97 replies to this topic

[Brandon]

[devilsfan26]

I'm confused about this. According to the rules...

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
© 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.).

It looks to me like Jennings clearly had the ball in his hands when they were in the air, but it's not a catch as defined by the rules until he hits the ground and maintains control. By the time he hits the ground, Tate is also holding the ball. Now the rules also say

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.

Clearly they didn't grab the ball out of the air simultaneously, but Jennings didn't actually make the catch (as defined by the rules) until he hits the ground, at which point both of them appear to have control of the ball. So at what point does a player "gain control" of the ball? Is it when he has the ball in his hands but has not yet hit the ground, or is it when the catch is completed (has the ball in his hands and has touched the ground)? Seems to me like they need to more clearly state what they mean by "gaining control."

If he doesn't "gain control" until he has the ball in his hands AND touches the ground, then I think it counts as a simultaneous catch and they actually got the call right. If "gaining control" doesn't mean he has to actually touch the ground to complete the catch, then Jennings had the ball and it's an interception and they got the call wrong.

[Devils Dose]

I'm confused about this.

So at what point does a player "gain control" of the ball? Is it when he has the ball in his hands but has not yet hit the ground, or is it when the catch is completed (has the ball in his hands and has touched the ground)? Seems to me like they need to more clearly state what they mean by "gaining control."

If he doesn't "gain control" until he has the ball in his hands AND touches the ground, then I think it counts as a simultaneous catch and they actually got the call right. If "gaining control" doesn't mean he has to actually touch the ground to complete the catch, then Jennings had the ball and it's an interception and they got the call wrong.

This I am very familiar with from officiating high school football. We use these terms like "gains control" and "grasps the ball" where a normal person would say "catches the ball" because the word "catch" needs to be reserved for complete act. So the answer to your question is that the "gaining control" refers exclusively to the grasping of the ball.

For example, if a player jumps, pins the ball firmly against his chest with one hand, and lands with both feet inbounds and begins to run, then he "gained control" the moment that he held the ball firmly, even though he was airborne at that moment.

Imagine now a player jumps, grabs the ball firmly with both hands, lands on his back (inbounds) and the ball slips out onto his chest. If he subsequently regains a firm grip on the ball (without it touching the ground), then that becomes the moment that he "gained control" of the football.

Hope that illustrates that point.

[CRASHER]

This is the official rule on receptions in the NFL:

"If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."

They made the RIGHT CALL....stop crying about replacement refs and get more angry on the asinine rule of "what is a catch" in the NFL and what isn't......and did Tate push off?? Sure....you tell me a time EVER offensive PI is called on a hail mary....the answer will be NEVER....

this all stems from the Calvin Johnson "no TD catch" in a season opener vs Chicago.....

the NFL needs to work on simplifying their goddamn rules instead of the weasel lawyers making them worse....

and yes Goodell is the biggest douche in sports, but can we PLEASE fault the real refs as well for not negotiating or wanting to be FULL-TIME officials as they should and NEED be....

"the real refs" would have made the same call

[NJDevs4978]

That rule had 'nothing' to do with last night. The real rule in question was posted above:

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.

There's no way the corner did not have control of the ball at any point when he was going up for it or after he came down. It was only later after his feet hit the ground that Tate got both hands on it and gained partial control. Not only that but one ref on the spot signaled TD, the other ref was waving it off and the head judge didn't even bother to consult either ref before going with the TD ruling. After they spend ten minutes conferencing on holding calls earlier in the game! If anything that's the real travesty on the play, the fact it wasn't properly discussed on the field. But you and 100,000 people in Seattle, Washington are the only ones who think the refs got it right last night when everyone else in America from former and current players/coaches/analysts/etc says otherwise.

I don't understand how you can be okay with refs who were FIRED BY THE LINGERIE LEAGUE FOR INCOMPETENCE deciding professional games. Not to mention security guards spend more time patting you down before going into the Prudential Center than the NFL did in vetting these refs in the first place.

Even if they wind up breaking the ref union it's not like 'these' are the guys who will be doing games when the dust settles anyway, they're not the best non-pro refs out there, the best non-pro refs are still in college because the guys who should be next in line aren't going to be doing these games because they don't want to be blacklisted when the lockout ends.

Edited by NJDevs4978, 25 September 2012 - 03:33 PM.

[CRASHER]

It DOESN'T MATTER if/when he has control UNTIL HIS FEET HIT THE GROUND (and BOTH feet)...by the time both feet do, Tate's got his hands in there....see now THAT is how you play a football game till the VERY end....not some bucktooth bully move during a kneel down....Tate fought, he did NOT give up on the play....and honestly he deserves a TON more credit then he's getting because everyone has a vendetta against the other refs...when the "real" refs screw up as much....and not to mention how USELESS this idiot supervisor in each stadium has been who's supposed to be the plan B

Like I said, the real issue is the definition of the term "reception" in the NFL .....

[NJDevs4978]

The real refs do 'not' screw up this much, stop perpetuating this fallacy. Instead of there being a few bad calls a week that get talked about normally, now there are a dozen bad calls and common procedural errors every game. Errors on stuff we should be taking for granted in a professional game of the 'best sports league in America', like marking off a 40-yard penalty on a personal foul in Detroit-Tennessee or using a kicking ball for a two-point conversion last night in addition to all their other errors. Not to mention players and coaches are getting more out of control by the week due to frustration and taking advantage of seventh-rate refs (not even second or third-rate).

Edited by NJDevs4978, 25 September 2012 - 03:54 PM.

[MantaRay]

The real refs do 'not' screw up this much, stop perpetuating this fallacy.

Verily, my brother.

[CRASHER]

The real refs do 'not' screw up this much, stop perpetuating this fallacy. Instead of there being a few bad calls a week that get talked about normally, now there are a dozen bad calls and common procedural errors every game. Errors on stuff we should be taking for granted in a professional game of the 'best sports league in America', like marking off a 40-yard penalty on a personal foul in Detroit-Tennessee or using a kicking ball for a two-point conversion last night in addition to all their other errors. Not to mention players and coaches are getting more out of control by the week due to frustration and taking advantage of seventh-rate refs (not even second or third-rate).

And this is why Belicheck MUST be suspended next week.....the inmates are being allowed to run the asylum and the league's allowed it....fines are cute, but they don't put the fear of anyone.....and again, where's the hate for the IN-STADIUM SUPERVISORS who should be calling down and saying HEY FIX THAT!!!! I've screamed about bad calls every Sunday from long before this year started....but like I said before it's more the RULES that are idiotic anyway...losing this season in mistakes and learning curve is FAR worth getting full-time officials who this is THEIR WAY OF LIFE as opposed to people making six figures during the week doing this as some over-priced hobby....I'll gladly deal with that!

[nmigliore]

The replacements refs are a joke; you'd have to be living under a rock to actually defend them. Read some of the stuff that has gone in other games; it's ridiculous.

The real refs aren't perfect but to pretend as if they are on an equal or near-equal basis is asinine.

Edited by nmigliore, 25 September 2012 - 04:02 PM.

[NJDevs4978]

And as far as whether the league or refs should 'win', I hardly care. Let them keep their pension and increase their pay in exchange for making them full-time and adding more refs. If you can't reach a compromise, agree to binding arbitration for crying out loud. I find it impossible to believe that a $10 billion league can't reach an EQUITABLE agreement and have the 'best' officials (whatever you want to say about it, there's no disputing this) ref games instead of guys who don't belong on the field and for all we know are more worried about their fantasy teams than getting the call right. Hell, they're collecting enough fine money to pay the refs just with that

Edited by NJDevs4978, 25 September 2012 - 04:20 PM.

[devilsfan26]

This I am very familiar with from officiating high school football. We use these terms like "gains control" and "grasps the ball" where a normal person would say "catches the ball" because the word "catch" needs to be reserved for complete act. So the answer to your question is that the "gaining control" refers exclusively to the grasping of the ball.

For example, if a player jumps, pins the ball firmly against his chest with one hand, and lands with both feet inbounds and begins to run, then he "gained control" the moment that he held the ball firmly, even though he was airborne at that moment.

Imagine now a player jumps, grabs the ball firmly with both hands, lands on his back (inbounds) and the ball slips out onto his chest. If he subsequently regains a firm grip on the ball (without it touching the ground), then that becomes the moment that he "gained control" of the football.

Hope that illustrates that point.

Awesome, thanks for clearing that up. So then according to this, CRASHER is wrong when he says it doesn't matter when he has control of the ball until his feet hit the ground. I thought he was right about that but your explanation shoots that down, and I feel like if that were the case, the NFL would have said so in today's statement.

[CRASHER]

People have a short-term goddamn memory

THIS is my evidence on what I mean:

http://www.aolnews.c...roversial-call/

[nmigliore]

Former official and officiating supervisor Jim Daopoulos came to the same conclusion that the play was not simultaneous possession:

"But look at the play,'' said Daopoulos. "Simultaneous possession is two men catching the ball at the same time. Tate sticking his [left] hand in there is not enough for simultaneous possession.''

I didn't listen to him very long but I also remember Mike Francesa quoting some former official or officiating supervisor today saying that the pass interference would never be called anyway (which is fair, even if kind of ridiculous in general) but that the play was absolutely not simultaneous possession.

Edit: Best 'Call Me Maybe' parody yet!

Edited by nmigliore, 25 September 2012 - 06:01 PM.

[MantaRay]

Whatever the real refs are asking for, the NFL owners should "double it" for what they have wrought on the fans.

[devilsfan26]

People have a short-term goddamn memory

THIS is my evidence on what I mean:

http://www.aolnews.c...roversial-call/

But the issue isn't when the catch is completed, it's whether or not it was a simultaneous catch, and you can clearly see Jennings is holding the ball before Tate is.

[Devils Dose]

People have a short-term goddamn memory

THIS is my evidence on what I mean:

http://www.aolnews.c...roversial-call/

Haven't you noticed that not a single person with any officiating expertise has said anything other than, "That call was butchered"? Even the NFL didn't say, "That was the right call." They only said that replay should not have overturned it. Those are not the same thing.

[CRASHER]

But the issue isn't when the catch is completed, it's whether or not it was a simultaneous catch, and you can clearly see Jennings is holding the ball before Tate is.

It IS the issue...it's not a "catch" until BOTH feet are on the ground, by time the Jennings has BOTH feet on the ground, Tate has his hands all over the ball, like I keep saying, everyone whining about it is missing the point

[nmigliore]

It IS the issue...it's not a "catch" until BOTH feet are on the ground, by time the Jennings has BOTH feet on the ground, Tate has his hands all over the ball, like I keep saying, everyone whining about it is missing the point

I guess the entire country and former officials/officiating supervisors who have spoken out on the topic are clueless, then.....

[devilsfan26]

It IS the issue...it's not a "catch" until BOTH feet are on the ground, by time the Jennings has BOTH feet on the ground, Tate has his hands all over the ball, like I keep saying, everyone whining about it is missing the point

That's what I was thinking too, but Devils Dose, who is or was a football ref, says for it to be a simultaneous catch, his feet don't need to be on the ground.

There is no point in which Jennings does not have control of the football, so the only way for it to be a touchdown is if you say it's a simultaneous catch and the tie goes to the passing team. For it to be a simultaneous catch though, both players need to grab the ball out of the air at the same time, it's not about touching the ground to make it a completed catch. Jennings grabs the ball in the air, he becomes the one in control of it, now the only way Tate can make it a touchdown is if he rips the ball out of his hands before Jennings hits the ground. He doesn't do that, he gets his hands in there but Jennings is still holding onto the ball too, and since Jennings was holding the ball first, once he lands on the ground it's an interception.