #7
              Unfortunately, this is going to be the norm this entire year guys, so get used to it!
              The owners are filthy rich, greedy and they don't give a damn about the job the replacement refs are doing!
              The Refs won't concede any of their demands and the owners will never give them what they want.....so get used to it if u can hold your nose that long, because these replacements will be around to ruin the post season ,once they're done destroying the regular season.
              "I'M ALL FOR IT!"

              John McKay, HC of the 1976 winless TB Buccaneers, when asked by a reporter, how McKay felt, about the execution of his offense.

              Comment


              • #8
                I wish refs would stop hiding behind technicalities when the answer is obvious. And this isn't just limited to replacement refs-- this goes for the pros, too.

                Yes, sometimes there needs to be a technical breakdown of what cons***utes a catch is it's truthfully uncertain.

                But this interception was clearly not simultaneous possession and it's painfully obvious.

                It's the same situation with Calvin Johnson's TD to end the Lions--Bears game two years ago.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think they were definitely wrong but the media and fans are taking it to far... I mean everyone knows that they are still going to watch. I know GB has every right to be mad , but does anyone else think that they are just coming off as babies now I mean you still got a dangerous team coming into your house time to let it go, nothing can be done.... the NFL made their statement.
                  sigpicShould the Giants fire Gilbride....

                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONL7L...yer_detailpage

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    This is only a big deal because it happened to the almighty Aaron Rodgers. If it had happened against the Seahawks, the media would say "ah human error... it happens."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Giants5699 View Post
                      This is only a big deal because it happened to the almighty Aaron Rodgers. If it had happened against the Seahawks, the media would say "ah human error... it happens."
                      Yeah I wonder what would happen if it happened the other way around....good point.
                      sigpicShould the Giants fire Gilbride....

                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONL7L...yer_detailpage

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I enjoyed the game.....could care less who won. It was fun to watch.

                        My father once told me when I was a kid- don't believe everything you read in the newspapers.......The Seahawks had a piece of the ball too
                        What cons***utes a simultaneous catch? The Sub ref stomping has to stop......its soooooooooooooo booooooooooring........how quickly how we forget how
                        biased and bad the "real Refs" were.........I like the loungerie guys........they dont call a gazillion holding calls off the ball

                        It almost makes you want to hear about Joe Paterno 24 hours a day for 5 months again

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I guess so, NFL reviewed and made it final.
                          Forget the Past, Live for the Future!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Giants5699 View Post
                            They missed the PI, but it was a simultaneous catch. I say it is a fair call and could have gone either way. If simultaneous catch would be a reviewable thing, the call also would have stood as called on the field because I saw no evidence that said otherwise.

                            SORRY DUDE....YOU COULDN'T BE MORE WRONG ... just curious...what kind of coke bottle were you watching the game through?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by EddieBlue View Post
                              SORRY DUDE....YOU COULDN'T BE MORE WRONG ... just curious...what kind of coke bottle were you watching the game through?
                              We are trying to discuss this like civilized people, please express your viewpoint in football terms without insulting.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X