Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Mnf: Seattle Vs Greenbay


BrownIndian

Recommended Posts

It was just a matter of time until "The Replacements" cost a high profile team like the Packers a game on National TV. We'll still get the scrubs against the Ravens, (I doubt it will matter) but the outcry around the league & (from inside) is deafening about this one.

 

Not only was it not a "simultaneous catch", there was clear offensive pass interference that didn't get called.

 

You can blame Goodell, but he's just a puppet of the owners. I'd imagine he'll be getting more than a few courtesy calls from his bosses (if he hasn't already) to get this BS lockout over with pronto. "Hey, my team might get screwed out of a win too."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK - I'm ready to take a bashing. I saw the play on TV (live) and (playing referee)I initially called it a touchdown. I then saw the replay (many times) and I still call it a touchdown. I don't like either team and here's my perspective:

 

The rule of a catch or interception is possession and control with two feet on the ground (or one knee or a hip...). The play looks like an interception while both players are in the air, but they both end up with their hands on the ball as they hit the ground. While on the ground, the ball is on top of the reciever's belly while he's on his back and both players still have their hands on the ball. The defender even tries to roll to his side, trying to pull the ball away but he can't because both have a strong grasp of the football.

 

Simultaneous possession. That's the right call. Touchdown!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK - I'm ready to take a bashing. I saw the play on TV (live) and (playing referee)I initially called it a touchdown. I then saw the replay (many times) and I still call it a touchdown. I don't like either team and here's my perspective:

 

The rule of a catch or interception is possession and control with two feet on the ground (or one knee or a hip...). The play looks like an interception while both players are in the air, but they both end up with their hands on the ball as they hit the ground. While on the ground, the ball is on top of the reciever's belly while he's on his back and both players still have their hands on the ball. The defender even tries to roll to his side, trying to pull the ball away but he can't because both have a strong grasp of the football.

 

Simultaneous possession. That's the right call. Touchdown!

 

That's also the "official" spew coming from the league office. I'm still not buying it. And they did say the Refs missed the blatant offensive interference- (non reviewable, and can't be called from the booth) which should have ended the game even if it was a TD. Sorry Packers- you just got royally screwed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It WAS a touchdown. I promise you it was.

 

Why, because the people in power looked at it, and to the best of their judgement, they called it a touchdown.

 

Who are any of you to read the minds of officials who weren't at the game? How do you know that Ed Hocule (sp) would not have seen this the same way?

 

Was it a tie in the air? According to the rules, it doesn't matter who has posession in the air. YOu have to maintain a possession all teh way through to landing on the ground. The reciever snuggled in and somehow, caught a refs eyes at teh exact time he was making his decision, at that point in time, it looked like a tie to him.

 

From the TV replay? YOu can't really see the ratio of reciever to defender as they first hit the turf. You really can't.

 

Personally, I like th replacement refs and hope they remain intact all year. As the ratings are shwoing, more people are tuning in to see this shit. It is EXCITING............ INTERESTING.............. it adds some spice to the game............. What will happen next..............

 

Look man, it doens't matter who teh refs are, if these guys blow or if they are good, they are going to make mistakes across the board, equally over teh long haul of a season.

 

Hey, if the packers were so fucking good they would have put the game away with TOUCHDOWNS. Frankly, I enjoyed seeing them lose that way. They played Kosar ball and settled for field goals. It isn't anyone's fault but their own that Seattle was within a TD to win.

 

People are making WAYYYYYY to much of this bullshit.

 

WHo cares who teh refs are? As long as they fuck up for both teams, and in this game? They fucked up in ways that helped Green Bay score earlier.

 

Seriously man, it is good for the soul to be brought down to earth once in awhile.

 

Bravo replacement refs.

 

 

LMAO if that was Browns VS Hawks and the same thing happened I am sure you would argue the same way. :rolleyes:

 

BTW jennings has both feet and both hands on the ball before Tate does. Just sayin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the bottom line on this situation is this:

 

The ref on the field made a judgment call that it was a TD.

 

The "further review" official, in his judgment felt that he did not see sufficient visual evidence to overturn the judgment of the field official.

 

The NFL then did not feel that their was sufficient evidence to question either the field or the review official's judgment.

 

So that is the way things conclude.

 

It is like the OJ Simpson jury verdict. In the eyes of that jury they did not see sufficient evidence to convict OJ. The judge did not feel that he could overturn the jury's verdict, thus it stands.....even though to almost everyone else's view they thought OJ did it.

That "judgment" that he was not guilty nevertheless stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's also the "official" spew coming from the league office. I'm still not buying it. And they did say the Refs missed the blatant offensive interference- (non reviewable, and can't be called from the booth) which should have ended the game even if it was a TD. Sorry Packers- you just got royally screwed.

 

I agree with your interference comment, but how many times do the real refs miss those on a play like that. It's a Hail Mary pass, everyone is colliding like a rugby scrum in one area and the attention is on what happens to the ball. Easy to miss contact like that - even if it's an obvious and flagrant penalty. But exluding the lack of an interference call, the actual play, IMO, resulted in a Touchdown and a correct call by the refs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMAO if that was Browns VS Hawks and the same thing happened I am sure you would argue the same way. :rolleyes:

 

BTW jennings has both feet and both hands on the ball before Tate does. Just sayin

 

Tate has his hand on the ball at the exact same time as Jennings does. Sure Jennings gets two hands on it right away, but that has nothing to do with it. Again, if Jennings really had more oontrol, why was he unable to rip the ball away from Tate as they hit the ground. Should he have had an interception? Yes! But based on what happened, did he have an interception? No! I rule it as simulatneous and therefore, Touchdown! Perhaps another angle would show something different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tate has his hand on the ball at the exact same time as Jennings does. Sure Jennings gets two hands on it right away, but that has nothing to do with it. Again, if Jennings really had more oontrol, why was he unable to rip the ball away from Tate as they hit the ground. Should he have had an interception? Yes! But based on what happened, did he have an interception? No! I rule it as simulatneous and therefore, Touchdown! Perhaps another angle would show something different.

 

BS Frenchie. It was chested THEN Tate had 2 hands on it. Do you even watch football?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tate has his hand on the ball at the exact same time as Jennings does. Sure Jennings gets two hands on it right away, but that has nothing to do with it. Again, if Jennings really had more oontrol, why was he unable to rip the ball away from Tate as they hit the ground. Should he have had an interception? Yes! But based on what happened, did he have an interception? No! I rule it as simulatneous and therefore, Touchdown! Perhaps another angle would show something different.

 

 

There is a clear angle that they've shown thousands of times. Tate's right arm comes out away from where the ball is as they are falling. Once they hit the ground, he shoves his hand back in to try and get the ball away. He cant have simultaneous posesion when one hand isn't even on the ball and the defensive player has the ball with two hands against his chest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...