Aaron Rodgers apologizes to you (1 Viewer)

[Avery]

I like Rodgers, I really do , but the timing on this is terrible. It just comes across as disingenuous and reeks of sour grapes.

If he played and his offense played well yesterday and they lost at the end due to that terrible call... maybe... but in these circumstances it doesn't come across like he's genuinely apologizing to the fans.

 

[texasheat]

I like Rodgers, I really do , but the timing on this is terrible. It just comes across as disingenuous and reeks of sour grapes.

If he played and his offense played well yesterday and they lost at the end due to that terrible call... maybe... but in these circumstances it doesn't come across like he's genuinely apologizing to the fans.

So what if it is?This wasn't a borderline call. Everyone knows what should have been called and who should have won the game. I give all GB players/fans permission to have sour grapes.

 

[fruity pebbles]

Is this the thread where we bash Rodgers fantasy performance thus far? Truth be told as bad as its been, if his receivers could catch and a little luck, he'd have had 250 yards and 2 tds last night.

 

[Soulfly3]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

 

[fruity pebbles]

From a radio interview on ESPN 540 Milwaukee today:

I gotta do something that the NFL is not gonna do. I have to apologize to the fans. Because our sport, the multi-billion dollar machine, is generated by people who pay good money to come watch us play. The product that's on the field is not being complimented by an appropriate set of officials. This is an NFL who gambled on some low-level referees -- including the guy who makes the most important call last night, who has never had any professional experience.

Taking a "fantasy" perspective here, and as a Rodgers owner in several of my leagues, my primary concern would be Aaron Rodgers facing a game suspension. I don't like what's going on with the officiating either, however I think there is a more effective and professional way and manner for these players to go about their grievances than the way they are doing it. They have agents, they have a players union, there is a formal process to petition grievances with the league, the more elite players have leverage with major corporations and businesses that endorse or sponsor them. My big issue is not that the player are criticizing the ref issue, but that it's not done as a team and at a team level for these players. If you are going to say or do something about the level of officiating, then stand as 53. Sheriff Roger Goodell and the owners ( yes it wasn't just Goodell here) made a decision about the refs contract and the subsequent negotiations. Goodell has already told players and coaches to back off the officials in public. Rodgers is the most high profile of the critics so far as players are concerned. Easiest way to cull players who want to keep complaining is to suspend Rodgers for a game and fine him big. Sends a message to everyone with a shot across the bow. This isn't just one slippery slope, it's several. You want to really hedge carefully on how much you want the league to come and "reset" completed games, no matter how badly it was officiated. You want to be careful with how much risk you expose these players to for the kind of hits some of them are taking because officials are missing calls. But you also want to show, for the good of the entire game for the long term, that you can't just arbitrarily criticize the officiating in any way or manner you want to as a player. Make a plan as a team, as a union, as a collective, for the betterment of all players. A bunch of Twitter and interview shots aren't going to help you, it's only going to put targets on the backs of specific players for little to no gain. Graham Harrell starting the next game for the Packers doesn't do the Packers, Packers fans, NFL fans, fantasy players or Rodgers any good. I'm sorry for the Packer fans here, I'm also sorry for Seahawk fans too. None of this is good for the game, but Rodgers, as a high profile elite QB in the league, he needs to be smarter with his mouth right now.

You don't think in the court of public opinion, where the nfl is getting slammed, suspending Rodgers makes things much worse.

 

[texasheat]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

ok, it was a borderline call that could have gone either way, you win. Also, you're asking me to give it a break? lol

 

[meyerj31]

Thanks Aaron, but I need an apology from the NFL...not from a bitter QB who couldn't put the game away in the fourth quarter last night.

Whoooooooaaaaaaaaaa, nelly. You are way off man.That 16-play, 4th quarter drive, down one point, against a rock defense ending in a touchdown was the stuff of champions. That was an incredibly clutch performance. Your comment is a joke.

 

[RBM]

Too many people have kissed his ### the last few years and he has lost it.

 

[Pipes]

I like Rodgers, I really do , but the timing on this is terrible. It just comes across as disingenuous and reeks of sour grapes.

If he played and his offense played well yesterday and they lost at the end due to that terrible call... maybe... but in these circumstances it doesn't come across like he's genuinely apologizing to the fans.

So what if it is?This wasn't a borderline call. Everyone knows what should have been called and who should have won the game. I give all GB players/fans permission to have sour grapes.

I think GB players are showing great restraint considering how bad they got screwed. Players all over the league are #####ing about the refs...even guys on teams that haven't been hosed as bad as the Pack.

 

[Billy Bats]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Actually, it could've been reversed.That's what makes it worse.

 

[Pipes]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Shocking employees of the NFL feel this way. I haven't heard any impartial player (former or current) that have taken this stance. And yes the call could have been reversed based on the NFL's statement from earlier today.

 

[sho nuff]

They are not going to suspend him people/gecko.

Nor will he be fined...have been reading that the NFL cannot fine them for these comments.

I think the NFL is more caring about owners and coaches and players doing it on the field...not in something like an interview or on Twitter.

And if so...I don't think Rodgers is all that worried about his money going to charity for getting his opinion out.

And lol at the people whining about him "shooting the gun" to signal first down on his run.

Also, for those of you thinking he should apologize for his play...have not listened to every interview he has done yet...but I would bet that he mentions his own play and holding the ball in the first half to put some of the blame for the lack of offense on his own shoulders (he usually does in such instances).

 

[Run It Up]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Shocking employees of the NFL feel this way. I haven't heard any impartial player (former or current) that have taken this stance. And yes the call could have been reversed based on the NFL's statement from earlier today.

This may have been true had the replay not showed that both players had control at the same time, just because Jennings had two hands on the ball and Tate one then two doesnt make it any less simultaneous possession. Unless they changed a rule somewhere that says that a player cant have control of the ball with one hand, which to my knowledge doesnt exist.At the end of the day Jennings should have batted down the ball. The refs should have called offensive PI. Arguing the wrong call here.

 

[Modog814]

I don't see what's so about this? Looks like him just finding another way to whine about the game last night. I seriously doubt he makes this statement if the situation was reversed.

Exactly...still waiting for the player/team that BENEFITED from poor officiating to say something...until then, it is just a nice excuse to whine. Seriously, if you are the "all-mighty" Packers, you don't need a last second play to determine your game's outcome against SEA.

This. It'd be admirable if Wilson, Tate or Carroll came out and made a statement like this, but otherwise, it's complaining.

After the game, Carroll said this about the ref situation "It's time for it to be over. The league deserves it, everybody deserves it." I think that's pretty much all you can say in his situation. It's not his fault the ref called it the way they did. He can't refuse to get the victory and why would he? There were plenty of important calls that went the other way as well....just not the last play of the game which everyone is focusing on. I think Carroll and the Seahawks would have loved to have played this game with proper refs....it would have made a great game even better.

I didn't hear that. But I wasn't implying that Carroll should refuse the victory. All I was saying is it's easy to stand up and confront something that's wrong when you lose because of it, it's much more admirable to do it when you're the benefactor.

 

[Soulfly3]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Shocking employees of the NFL feel this way. I haven't heard any impartial player (former or current) that have taken this stance. And yes the call could have been reversed based on the NFL's statement from earlier today.

The way it's explained, is thisossession is not established in the air. Possession is only established once the player(s) touch the ground, at which point, the video showed that BOTH Jennings and Tate had simultaneous possession of the ball.

Thus, the decision for some to say they can reason with the referees call. It's really nowhere near a bad of a call as some are making it out to be once the rules are explained and frame by frame shows the details..

That's my opninion anyways... And I have absolutely zero on the line in this case. Dont support either team, and only own Nelson.

 

[Pipes]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Shocking employees of the NFL feel this way. I haven't heard any impartial player (former or current) that have taken this stance. And yes the call could have been reversed based on the NFL's statement from earlier today.

This may have been true had the replay not showed that both players had control at the same time, just because Jennings had two hands on the ball and Tate one then two doesnt make it any less simultaneous possession. Unless they changed a rule somewhere that says that a player cant have control of the ball with one hand, which to my knowledge doesnt exist.At the end of the day Jennings should have batted down the ball. The refs should have called offensive PI. Arguing the wrong call here.

Yes it does. It's pretty clear, and pretty much every analyst, expert, whatever you want to call them agrees that Jennings had possession first before Tate gets a hand on the ball. I'm done arguing this...no need to beat a dead horse. The Seahawks won, The Pack loss and the replacement refs are still in over their heads.

 

[Run It Up]

Yes it does. It's pretty clear, and pretty much every analyst, expert, whatever you want to call them agrees that Jennings had possession first before Tate gets a hand on the ball. I'm done arguing this...no need to beat a dead horse. The Seahawks won, The Pack loss and the replacement refs are still in over their heads.

Are you just not seeing that when Jennings closes both hands on the ball that Tate also has a hand on the ball? I dont see how you guys arent seeing that... and he most definitely gets his second in their before they get to the ground.

 

[Soulfly3]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Shocking employees of the NFL feel this way. I haven't heard any impartial player (former or current) that have taken this stance. And yes the call could have been reversed based on the NFL's statement from earlier today.

This may have been true had the replay not showed that both players had control at the same time, just because Jennings had two hands on the ball and Tate one then two doesnt make it any less simultaneous possession. Unless they changed a rule somewhere that says that a player cant have control of the ball with one hand, which to my knowledge doesnt exist.At the end of the day Jennings should have batted down the ball. The refs should have called offensive PI. Arguing the wrong call here.

Yes it does. It's pretty clear, and pretty much every analyst, expert, whatever you want to call them agrees that Jennings had possession first before Tate gets a hand on the ball. I'm done arguing this...no need to beat a dead horse. The Seahawks won, The Pack loss and the replacement refs are still in over their heads.

Jennings had possession IN THE AIR, which doesn't mean a damn thing.The quicker ppl understand this, the better

 

[stunaman]

I have lost all respect for him. He's a punk that can't own up to the fact he was owned for 4 quarters. He shot a gun after his first scamble and then got it taken to him.

Chest thumping from a Seahawk fan after last night's entertainment.

Why wouldn't I? Held the pack to 12 points.

Yeah, the Seattle D was solid, but your offense only scored 7 points.

whatever... let's not make this more than it is. he's got a point, nfl tix are not cheap. if i bought one to watch a game get messed up by the refs i'd be pissed.i wouldn't call it whining when bree, foster and a host of other nfl players are tweeting the same thing.

blah, blah, blah. bring the real refs back and lets get on with life.

 

[shader]

Whiner

 

[meyerj31]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Shocking employees of the NFL feel this way. I haven't heard any impartial player (former or current) that have taken this stance. And yes the call could have been reversed based on the NFL's statement from earlier today.

This may have been true had the replay not showed that both players had control at the same time, just because Jennings had two hands on the ball and Tate one then two doesnt make it any less simultaneous possession. Unless they changed a rule somewhere that says that a player cant have control of the ball with one hand, which to my knowledge doesnt exist.At the end of the day Jennings should have batted down the ball. The refs should have called offensive PI. Arguing the wrong call here.

Yes it does. It's pretty clear, and pretty much every analyst, expert, whatever you want to call them agrees that Jennings had possession first before Tate gets a hand on the ball. I'm done arguing this...no need to beat a dead horse. The Seahawks won, The Pack loss and the replacement refs are still in over their heads.

Jennings had possession IN THE AIR, which doesn't mean a damn thing.The quicker ppl understand this, the better

Sure does. Once a player has possession at any point the ball cannot then be ruled simultaneous possession.

 

[Modog814]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

This absolutely nails it. People forget that these refs (replacement or not) have a split second to make a call, not the endless replays we get.

 

[Jackstraw]

Seahwks D looks salty.

 

[Run It Up]

Sure does. Once a player has possession at any point the ball cannot then be ruled simultaneous possession.

In the rule book anywhere does it say anything about simultaneous possession where one player has two hands and other only one on the ball?

 

[sho nuff]

Sure does. Once a player has possession at any point the ball cannot then be ruled simultaneous possession.

In the rule book anywhere does it say anything about simultaneous possession where one player has two hands and other only one on the ball?

It says it can't happen when one has control of the ball first.Jennings clearly has this multiple times while Tate never has it at all until after the scrum.

 

[Billy Bats]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Shocking employees of the NFL feel this way. I haven't heard any impartial player (former or current) that have taken this stance. And yes the call could have been reversed based on the NFL's statement from earlier today.

This may have been true had the replay not showed that both players had control at the same time, just because Jennings had two hands on the ball and Tate one then two doesnt make it any less simultaneous possession. Unless they changed a rule somewhere that says that a player cant have control of the ball with one hand, which to my knowledge doesnt exist.At the end of the day Jennings should have batted down the ball. The refs should have called offensive PI. Arguing the wrong call here.

Yes it does. It's pretty clear, and pretty much every analyst, expert, whatever you want to call them agrees that Jennings had possession first before Tate gets a hand on the ball. I'm done arguing this...no need to beat a dead horse. The Seahawks won, The Pack loss and the replacement refs are still in over their heads.

Jennings had possession IN THE AIR, which doesn't mean a damn thing.The quicker ppl understand this, the better

Sure does. Once a player has possession at any point the ball cannot then be ruled simultaneous possession.

Some people apparently don't know what simultaneous means.

 

[Chili Cheese Burrito]

Thanks Aaron, but I need an apology from the NFL...not from a bitter QB who couldn't put the game away in the fourth quarter last night.

Whoooooooaaaaaaaaaa, nelly. You are way off man.That 16-play, 4th quarter drive, down one point, against a rock defense ending in a touchdown was the stuff of champions. That was an incredibly clutch performance. Your comment is a joke.

Oh good point, aided by the PI that kept the drive alive. Champions!

 

[Jewell]

Aaron Rodgers apologizes to you

I thought this thread was going to be about Rodgers apologizing to those of us who wasted a high first round draft pick on him or blew our load in an auction for him.

 

[hxperson]

81 replies and no mention of DISCOUNT DOUBLECHECK?

Shark pool be slippin'

 

[Yenrub]

Thanks Aaron,And now go throw some ### #### touchdownsSignedBSS

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

I have lost all respect for him. He's a punk that can't own up to the fact he was owned for 4 quarters. He shot a gun after his first scamble and then got it taken to him.

Chest thumping from a Seahawk fan after last night's entertainment.

Why wouldn't I? Held the pack to 12 points.

Yeah, the Seattle D was solid, but your offense only scored 7 points.

hats off to both defenses, this would have been a great game had it not been for the officiating getting in the way. the last play didn't cost GB the game, it was a whole lot of other f'ups along the way by the officiating and the Packs offense, ARodge should apologize for the latter! it was funny how many calls were made by the officials that would barely qualify as an infraction while the obvious ones didn't draw a flag at all. i now believe the who say the replay officials are sitting in Vegas.

 

[Warhogs]

Aaron Rodgers is a GOD! signed...a Packer fan.

In all sriousness though. I am starting to worry about my Packers. The unstoppable offense has been stopped pretty well the last 2 weeks.

 

[Papa Georgio]

A lot of jealous in this thread. Despite his motives what he said is true.

Haters gotta hate.

 

[Samuel L Bronkowitz]

This wasn't a borderline call.

Yes it was.Even members of the NFL Network said they could understand how the call was made, according to the letter of the law.

Jesus, everyone is an armchair referee these days. You get 50 views and a constipation slo-mo view from every angle on every play. These guys have a split second to decide what happened, and in this instance, the play COULDN'T BE REVERSED based on the simultaneous catch ruling.

Give it a break. Ya, it probably should have been an INT, but under the circumstances and understanding why what happened happened.. I couldnt care less.

Shocking employees of the NFL feel this way. I haven't heard any impartial player (former or current) that have taken this stance. And yes the call could have been reversed based on the NFL's statement from earlier today.

This may have been true had the replay not showed that both players had control at the same time, just because Jennings had two hands on the ball and Tate one then two doesnt make it any less simultaneous possession. Unless they changed a rule somewhere that says that a player cant have control of the ball with one hand, which to my knowledge doesnt exist.At the end of the day Jennings should have batted down the ball. The refs should have called offensive PI. Arguing the wrong call here.

Yes it does. It's pretty clear, and pretty much every analyst, expert, whatever you want to call them agrees that Jennings had possession first before Tate gets a hand on the ball. I'm done arguing this...no need to beat a dead horse. The Seahawks won, The Pack loss and the replacement refs are still in over their heads.

Jennings had possession IN THE AIR, which doesn't mean a damn thing.The quicker ppl understand this, the better

You serious, Clark?From the NFL casebook, page 38

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.

 

[MilwaukeeTed]

Well, some of you guys really make me chuckle. For those of you who's opinions aren't so easily swayed by second-hand knowledge and hanging quotes, here is a link the actual interview. Tuesdays with Aaron

It's his weekly radio show/podcast, and you can listen to it for free. For what it's worth, it might be good to get the full context before jumping to conclusions.

 

[Papa Georgio]

The only thing more transparent than Rodgers comments about refs are the ones in here bad mouthing him. It's obvious that he has either tore your NFL team or fantasy team a new one or you drafted him this year and are mad he hasn't put up big points yet.

 

[kegger]

All players should do this after badly ref'ed games, EVERY WEEK!

The more it's out there other than the Media the more impact it should have.

 

[Billy Bats]

You serious, Clark?

From the NFL casebook, page 38

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.

Nice work Bronk, been searching for something like that all day. So it doesn't matter that Tate had one hand on the ball?!

 

[Buck Stop]

I for one accept Discount Double Check's apology. He is entitled to a bad day.

 

[mad sweeney]

I don't see what's so about this? Looks like him just finding another way to whine about the game last night. I seriously doubt he makes this statement if the situation was reversed.

I'd be ok with it if he'd just been generic about the refs last night. Just comes off as whining when he actually has a good point.

 

[mad sweeney]

Perhaps we should turn our outrage toward Golden Tate instead.Reporter: "Did you push off?"Tate: "I don't know what you're talking about."

What's he supposed to say? That's the best answer he could give. I don't want him saying no, which I think he did later anyways. Just avoid the question because no answer is going to help.

 

[mad sweeney]

Thanks Aaron, but I need an apology from the NFL...not from a bitter QB who couldn't put the game away in the fourth quarter last night.

Whoooooooaaaaaaaaaa, nelly. You are way off man.That 16-play, 4th quarter drive, down one point, against a rock defense ending in a touchdown was the stuff of champions. That was an incredibly clutch performance. Your comment is a joke.

Is that the one that got extended by a terrible PI call that none of the Packers seemed to have a problem with? Yeah, stuff of legends.

 

[BigJim®]

Listen, I feel bad for Packer fans, I really do. The team should not have lost. Still, this 'apology' is laughably lame.1. I don't recall Rodgers making a public apology when Green Bay beat the Vikings by 4 points after the NFL admitted two blown touchdown calls that caused the Vikings a 28-24 loss in October 2010. His 'apology' that night? "We had to have this one," Rodgers said. "It was a little bit more special because of the significance of where we're at in the season. We were 3-3 coming in, a division opponent, our greatest rival, close score, the way it ended. "It was a special night." 2. I don't remember anyone on the Packers issuing an apology after the NFL admitted to NINE officiating errors, 8 of them in the 4th quarter, of the 2002 game that the Packers came back from a 10 point deficit to beat the Vikings 26-22 (December 8, 2002)

Reports: NFL cites missed calls in Vikings' loss to PackersPosted: Thursday December 12, 2002 12:40 AMMINNEAPOLIS (AP) -- The NFL has acknowledged its officiating crew made at least nine mistakes during Sunday's Green Bay-Minnesota game, including a key pass interference call, two newspapers reported Wednesday.The mistakes were documented in a confidential memorandum, the Star Tribune and St. Paul Pioneer Press said, citing unidentified sources.The Vikings (3-10) lost the game 26-22 in Green Bay. Eight of the affected plays occurred in the fourth quarter, when the Packers (10-3) made up a nine-point deficit with two touchdowns. An interference call negated a Vikings' interception on the Packers' game-winning drive.Both papers reported the league's correspondence with the Vikings."Conversations between the NFL officiating department and teams are confidential," NFL spokesman Michael Signora said. "We do not comment on them."Vikings coach Mike Tice declined comment. Team officials are prohibited from discussing confidential communication with the league.On Monday, the Vikings sent in 12 officials' calls the team disagreed with. In a response, league supervisors wrote that Vikings safety Corey Chavous should not have been called for pass interference against Donald Driver on a third-down pass that safety Jack Brewer intercepted."It doesn't matter what they say after the fact," Chavous said. "We lost the game."Under the NFL's instant replay policy, pass interference penalties are not subject to review. Tony Fisher scored the go-ahead touchdown for Green Bay four plays later.NFL teams routinely fill out such forms on the day after games, seeking clarification or explanations for calls, and it is not unusual for mistakes to be acknowledged affecting both teams.Among other mistakes detailed in the document, league supervisors wrote that Packers receiver Robert Ferguson should have been ruled out of bounds at the 1-yard line rather than given a 40-yard touchdown reception with 10:48 left in the fourth quarter. The Vikings did not challenge the call via instant replay.The NFL also wrote that Packers safety Antuan Edwards should have received an unnecessary roughness penalty for hitting Vikings receiver Chris Walsh, who had taken a knee to stop the next-to-last play of the game, and that Packers linebacker Nate Wayne also should have been penalized for blocking receiver Randy Moss in the back on the final play of the game.

So please, spare me the apology to fans when you wind up on the short end of the stick. It's transparent and whiny.

 

[Khy]

Sure does. Once a player has possession at any point the ball cannot then be ruled simultaneous possession.

In the rule book anywhere does it say anything about simultaneous possession where one player has two hands and other only one on the ball?

It says it can't happen when one has control of the ball first.Jennings clearly has this multiple times while Tate never has it at all until after the scrum.

Must be tough to understand words and rulings when your glasses are made of swiss cheese. Jennings gets 2 hands on the ball, Tate has his one hand on the ball and from the slow mo footage that hand doesn't move until they are on the ground scraping for it. Since when is a one handed catch never considered possession? I'm roughly 1,000,000,000% sure that you can maintain possession of a ball with one hand. You can also maintain possession with one of your hands and your helmet, or your body, or your opponents helmet or body. Was it an interception? Yeah probably. Was it a clear as the ocean is wet? No not even close, it was about as clear as trying to read with beer goggles on. The call was deemed TD in real time. Even with SUPER slow mo you can't say without a shadow of a doubt that it was not simultaneous possession. Two simple facts, One: The Packers played awful last night... they and their fans act like the Seahawks were handed 3 touchdowns to officiating mistakes. The simple fact is they were down 7-6 with only a few minutes remaining in the game. Maybe they should start taking some of the blame themselves, they are supposed to be the Superbowl favorites for this season, they are supposed to have the best QB in the league and the best offense in the league. I heard a rumor last year they almost went 16-0. They went into Seattle last night and got their asses handed to them. Then a slightly controversial call comes up and they blame it all on that. Personally, I think Rodgers needs to face facts and not whine about the officiating but talk about how he's going to get back into his 2011 form. Through three weeks he looks like the 2011 form of Mark Sanchez at best.Two: The Packers never even score that go ahead TD if not for a phantom PI on one Kam Chancellor. Which was another officiating miscue. How about this... the two bs penalties offset. Seahawks win the game 7-6. Same result, but if they both didn't happen than there is less drama. Either way, no arguments about it. Aaron Rodgers statistically is currently behind the likes of Sanchez, Palmer, Ponder, Manning (both of them), Dalton, Schaub, Flacco etc. doesn't really matter how you look at his stats. Through three weeks of the 2012 season he's no better than your average run of the mill QB.-SignedA Giants Fan

 

[MaxThreshold]

Sure does. Once a player has possession at any point the ball cannot then be ruled simultaneous possession.

In the rule book anywhere does it say anything about simultaneous possession where one player has two hands and other only one on the ball?

It says it can't happen when one has control of the ball first.Jennings clearly has this multiple times while Tate never has it at all until after the scrum.

Must be tough to understand words and rulings when your glasses are made of swiss cheese. Jennings gets 2 hands on the ball, Tate has his one hand on the ball and from the slow mo footage that hand doesn't move until they are on the ground scraping for it. Since when is a one handed catch never considered possession? I'm roughly 1,000,000,000% sure that you can maintain possession of a ball with one hand. You can also maintain possession with one of your hands and your helmet, or your body, or your opponents helmet or body. Was it an interception? Yeah probably. Was it a clear as the ocean is wet? No not even close, it was about as clear as trying to read with beer goggles on. The call was deemed TD in real time. Even with SUPER slow mo you can't say without a shadow of a doubt that it was not simultaneous possession. Two simple facts, One: The Packers played awful last night... they and their fans act like the Seahawks were handed 3 touchdowns to officiating mistakes. The simple fact is they were down 7-6 with only a few minutes remaining in the game. Maybe they should start taking some of the blame themselves, they are supposed to be the Superbowl favorites for this season, they are supposed to have the best QB in the league and the best offense in the league. I heard a rumor last year they almost went 16-0. They went into Seattle last night and got their asses handed to them. Then a slightly controversial call comes up and they blame it all on that. Personally, I think Rodgers needs to face facts and not whine about the officiating but talk about how he's going to get back into his 2011 form. Through three weeks he looks like the 2011 form of Mark Sanchez at best.

Two: The Packers never even score that go ahead TD if not for a phantom PI on one Kam Chancellor. Which was another officiating miscue. How about this... the two bs penalties offset. Seahawks win the game 7-6. Same result, but if they both didn't happen than there is less drama.

Either way, no arguments about it. Aaron Rodgers statistically is currently behind the likes of Sanchez, Palmer, Ponder, Manning (both of them), Dalton, Schaub, Flacco etc. doesn't really matter how you look at his stats. Through three weeks of the 2012 season he's no better than your average run of the mill QB.

-Signed

A Giants Fan

Hey clueless, look at this. You cannot have possession when your lying on the bottom with a defender between you and the ball. Looks like possession/control/whatever you want to call it by Jennings.Those that can't see the indisputable proof are either CheatHawks fans, had money on the them, blind or all of the above.

Anyone with any intelligence is saying the Packers were robbed.

 

[sho nuff]

Sure does. Once a player has possession at any point the ball cannot then be ruled simultaneous possession.

In the rule book anywhere does it say anything about simultaneous possession where one player has two hands and other only one on the ball?

It says it can't happen when one has control of the ball first.Jennings clearly has this multiple times while Tate never has it at all until after the scrum.

Must be tough to understand words and rulings when your glasses are made of swiss cheese. Jennings gets 2 hands on the ball, Tate has his one hand on the ball and from the slow mo footage that hand doesn't move until they are on the ground scraping for it. Since when is a one handed catch never considered possession? I'm roughly 1,000,000,000% sure that you can maintain possession of a ball with one hand. You can also maintain possession with one of your hands and your helmet, or your body, or your opponents helmet or body. Was it an interception? Yeah probably. Was it a clear as the ocean is wet? No not even close, it was about as clear as trying to read with beer goggles on. The call was deemed TD in real time. Even with SUPER slow mo you can't say without a shadow of a doubt that it was not simultaneous possession. Two simple facts, One: The Packers played awful last night... they and their fans act like the Seahawks were handed 3 touchdowns to officiating mistakes. The simple fact is they were down 7-6 with only a few minutes remaining in the game. Maybe they should start taking some of the blame themselves, they are supposed to be the Superbowl favorites for this season, they are supposed to have the best QB in the league and the best offense in the league. I heard a rumor last year they almost went 16-0. They went into Seattle last night and got their asses handed to them. Then a slightly controversial call comes up and they blame it all on that. Personally, I think Rodgers needs to face facts and not whine about the officiating but talk about how he's going to get back into his 2011 form. Through three weeks he looks like the 2011 form of Mark Sanchez at best.Two: The Packers never even score that go ahead TD if not for a phantom PI on one Kam Chancellor. Which was another officiating miscue. How about this... the two bs penalties offset. Seahawks win the game 7-6. Same result, but if they both didn't happen than there is less drama. Either way, no arguments about it. Aaron Rodgers statistically is currently behind the likes of Sanchez, Palmer, Ponder, Manning (both of them), Dalton, Schaub, Flacco etc. doesn't really matter how you look at his stats. Through three weeks of the 2012 season he's no better than your average run of the mill QB.-SignedA Giants Fan

So...I guess all these analysts...ex refs...former players from most teams...current players on some other teams and so on all are wearing cheese colored glasses right?One hand on the ball while it is in the arms of a defender who grabs the ball first (a key point you miss), and is pinned against that player is not a one handed catch or possession in any definition of the word.Down 7-6 with only a few minutes left?They scored the go ahead TD with 8:44 left in the game. That is not just a few minutes.The Packers played an awful first half...nobody is denying that.Despite that, they made adjustments and dominated the 2nd half of play...controlling the ball, the clock and controlling the Seahawks offense.The Hawks were gifted several things on those last drives.As for Rodgers...do you think all he said was about the refs and never took any of it on himself for his play? Really?Might want to read up on how that guy constantly puts bad performances on himself...I have not yet read the transcript or heard every interview he has done since then...but I would bet at some point he does mention his own poor play and the team's poor play in the first half.As for the PI call.Can you admit the defender was there a tiny split second early? I can.I can also admit its a call that should not have been made.That said...you can't assume at that point in the game...with that much time left that the Packers would not get a stop and be able to drive for a winning FG...which is what you do when you claim those 2 plays offset and Seattle wins 7-6...it also misses the PI call on Tate and another on Rice.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Sure does. Once a player has possession at any point the ball cannot then be ruled simultaneous possession.

In the rule book anywhere does it say anything about simultaneous possession where one player has two hands and other only one on the ball?

It says it can't happen when one has control of the ball first.Jennings clearly has this multiple times while Tate never has it at all until after the scrum.

Must be tough to understand words and rulings when your glasses are made of swiss cheese. Jennings gets 2 hands on the ball, Tate has his one hand on the ball and from the slow mo footage that hand doesn't move until they are on the ground scraping for it. Since when is a one handed catch never considered possession? I'm roughly 1,000,000,000% sure that you can maintain possession of a ball with one hand. You can also maintain possession with one of your hands and your helmet, or your body, or your opponents helmet or body. Was it an interception? Yeah probably. Was it a clear as the ocean is wet? No not even close, it was about as clear as trying to read with beer goggles on. The call was deemed TD in real time. Even with SUPER slow mo you can't say without a shadow of a doubt that it was not simultaneous possession. Two simple facts, One: The Packers played awful last night... they and their fans act like the Seahawks were handed 3 touchdowns to officiating mistakes. The simple fact is they were down 7-6 with only a few minutes remaining in the game. Maybe they should start taking some of the blame themselves, they are supposed to be the Superbowl favorites for this season, they are supposed to have the best QB in the league and the best offense in the league. I heard a rumor last year they almost went 16-0. They went into Seattle last night and got their asses handed to them. Then a slightly controversial call comes up and they blame it all on that. Personally, I think Rodgers needs to face facts and not whine about the officiating but talk about how he's going to get back into his 2011 form. Through three weeks he looks like the 2011 form of Mark Sanchez at best.Two: The Packers never even score that go ahead TD if not for a phantom PI on one Kam Chancellor. Which was another officiating miscue. How about this... the two bs penalties offset. Seahawks win the game 7-6. Same result, but if they both didn't happen than there is less drama. Either way, no arguments about it. Aaron Rodgers statistically is currently behind the likes of Sanchez, Palmer, Ponder, Manning (both of them), Dalton, Schaub, Flacco etc. doesn't really matter how you look at his stats. Through three weeks of the 2012 season he's no better than your average run of the mill QB.-SignedA Giants Fan

My god..you're kidding right?

 

[CapnJB]

Aaron Rodgers statistically is currently behind the likes of Sanchez, Palmer, Ponder, Manning (both of them), Dalton, Schaub, Flacco etc. doesn't really matter how you look at his stats.

He leads the league in apologies.

 

[CapnJB]

Those that can't see the indisputable proof are either CheatHawks fans

I get that you're upset, but what did the Seahawks have to do with that call? Taking your anger out on the Seahawks is a bit misplaced.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

From a radio interview on ESPN 540 Milwaukee today:

I gotta do something that the NFL is not gonna do. I have to apologize to the fans. Because our sport, the multi-billion dollar machine, is generated by people who pay good money to come watch us play. The product that's on the field is not being complimented by an appropriate set of officials. This is an NFL who gambled on some low-level referees -- including the guy who makes the most important call last night, who has never had any professional experience.

Awesome dude - love this guy. Thanks for posting RN!