Packer fan thoughts

[mkarnold1]

The NFL rulebook clearly states in Article 3, section 5
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.

[LostAbbott]

Originally Posted by mkarnold1

The NFL rulebook clearly states in Article 3, section 5
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.

Yes, it is clear that the announcers were biases against the Seahawks. With that said I know the fairly call opi on the last play of the game but Tates push off was blatant and completely unnessary.
Posted via Mobile Device

[dwoodward]

Originally Posted by mkarnold1

The NFL rulebook clearly states in Article 3, section 5
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.

You need to read further into the playbook. It also states that if one party has the ball before the other party then the ball belongs to the original party.

They have been showing the replay non stop for the last hour, it's blatantly obvious that Jennings had the ball first. So according to the rule book, it's an interception.

It is what it is now. But I hope and pray for the sake of the NFL that the ref strike ends. These back up refs are horrible, not just that call, but a lot of call thru the game. The integrity of the entire league is at stake when these kind of things happen.

[TJarv]

Originally Posted by dwoodward

You need to read further into the playbook. It also states that if one party has the ball before the other party then the ball belongs to the original party.

They have been showing the replay non stop for the last hour, it's blatantly obvious that Jennings had the ball first. So according to the rule book, it's an interception.

It is what it is now. But I hope and pray for the sake of the NFL that the ref strike ends. These back up refs are horrible, not just that call, but a lot of call thru the game. The integrity of the entire league is at stake when these kind of things happen.

X2

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by mkarnold1

The NFL rulebook clearly states in Article 3, section 5
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.

Except it wasn't caught simultaneously. And that speaks nothing of the blatant OPI where Tate shoves Shields to the ground right before he jumps for the ball.

Russell Wilson; first player in NFL history to throw a game-winning interception.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by mkarnold1

The NFL rulebook clearly states in Article 3, section 5
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.

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.

[dwoodward]

Originally Posted by Stephen

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.

Thank you Stephen, that's pretty much the rule I was referring too. I hate it when people cut out parts of rules to try to make their point. Shame on you mkarnold1... that's all I can say.

[icehog3]

Originally Posted by dwoodward

Thank you Stephen, that's pretty much the rule I was referring too. I hate it when people cut out parts of rules to try to make their point. Shame on you mkarnold1... that's all I can say.

Yeah, no milk and cookies for you.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by icehog3

Yeah, no milk and cookies for you.

Wait...You guys hand out milk and cookies?

[pnoon]

Originally Posted by Stephen

Wait...You guys hand out milk and cookies?

Only to the children.

[mkarnold1]

Originally Posted by dwoodward

Thank you Stephen, that's pretty much the rule I was referring too. I hate it when people cut out parts of rules to try to make their point. Shame on you mkarnold1... that's all I can say.

I was just trying to get a rise out of the packers fans out there. And I did. It is really easy to pick it apart after seeing the play in slow motion and make a big stink about it. The refs on the field do not have that luxury. At regular speed it looked very much like a simultaneous catch, the ref made the call he thought was right based on the information he had at the time and in accordance with the rule as he understood. The reason I did not put the second part of that rule in there, although I did read it, is that the referee on the field was calling the play a simultaneous catch and thus, a TD for the seahawks and at that point in time the next part of the rule is superfluous. After the TD call was made, it is very difficult to overturn because you cannot overturn possession based on instant replay. You know what I hate? When people say "shame on you".

[King James]

Originally Posted by mkarnold1

I was just trying to get a rise out of the packers fans out there. And I did. It is really easy to pick it apart after seeing the play in slow motion and make a big stink about it. The refs on the field do not have that luxury. At regular speed it looked very much like a simultaneous catch, the ref made the call he thought was right based on the information he had at the time and in accordance with the rule as he understood. The reason I did not put the second part of that rule in there, although I did read it, is that the referee on the field was calling the play a simultaneous catch and thus, a TD for the seahawks and at that point in time the next part of the rule is superfluous. After the TD call was made, it is very difficult to overturn because you cannot overturn possession based on instant replay. You know what I hate? When people say "shame on you".

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...s-debacle-too/

[mkarnold1]

Originally Posted by King James

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...s-debacle-too/

Thanks for posting this article, it makes my point for me. Although Mike Florio makes the completely wrong statement "Make no mistake about it. This one could have been overturned. Rule 15, Section 9 makes the question of whether a pass was “ruled complete/incomplete/intercepted” subject to replay review, with no exception for questions of simultaneous possession."

The fact that no mention is given for simultaneous possession means that it cannot be reviewed, not that it can be. The question of possession is not one that can be reviewed, specifically because it is not on this list of situations that CAN be reviewed.

[King James]

Originally Posted by mkarnold1

Thanks for posting this article, it makes my point for me. Although Mike Florio makes the completely wrong statement "Make no mistake about it. This one could have been overturned. Rule 15, Section 9 makes the question of whether a pass was “ruled complete/incomplete/intercepted” subject to replay review, with no exception for questions of simultaneous possession."

The fact that no mention is given for simultaneous possession means that it cannot be reviewed, not that it can be. The question of possession is not one that can be reviewed, specifically because it is not on this list of situations that CAN be reviewed.

Per the NFL statement today:

In the end zone, a ruling of a simultaneous catch is reviewable. That is not the case in the field of play, only in the end zone.