Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 272

Thread: REPLACEMENT REFS ARE RUINING THE GAME

  1. #201
    I like the back and forth between everyone on this.. I wanna add a few more bits of info to sway your opinions.

    There are rules where the ball can cross the goal line, but your not in the end zone and that's a touchdown.

    There are rule where you can be in the end zone and catch a ball outside of the endzone (over the out of bounds line) and that's a touchdown.

    We've seen Calvin Johnson make a 1 handed catch and maintain possession while placing the ball on the ground in the act of completing a catch. and that was not a touch down.

    So now we have probably the worst judgement call possible, because the ball never touched the ground, and nobody was out of bounds, and you have rules written about dual possession that can be up for interpretation.

    The whole endzone rule book needs a reboot. Its not just these refs.

  2. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by Whichfan View Post
    Would have happened because the game is fixed and they probably would have still found something to call, like a PI on Jennings , even if he did knock the ball down.

    This isn't the only damn call the referees gave Seattle. Beginning mid way through the 4th quarter they were hell bent on Seattle winning this football game.
    After blatant bad calls I frequently conclude there's no other explanation but fixing. But, why would they want Seattle not GB to win? Isn't GB usually favored in these things?
    And the other thing that stops me from believing it, is how far down does it go? How can coaches for instance, get so emotional on the sidelines when things don't go their way. They're NOT that good actors. But how could they not know about it.

  3. #203
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    light-years ahead
    Posts
    2,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlton View Post
    NO. Once again you are confusing control with completion. Every dropped ball isn't a fumble because it's incomplete which has nothing to do with control.
    What makes it "incomplete" is my point.

    A fumble is a fumble because the ball was controlled before the player lost possession.

    Sorry, you are confusing almost every event in this play.

    Clearly this pass was complete to either the offensive player or the defensive player as it never hit the ground. Control is the stipulation in the rule that if one player clearly possesses the ball first (which is a judgement call by the official)... aka they don't both catch the ball at the same time which we've seen many times. Jennings clearly pulls the ball to his chest and never lets it go.
    But Jennings' feet weren't down. LOL

    Tate sort of grabs it (though not really) on the way down.
    Tate grabs it with both feet landed while Jennings is still airborne.

    Watch the video!!!

    Even if you were correct I still don't think Tate even has what you could call "simultaneous control" at any point. He's wrapped around the guy who clearly is holding the football. Every former ref/player/rules official has agreed it was a pick. You don't think Jennings controlled that ball initially?
    At first I thought it was an INT. Jennings clearly had a firm grip the whole time, I never disputed that.

    You guys are only watching their hands.

    But their feet are what completes the catch for both players, and the timing of their feet combined with their grips on the ball is what determines the correct call.

  4. #204
    Quote Originally Posted by jetrider View Post
    What makes it "incomplete" is my point.

    A fumble is a fumble because the ball was controlled before the player lost possession.

    Sorry, you are confusing almost every event in this play.



    But Jennings' feet weren't down. LOL



    Tate grabs it with both feet landed while Jennings is still airborne.

    Watch the video!!!



    At first I thought it was an INT. Jennings clearly had a firm grip the whole time, I never disputed that.

    You guys are only watching their hands.

    But their feet are what completes the catch for both players, and the timing of their feet combined with their grips on the ball is what determines the correct call.
    A fumble has absolutely nothing to do with the word control in the stipulation of the rule. A fumble is a fumble because the rule states the player has to make a football move. We are talking about a specific usage of the word in the rule of simultaneous catch that states if one receiver controls it first then no simultaneous catch will be awarded. What do you think that means? That the guy has to catch it and get two feet down and make a football move and THEN if the other guy put his hands on it it wouldn't be a simultaneous catch? Do you think they would need a stipulation for something that ridiculously obvious? The stipulation is to say if one player grabs it first then simultaneous catch is out the window and the other man would have to wrench it away to get the catch. I can't explain it any more clearly than that. Let's just agree to disagree.

  5. #205
    Quote Originally Posted by NPTJET53 View Post
    I like the back and forth between everyone on this.. I wanna add a few more bits of info to sway your opinions.

    There are rules where the ball can cross the goal line, but your not in the end zone and that's a touchdown.

    There are rule where you can be in the end zone and catch a ball outside of the endzone (over the out of bounds line) and that's a touchdown.

    We've seen Calvin Johnson make a 1 handed catch and maintain possession while placing the ball on the ground in the act of completing a catch. and that was not a touch down.

    So now we have probably the worst judgement call possible, because the ball never touched the ground, and nobody was out of bounds, and you have rules written about dual possession that can be up for interpretation.

    The whole endzone rule book needs a reboot. Its not just these refs.
    The Calvin Johnson play was just awful...That play, while justified in the rules, was just terrible.

    That's what I've been saying about this play. While you may not like it - based on the rules, you could make a case it was the right call.

    btw. you could make a case it was an INT. too but the point is - by the rules this wasn't a terrible call. Just terrible rules.
    Last edited by fidelioion; 09-25-2012 at 04:00 PM.

  6. #206
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    light-years ahead
    Posts
    2,822
    Quote Originally Posted by SMC View Post
    Again, control is completely different than possession. You keep conflating the two, as evidenced by your fumble analogy. A player needs to have "possession" of the ball in order to fumble.
    No sh!t Sherlock.

    The rule doesn't say control.

    Control is a component of possession. Think of possession as the sum of certain parts: control + in bounds feet/revelant body part = possession. Control =/= possession because you need the extra component.

    For the simultaneous possession rule, the rule makes an exception for FIRST CONTROL.

    Again, this is the rule:

    Rule 8 - Section 3 - Article 1 - Item 5: Simultaneous Catch. 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. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
    Keywords = caught, catch

    Again, you need your feet down to complete a catch !!!!

  7. #207
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    The Big Apple, USA
    Posts
    22,857
    funny to watch the media acting as the PR representative for the regular part time incompetent officials that blow just as many or MORE calls than these guys.

    Walt Coleman -- the fumble reversal

    Ed Hochilli - the screwing of Denver

    Ron Winter - every single game he does


    JUST AS BAD IF NOT WORSE

  8. #208
    Quote Originally Posted by jetrider View Post
    No sh!t Sherlock.



    Keywords = caught, catch

    Again, you need your feet down to complete a catch !!!!
    It doesn't say anything about completing a catch! You're nitpicking verbs. It says if one player controls the ball first. Not "completes an NFL catch with 2 feet down." Think about it. If that were the rule... it would be painfully obvious that someone caught a ball and came down with 2 feet before the other guy put his hands on the ball. They would need no stipulation for that.

  9. #209
    Quote Originally Posted by sg3 View Post
    funny to watch the media acting as the PR representative for the regular part time incompetent officials that blow just as many or MORE calls than these guys.

    Walt Coleman -- the fumble reversal

    Ed Hochilli - the screwing of Denver

    Ron Winter - every single game he does


    JUST AS BAD IF NOT WORSE
    completely agree. The regular refs make awful calls and play obvious favorites.

    These guys happen to be under a bigger micro-scope, every mistake is being magnified.

  10. #210
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    The Big Apple, USA
    Posts
    22,857
    listening to Craig Cartoon pretending to know something about NFL officiating should be bad enough

    SERIOUSLY

    time to PATCO the regular part time incompetents, keep these guys around for this season and during that time HIRE full time professional NFL officials who will be NFL Officials 12 months a year and not just 1 day a week for 16-19 weeks

    the ONLY SOLUTION long term to FIX the officiating mess in the NFL

  11. #211
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    light-years ahead
    Posts
    2,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlton View Post
    A fumble has absolutely nothing to do with the word control in the stipulation of the rule. A fumble is a fumble because the rule states the player has to make a football move.
    A "football move" was added to complete the control. Otherwise, how do you define a drop from a fumble? You can't put a definitive amount of time to it, so they added the "football move" requirement to give it completion.

    Anyway, I only brought that up cos you were insinuating that Jennings' hands on the ball in mid air was enough to award him possession.

    We are talking about a specific usage of the word in the rule of simultaneous catch that states if one receiver controls it first then no simultaneous catch will be awarded. What do you think that means? That the guy has to catch it and get two feet down and make a football move and THEN if the other guy put his hands on it it wouldn't be a simultaneous catch? Do you think they would need a stipulation for something that ridiculously obvious? The stipulation is to say if one player grabs it first then simultaneous catch is out the window and the other man would have to wrench it away to get the catch. I can't explain it any more clearly than that. Let's just agree to disagree.
    And that's essentially what happened because, for the 1000th time, Tate got his feet down FIRST with BOTH HANDS ON THE BALL.

    If Jennings got his second foot down sooner and beat Tate's grip it would've been a sure INT.

  12. #212
    Quote Originally Posted by jetrider View Post
    A "football move" was added to complete the control. Otherwise, how do you define a drop from a fumble? You can't put a definitive amount of time to it, so they added the "football move" requirement to give it completion.

    Anyway, I only brought that up cos you were insinuating that Jennings' hands on the ball in mid air was enough to award him possession.

    ^^
    It doesn't award him possession. It awards him initial control! This is the crux of where we disagree.

    And that's essentially what happened because, for the 1000th time, Tate got his feet down FIRST with BOTH HANDS ON THE BALL.

    If Jennings got his second foot down sooner and beat Tate's grip it would've been a sure INT.
    Alright we disagree here. I see your point, but I don't think you're seeing mine. I can't go over it anymore. Go jets!!
    Last edited by Carlton; 09-25-2012 at 04:14 PM.

  13. #213
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    light-years ahead
    Posts
    2,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlton View Post
    It doesn't say anything about completing a catch! You're nitpicking verbs. It says if one player controls the ball first. Not "completes an NFL catch with 2 feet down." Think about it. If that were the rule... it would be painfully obvious that someone caught a ball and came down with 2 feet before the other guy put his hands on the ball. They would need no stipulation for that.
    Huh? They used the words "catch" and "caught" which I assume implies a completed "catch."

    Read what SMC quoted.

    It applies to cases where the catch is made simultaneously.

    You saying it's impossible for two guys to go up and come down with the ball simultaneously?

  14. #214
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    light-years ahead
    Posts
    2,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlton View Post
    Alright we disagree here. I see your point, but I don't think you're seeing mine. I can't go over it anymore. Go jets!!
    I agree that Jennings had initial control and better grip.

    The problem was he didn't land two feet with the ball before Tate did.

  15. #215
    Quote Originally Posted by jetrider View Post
    Huh? They used the words "catch" and "caught" which I assume implies a completed "catch."

    Read what SMC quoted.

    It applies to cases where the catch is made simultaneously.

    You saying it's impossible for two guys to go up and come down with the ball simultaneously?
    Rule 8 - Section 3 - Article 1 - Item 5: Simultaneous Catch. 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. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

    Catch is to grab something out of the air... it is not just used as a definition for a completed NFL catch. It I told you I caught the salt shaker that you threw me you wouldn't ask if I got both feet in bounds. The stipulation for controlling the ball first is a judgement call to who has control of the football first. Jennings clearly snatches it first. It says nothing about two feet down. That comes in to play to determine if the end result is a completion. Once again there would be no need for the first control stipulation for what you are saying. It would be painfully obvious if someone came down with two feet first then someone else went over and grabbed the ball. CLEARLY that is a catch for the person who came down with it. This is defining the difference between two guys literally grabbing it at the same time (which happens) and one guy grabbing it first which negates any simultaneous catch from then on. Regardless of all this Tate NEVER had possession which you can see him lose multiple times as he adjusts his grip. Either way it wasn't simultaneous. I'll let you have the last word. We just don't see eye to eye.

  16. #216
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    Quote Originally Posted by jetrider View Post
    A "football move" was added to complete the control. Otherwise, how do you define a drop from a fumble? You can't put a definitive amount of time to it, so they added the "football move" requirement to give it completion.

    Anyway, I only brought that up cos you were insinuating that Jennings' hands on the ball in mid air was enough to award him possession.

    And that's essentially what happened because, for the 1000th time, Tate got his feet down FIRST with BOTH HANDS ON THE BALL.

    If Jennings got his second foot down sooner and beat Tate's grip it would've been a sure INT.
    Jennings' hands on the ball in mid air was enough to award him CONTROL. After he has control, then he needs to maintain control with 2 feet down/relevant body part in order to have POSSESSION.

    According to the rule, Tate cannot have possession of the ball once Jennings had first control UNLESS Jennings lost control of the ball which he never did.

    Thus, your claim that Tate had possession because his feet hit first is irrelevant. Tate did not have FIRST CONTROL.

    Again, we'll just disagree here because we are talking about different things.

  17. #217
    Fck all the bullsh!t. Watch the play. It's an interception. I don't need screen shots and highlighted circles to tell me what I saw live over and over.

    CB catches the ball, brings the ball against his chest, goes to the ground and never relinquishes control. It's an interception. Move along. Not changing it now.

  18. #218
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    nyc
    Posts
    11,699
    Quote Originally Posted by southside View Post
    Fck all the bullsh!t. Watch the play. It's an interception. I don't need screen shots and highlighted circles to tell me what I saw live over and over.

    CB catches the ball, brings the ball against his chest, goes to the ground and never relinquishes control. It's an interception. Move along. Not changing it now.

  19. #219
    All League
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    2,842
    Quote Originally Posted by SMC View Post
    Jennings' hands on the ball in mid air was enough to award him CONTROL. After he has control, then he needs to maintain control with 2 feet down/relevant body part in order to have POSSESSION.

    According to the rule, Tate cannot have possession of the ball once Jennings had first control UNLESS Jennings lost control of the ball which he never did.

    Thus, your claim that Tate had possession because his feet hit first is irrelevant. Tate did not have FIRST CONTROL.

    Again, we'll just disagree here because we are talking about different things.
    100% dead on

  20. #220
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    light-years ahead
    Posts
    2,822
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlton View Post
    Rule 8 - Section 3 - Article 1 - Item 5: Simultaneous Catch. 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. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

    Catch is to grab something out of the air... it is not just used as a definition for a completed NFL catch. It I told you I caught the salt shaker that you threw me you wouldn't ask if I got both feet in bounds. The stipulation for controlling the ball first is a judgement call to who has control of the football first. Jennings clearly snatches it first. It says nothing about two feet down. That comes in to play to determine if the end result is a completion. Once again there would be no need for the first control stipulation for what you are saying. It would be painfully obvious if someone came down with two feet first then someone else went over and grabbed the ball. CLEARLY that is a catch for the person who came down with it.
    Agreed. And it just so happens that the second guy to grab it came down with it first!

    Regardless of all this Tate NEVER had possession which you can see him lose multiple times as he adjusts his grip. Either way it wasn't simultaneous. I'll let you have the last word. We just don't see eye to eye.
    Nope. When Tate got both hands on it there was no more juggling till after the play was dead.

    Maybe we don't see eye to eye because you didn't watch the video 50 times frame-by-frame like I did.

    The multi-angle video that was up earlier this morning is now replaced with other junk. But now Eric Davis is saying the same thing I been saying ...

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

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us