NFL 2012 - Drive to Glory

[chrisspringob]

Incredible:

http://www.latimes.com/sports/footba...1808277.column

When you crunch the numbers, if the NFL gave the locked-out referees everything they wanted, it would cost about $100,000 extra per team per season. That equals about four games' pay for one of a team's lowest-paid players. The owners are watching their sport burn because they won't improve the officials' compensation by about one-fourth the amount they would pay a backup guard? Think about that.

[Caligula]

Enterprise is Great wrote:

---

The refs totally buttfucked the Packers without lube.

Yes, and they gave Seattle WR Golden Tate the reach-around.

[tighr]

Saw this, and figured it just about sums up NFL Week 3:

[Skywalker]

tighr wrote:

---

Saw this, and figured it just about sums up NFL Week 3:

The score is now 15-Love.

[Neroon]

Was it an interception or a TD?

This is a clip of a studio discussion on the call, including an explanation of the simultaneous catch rule. There are several angles viewed. Frankly, I don't see how you CAN'T call it an interception! I've really tried to give the replacement refs the benefit of the doubt but now it's cost an actual game result.


ETA: Listening to Mike & Mike this morning, I learned that possession was not reviewable; only whether or not it was a catch. And I was also unaware that there was apparently no conference between the referee and the two officials in the corner of the end zone who made different calls.

[Alidar Jarok]

While I agree with everyone that it was a terrible, terrible call, just looking at it from a football perspective, Jennings should have tried to bat it down, not catch it. If he had done that, not even the refs could have screwed him over.

[Neroon]

Except that batting it still leaves control of the ball in question. You don't know where it will go, whereas if you can catch it, that should end it.

Accent on the "should" part.

[SmoothieX]

Caligula wrote:

---

Yes, and they gave Seattle WR Golden Taint the reach-around.

Fixed that for you.

[InklingStar]

IndyJones wrote:

---

Um, no.

Here's the rule:

Jennings caught the ball two handed and pulled it to his chest. Tate had one arm in there initially, and a second after they fell to the ground. The only person I've seen call that a simultaneous catch tonight is the replacement ref. Now, obviously his was the only vote that mattered...but it *was* wrong.



You'll notice in the second photo that Tate's basically just hugging Jennings. It's very sweet, but it's not like any touchdown I've seen.

After further reading, that is not the entirety of the rule.

a catch is defined as Article 3 Completed or Intercepted Pass. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. 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.).
Note 1: It is not necessary that he commit such an act, provided that he maintains control of the ball long
enough to do so.
Note 2: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of
possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.
If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body other than his hands
to the ground, or if there is any doubt that the acts were simultaneous, it is not a catch.

Bolding by me. Jennings had the ball first, but he could not be considered "in control" because he was still in the air. At the point that Jennings hit the ground, Tate also had control of the ball. I am more convinced now that the call on the field was correct.

All the national media crying about it this morning would not be having the reaction they are if the situation were reversed and the Packers benefited from the end-game ambiguous call.

[tighr]

InklingStar wrote:

---

Bolding by me. Jennings had the ball first, but he could not be considered "in control" because he was still in the air. At the point that Jennings hit the ground, Tate also had control of the ball. I am more convinced now that the call on the field was correct.

I'm sorry, you still must be watching a different replay than the rest of us. I do not see Tate with control of the ball at any point, even when they hit the ground.

[IndyJones]

InklingStar wrote:

---

All the national media crying about it this morning would not be having the reaction they are if the situation were reversed and the Packers benefited from the end-game ambiguous call.

You keep saying that, it doesn't make it any more true.

I live in Chicago. These aren't exactly Packers fans. And on the local ESPN radio station they're playing 'Bear Down' and thanking the refs for a gift.

So, if you can show me in the next image where Tate has better control of the ball then Jennings, please do. I don't see it, but, whatever.

But retire that nonsense, will ya?

[1001001]

tighr wrote:

---

Saw this, and figured it just about sums up NFL Week 3:

That's awesome. And sad.

[Scout101]

Heh, now it's personal! Screwed with my fantasy football team :P Had the GB defense, and lost by like 5 points. Add in the interception, and keep Seattle to 7 instead of 14, I win the week. For people with actual money on the game, or paid fantasy leagues, gotta be infuriating.

And here I thought Sunday Night's game was as bad a game as they could have...

[Spider]

As long as these horrid replacement refs are calling the games, there's going to be a lot more teams besides GB that get screwed.

[tomalak301]

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. 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.

-I've always said (And feel like I've been consistent with this fact) that the Referees themselves have been treated like second class citizans by pretty much everyone because they are replacements. It's kind of like when you have a Substitute teacher and the students take advantage of him/her because they know they can get away with it. I actually thought before the 4th quarter is was a decently officiated game. Yeah they were flag happy, but it seemed like a lot of those calls were legit calls. It was the 4th quarter where these guys had major issues with the PIs or roughing the passer. I really was hoping to give these guys some credit last night and then the 4th quarter happened and I couldn't. It's really a shame that these guys are in this position because they might be good referees in their respective leagues but the NFL is an entirely different animal. Also, the replay booth guys are not replacements and they seem to be getting a free pass. Why aren't they being grilled today for what happened. Why Aren't they having a press conference a la Jim Joyce and apologizing publicly for this?

I was listening to the JT The Brick show last night and there was a caller who pretty much said something that I really agree with. He said, don't blame the Refs themselves, blame the NFL and owners. They knew this Lockout was coming and they didn't force a hand by bringing in these guys and giving them proper training. You had the Super Bowl end in February, and there was no contingency plan in case the lockout happened, which it ended up happening in June. It was a very strong argument, and it's pretty much how I feel. I don't blame the refs themselves. I blame Roger Godell, the RFA, and the NFL for this mess.

Unfortunately, much like Hockey, I'm still a fan and I'm still going to watch. I don't buy any NFL products anyway, but everyone's saying we as fans need to Boycott the NFL. You can't boycott the NFL, not if you're a fan of football. Are you just going to say when you're favorite team is playing that you won't watch? I am planning a trip to Reno in November and I probably won't place a bet on the NFL though. That might actually go to betting on the NBA, as they might be the only legit and stable league going at the time, believe it or not.

Still, this whole thing is a freaking mess. I hope something is done, and soon because the integrity of the game is lost. This isn't the NFL I know and love, and god if this happened in the playoffs or Super Bowl, there might be riots. I can tell you one thing though. If we still have replacement refs on Super Bowl Sunday, that game might be like 6 hours long.

I do wonder how this would have gone down if the regular officials had been out there anyway. They miss calls all the time and I still think the thing/play would have been a mess.