What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Packers at Seahawks (3 Viewers)

I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession. Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.
I agree. Tate gets both hands on before Jennings hits the ground.
Which would NOT be simultaneous possession. If Jennings had possession first, Tate cant 'gain' possession after that. The ref on the broadcast explained it. Jennings had it in his possession, its immaterial that Tate LATER got both hands on the ball.
 
Well...just when you thought it could not get any worse.
And it gets worse. How can they not overturn that? Pretty clearly an INT.
It couldn't be overturned because the simultaneous catch part (and the pass interference part) are not reviewable.The only way for it to be overturned would be if the ball hit the ground, or if Jennings stepped out of bounds, or something like that.
Good point. In that case, the simultaneous possession ruling isn't that egregious. That's virtually an impossible call to make live. I'm not sure the real refs would have called that part any differently.The missed PI on Tate is still inexcusable though.
 
There may have been plenty of places through the course of the game that had to do with the replacement refs. But the final play says nothing at all about the officiating. Regular crew of refs could have called it either way, including 2 refs calling it differently. And I doubt they'd overturn regardless of the call on the field.
You're assuming the real refs would have made the same call. They wouldn't have. that was a clear PI on Tate and an interception by Jennings.
when have you EVER seen offensive pi on a hail mary? gruden was going on about it...the ex-ref they have with them said the same thing. i'll bet you see it a bunch from now on, but i can't remember a single time.
 
After being a pro football fan for my entire life I am really souring on the game with these refs. They are ruining the game. Might as well not even play the games in my opinion until you get competant refs.

 
I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession. Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.Regardless, I'm glad it's being considered a bad call, because it may FINALLY be the thing that gets the real refs back.
A hand on the ball is not possession.
It was more of 'an arm under the football'Proper call is int
 
There may have been plenty of places through the course of the game that had to do with the replacement refs. But the final play says nothing at all about the officiating. Regular crew of refs could have called it either way, including 2 refs calling it differently. And I doubt they'd overturn regardless of the call on the field.
You're assuming the real refs would have made the same call. They wouldn't have. that was a clear PI on Tate and an interception by Jennings.
when have you EVER seen offensive pi on a hail mary? gruden was going on about it...the ex-ref they have with them said the same thing. i'll bet you see it a bunch from now on, but i can't remember a single time.
How often have you seen a WR shove a DB to the ground prior to the ball arriving in the past? That was as blatant an offensive PI that I have ever seen and it was missed. These guys are horrendous at best.
 
I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession. Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.
I agree. Tate gets both hands on before Jennings hits the ground.
Which would NOT be simultaneous possession. If Jennings had possession first, Tate cant 'gain' possession after that. The ref on the broadcast explained it. Jennings had it in his possession, its immaterial that Tate LATER got both hands on the ball.
what constitutes possession though? i thought when you were coming to the ground, you had to maintain throughout the entire process, which means he didn't have possession until the very end.
 
The amazing thing is everyone is here is going to bash the refs.....AND IT"S THE 100% RIGHT CALL
No one agrees with you
I do. Its the right call assuming you miss he blatant pi on Tate.
Not sure if it matters in the ruling but it looked like Tate was down first with hands on the ball. Jennings fell on top of him also with hands on the ball.
OMG, clearly you're not watching the same game or you have a misunderstanding of what "possession" really means.
 
Joint possession goes to the offensive player, but I don't think that was joint. I think Jennings had it, not Tate.
Just to play Devil's Advocate (because I think that was a pick), when is the joint possession determined? That is, is the play judged by when the players land on the ground with their feet, when they touch their knee(s) to the ground, or when they come to a complete stop? Is this impacted by the going to the ground rule? I've no reason to believe it does, but it may impact who is deemed to have possession.
 
I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession. Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.
I agree. Tate gets both hands on before Jennings hits the ground.
You guys are either BSing or are blind or are ######ed. On no planet is that a reception or "simultaneous possession". GD replacements. :no:
 
I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession. Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.Regardless, I'm glad it's being considered a bad call, because it may FINALLY be the thing that gets the real refs back.
A hand on the ball is not possession.
What I mean is that he got his hand on the ball before Jennings established possession. At the time possession would have been established, Tate had both hands on the ball, just like Jennings.I actually lost a fantasy game because of that touchdown (I started the Packers defense), but personally, I think it was the right call.
 
This is a disaster! The two refs, making different calls in the endzone.....will be the front page of every sports page in the country...I'm cracking up.

:tfp:

 
That extra point just cost/won a game in the league I commission.This should be fun tomorrow. Maybe I just turn the ringer off.
Why? No offense, but while we can debate what the "right" or "wrong" call is, no one in FF should argue how it affects FF. Ironically though, that speaks volumes about what I have been saying all along is the problem with the replacement refs - validity of outcome. And if you can question that - why not everything else?That's a pretty slippery slope. And one that should not even be attempted in FF. The results are "official" - whether you or anyone else agrees with them.
 
The amazing thing is everyone is here is going to bash the refs.....AND IT"S THE 100% RIGHT CALL
No one agrees with you
I do. Its the right call assuming you miss he blatant pi on Tate.
Not sure if it matters in the ruling but it looked like Tate was down first with hands on the ball. Jennings fell on top of him also with hands on the ball.
:lmao: Ok.
 
The amazing thing is everyone is here is going to bash the refs.....AND IT"S THE 100% RIGHT CALL
No one agrees with you
I do. Its the right call assuming you miss he blatant pi on Tate.
Not sure if it matters in the ruling but it looked like Tate was down first with hands on the ball. Jennings fell on top of him also with hands on the ball.
All-time great username here.
 
419 User(s) are reading this topicINSANE!The billionaire NFL owners are trying to break the ref union with these worthless scabs so they can save a couple of hundred thousand dollars. IS IT WORTH IT YOU SCUM BILLIONAIRES????????? IS IT WORTH IT??????????????
:goodposting: i'm almost sad about this ending because what's gonna be lost behind it is the fact that the whole game was like this and the packers got handed the game many times over by bad calls before they got "robbed". this wasn't even a game
 
Hawks D took it to GB.... and at the end when it mattered most Wilson got the job done. Here come the Hawks!!! :football:
Other way around...Packer D pretty much controlled the Hawks except for the one big play.Hawks D was great and played great...but GB controlled the 2nd half.
 
What a travishamockery, even before Jennings had the obvious pick, tate clearly shoved (with both hands) Shields in the back. This game had some horrid calls, by far the worst I have seen so far and that went for both teams. What sucks is, even though the NFL can review this and say, yeah we F'd up, all the Packers get is an apology which doesn't mean jack and and L, which means a lot.

I will say this, Seattle is damn good, much better than I gave them credit for, you still should have lost this game, but I definitely see a 3 way race for the NFC west.

 
I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession.

Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.
I agree. Tate gets both hands on before Jennings hits the ground.
Which would NOT be simultaneous possession. If Jennings had possession first, Tate cant 'gain' possession after that. The ref on the broadcast explained it. Jennings had it in his possession, its immaterial that Tate LATER got both hands on the ball.
Ah, that makes a lot more sense. Here's the rule: NFL Rulebook, rule 8, section 1, article 3, item 5: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.

 
I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession. Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.Regardless, I'm glad it's being considered a bad call, because it may FINALLY be the thing that gets the real refs back.
A hand on the ball is not possession.
What I mean is that he got his hand on the ball before Jennings established possession. At the time possession would have been established, Tate had both hands on the ball, just like Jennings.I actually lost a fantasy game because of that touchdown (I started the Packers defense), but personally, I think it was the right call.
You are quite incorrect based on every angle of it and every official and rules guy that has looked at the play so far.
 
I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession. Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.
I agree. Tate gets both hands on before Jennings hits the ground.
Even if you're right, which you're not, there is still the flagrant missed PI.
I agree with the missed PI call. That was terrible.
 
Tie goes to the receiver?nvm Tirico just "explained" it.
What tie? The Hawks guy threw his arm over the ball after the ball had gone to the ground in the Packer players hands. Clear int. I have no dog in this fight as Dallas and Rams fan so I could care less who won. The wrong team won though. No way these refs stick around. That kind of stuff has an impact on playoffs. That was a high school crew trying to ref an NFL game. Embarrassing for the league.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've watched the play over and over, and it's still a touchdown to me (and I don't have a dog in this fight). Jennings hadn't established possession yet (because you have to complete the catch, feet down) when Tate got his hand on the ball. I think it's clearly simultaneous possession. Obviously I'm in the minority here, but I think it was the correct call.
I agree. Tate gets both hands on before Jennings hits the ground.
Which would NOT be simultaneous possession. If Jennings had possession first, Tate cant 'gain' possession after that. The ref on the broadcast explained it. Jennings had it in his possession, its immaterial that Tate LATER got both hands on the ball.
what constitutes possession though? i thought when you were coming to the ground, you had to maintain throughout the entire process, which means he didn't have possession until the very end.
Pretty sure that isn't the rule- I guess 'control' might be a better word than possession (im paraphrasing the ref). If the above was true, any int in the endzone you must immediately jump on the guy and grab at the ball for an insta-TD. That cant be right.Edit- That being said, Jennings should have knocked that ball down and ended the game like DBs are trained to since peewee.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top