These refs have got to go
#31
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:03 PM
#32
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:05 PM
#33
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:05 PM
#34
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:06 PM
If both players have their hands on the ball, regardless of who has "more" of a possession, doesn't the ball automatically go to the receiver? I thought that was the rule so that there would never be any doubt or a judgement call on this. Am I making this stuff up? I'm pretty sure I read this somewhere.
Yes and no. That applies to simultaneous possession. There was nothing simultaneous about that. The defender intercepted it, then Tate reached in and put two hands on the ball.
Green Bay got fugged big time.
#35
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:08 PM
Yes and no. That applies to simultaneous possession. There was nothing simultaneous about that. The defender intercepted it, then Tate reached in and put two hands on the ball.
Green Bay got fugged big time.
I thought you couldn't get possession of the ball in the air. If you catch the ball in the air but you can't bring it to the ground, it's never called a catch then fumble. It's an incomplete pass. That's the way it's always been. Tate reached in while the defender was still in the air. I don't see why that wouldn't be considered simultaneous.
#36
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:09 PM
#37
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:10 PM
#38
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:10 PM
Man, the Packers should have made a statement. They shouldn't have come back for the extra point. These coaches have been complaining non-stop, yet when you have a chance to make a bold statement, you don't do it? Having the Seahawks kick an extra point without the Packers on the field, would have been the lasting image of these replacement refs. The Packers missed there chance there.
wouldn't the Packers get disqualified for that?
#39
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:11 PM
#40
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:11 PM
Man, the Packers should have made a statement. They shouldn't have come back for the extra point. These coaches have been complaining non-stop, yet when you have a chance to make a bold statement, you don't do it? Having the Seahawks kick an extra point without the Packers on the field, would have been the lasting image of these replacement refs. The Packers missed there chance there.
I agree.
#41
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:14 PM
#42
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:16 PM
wouldn't the Packers get disqualified for that?
What do you mean by disqualified?
#43
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:17 PM
#44
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:17 PM
That game was GREAT! No crying, very entertaining, great finish!
#45
Posted 24 September 2012 - 11:17 PM
I thought you couldn't get possession of the ball in the air. If you catch the ball in the air but you can't bring it to the ground, it's never called a catch then fumble. It's an incomplete pass. That's the way it's always been. Tate reached in while the defender was still in the air. I don't see why that wouldn't be considered simultaneous.
A catch is not completed until the player is down and maintains possession. That is true. And yes, the rule is the tie on simultaneous possession goes to the receiver. But in this case there was no tie. The defender had the ball intercepted and kept possession all the way to the ground. He had both his hands on it. Only after it was intercepted did Tate reach in and also get his two hands on the remaining parts of the ball.
At least, that is how I would have ruled in my unprofessional capacity.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users





