cvanvol Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Until possession is established (that "football action" they always talk about) it is like the ball is still in the air. You might be right. This is exactly right, the player cannot establish possession in the air. Jennings most definantly touches the ball first with both hands, while in the air tate wraps it up as well to the point that they hit the ground and they both have possession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 That was a touchdown. YOu have to come down with the ball to have possession, even though jennings touched the ball first they both came down with it in their arms. Tate had possession as well, it is a touchdown. They made the right call, is it controversial sure but I bet the real refs make the same call. Every announcer, on multiple broadcasts to chime in, every poster, the official asked on the original broadcast, and all the professional tweets I've seen disagree about your interpretation. Maybe just the mob going crazy here but it really looked like a pick, after an ugly OPI to boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 no he did not, he had both hands on the ball before either player touched the ground. YOu can not have possession until you touch the ground therefore they both had possession of the ball I dont think that happened at all. Jennings had 80-90% of the ball and clear possession when they hit the ground. Tate barely had his hands on the ball until well after they both were down. That is not dual possession, that is INT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heels20X6 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 You're providing good food for thought. This isn't as black and white an INT as most think. So by that logic, all a receiver has to do is stick his hands into an intercepted ball while the DB is in the air and it's an INT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 I dont think that happened at all. Jennings had 80-90% of the ball and clear possession when they hit the ground. Tate barely had his hands on the ball until well after they both were down. That is not dual possession, that is INT. There was a moment in there when Tate had just as much control over it as Jennings. I would think if that coincides with calling it down there's a good case for dual possession and a TD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cvanvol Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Every announcer, on multiple broadcasts to chime in, every poster, the official asked on the original broadcast, and all the professional tweets I've seen disagree about your interpretation. Maybe just the mob going crazy here but it really looked like a pick, after an ugly OPI to boot. It did look like a pick to me as well, but someone here said in the rules it should be a pick when that is not true. In the rules it is a touchdown. a person cannot have "more" possession, you either have it or you dont. In this case I think they both had possession, jennings for sure caught the ball first but by the time they hit the ground tate had it as well. They both have possession so it is a touchdown. IF you dont think tate had it you are crazy, by the end of the scrum he was the one with the ball and he had the ball so tight once they hit the ground jennings couldnts roll away which is what he tried to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 I dont think that happened at all. Jennings had 80-90% of the ball and clear possession when they hit the ground. Tate barely had his hands on the ball until well after they both were down. That is not dual possession, that is INT. Agreed - Tate touching the ball is not Tate possessing the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilsner Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 simultaneous possession goes to the offense Tommy Jackson is going ballistic right now This is true under the rules but in that last pass it wasn't simultaneous possession. It's really a moot point though because the WR committed offensive PI. For some reason it wasn't called even after review. Kinda odd huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Adams Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Where? Do you have video? I'd like to see how comparable they were 2010: 2011: Kansas City vs. Chicago Remember, we're talking about the effectiveness of batting balls down, as football players are taught. My point was that it's not always a "gimme." Either of those could EASILY have been intercepted. BA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 25, 2012 Author Share Posted September 25, 2012 This is exactly right, the player cannot establish possession in the air. Jennings most definantly touches the ball first with both hands, while in the air tate wraps it up as well to the point that they hit the ground and they both have possession. Totally disagree. The ball was possessed 90% by the defender, 10% by Tate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 This is true under the rules but in that last pass it wasn't simultaneous possession. It's really a moot point though because the WR committed offensive PI. For some reason it wasn't called even after review. Kinda odd huh? You cant call a penalty after a review like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cvanvol Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Totally disagree. The ball was possessed 90% by the defender, 10% by Tate. There is no percentage it is either yes or no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 This is true under the rules but in that last pass it wasn't simultaneous possession. It's really a moot point though because the WR committed offensive PI. For some reason it wasn't called even after review. Kinda odd huh? No. Uncalled penalties are unreviewable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cvanvol Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 This is true under the rules but in that last pass it wasn't simultaneous possession. It's really a moot point though because the WR committed offensive PI. For some reason it wasn't called even after review. Kinda odd huh? watch it again the other two green bay defenders knock the other seattle receiver out of the play as well, in this instance you let it play Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilsner Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 You cant call a penalty after a review like that. If this is the case that's unfortunate for GB. Refs shoulda caught it in the first place. But if first string refs can't catch everything then 3rd tier prolly will catch less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 No. Uncalled penalties are unreviewable. I thought that the whole play becomes reviewable? Man, Tate just pushed that guy right to the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Anyone remember that game a few years back where Ed Hochuli blew a call that cost The Chargers a game to Denver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Adams Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 Totally disagree. The ball was possessed 90% by the defender, 10% by Tate. I think Tate possessed the defender's arm. Does that count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 at least mike mccarthy didnt go after the ref... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 2010: 2011: Kansas City vs. Chicago Remember, we're talking about the effectiveness of batting balls down, as football players are taught. My point was that it's not always a "gimme." Either of those could EASILY have been intercepted. BA First was just a bad play by the defender. Down means down not forward right at the offense. The 2nd was more comparable. Neither strategy ... go for pick or knock it away is fool proof ... its all about playing the odds. And for me it seems a lot simpler to break a play up than go for an INT. I'm sure there are plenty of examples of a defender going for an INT and losing the battle with a WR too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts