View Single Post
Old September 25 2012, 11:53 PM   #269
archeryguy1701
Rear Admiral
 
archeryguy1701's Avatar
 
Location: Cheyenne, WY
Send a message via Yahoo to archeryguy1701
Re: NFL 2012 - Drive to Glory

tomalak301 wrote: View Post
I've been thinking about this (after sleeping on it basically) and I have a few things to ask.

-I kept reading here last night that this call couldn't be reviewed, and people seemed to have an issue with the fact that it was reviewed. Well, I thought all scoring plays this season were reviewable, so it seemed legit to me.
It's a goofy thing with the rules... in the field of play, when there's a simultaneous catch situation, who actually has possession can't be reviewed or overturned. They can decide if there was actually a catch, but they can't reward the ball to one team or the other after making an initial decision. BUT, possession can be reviewed in the endzone. So, there's no reason why they couldn't have overturned it or gave the ball to the defense or anything of that sort.


Also, since when was it an official rule that you had to kick the extra point for the touchdown to count. I always thought if you score a touchdown and it's the end of the game, than you don't need to kick the PAT. Before the PAT, it was 13-12, so that's game over right? In OT, if you score a TD, the game is over and you don't have to kick. I was very confused with both those aspects.
In overtime, you don't have to kick the PAT because it's first to score. In regular time, the PAT still has to happen, even if it's in the closing seconds.


InklingStar wrote: View Post
Official NFL statement on the controversy:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...headline_stack

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.
The refs made a lot of bad calls in this game, but at the end they made the correct one.
When was the last time the NFL came out and said, "Yeah, our guys fucked up."? In fact, the way I read their statement was trying to shift focus elsewhere. By saying that the catch was good, but there should have been PI, it was like saying, "The thing you guys are worried about was correct, but they missed this call instead. Fortunately, they've been missing all sorts of calls, so it's not really a big deal, so shut up and keep paying!"

The NFL will never throw their guys under the bus. Don't expect them to start now, especially when "so much" (a whopping $100,000 per owner) is on the line.

InklingStar wrote: View Post
This post does a good job of explaining what I see:

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2012/9/24/...efense-of-a-td

...there is no such thing as degrees of possession. Either one does, both do, or neither does. And as far as any person can tell, "both do" is the only conclusion you can come to with any degree of certainty.

...

Whether Jennings had more possession in the air or not is irrelevant. There is no such thing as possession in the air. Possession inherently implies two feet, a butt, a shoulder, and elbow, a knee, a hip, some body part touching the ground. At the point when it most mattered, when both players hit the ground, both players had an all but equal claim to the ball. Any rolling or twisting or manhandling afterwards is pointless. Once both players hit the ground in a state of dual possession, the play is dead and it's a touchdown.

...

There are very reasonable arguments to be made that it was an interception. When you break it down and go frame by frame, it looks like Jennings probably has more of a claim to it on the ground. Unfortunately, the official whose call it was to make didn't have the luxury of breaking it down frame by frame. He had to make the bang-bang call as he was watching six players go up and come down, all clawing at the ball. It looked to him like it was dual possession as they came down...
I can see how people can call that an interception, but I cannot see how you can make the claim that Tate had absolutely no possession of the ball at that point.
For possession to happen, a player not only has to come down with two feet in bounds, he has to perform a "football move". In this case, falling down constituted a football move. How many times did one or both of Tate's hands stop holding onto the football when they came down? The defender had possession from start to finish, Tate would occassionally have it. The only reason the ball didn't squirt away when they hit the ground was because Jennings never lost his possession.
__________________
"If it weren't for stupid, difficult races, there'd simply be no point to living."

Sometimes you just gotta roll the hard six- Bill Adama
archeryguy1701 is online now