salsadancer7 said:I wonder how Seahawks fans feels ..
Broncos' Mays suspended a games for his hit on Schaub. Appealing. He's apologized repeatedly.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
I wonder how Seahawks fans feels ..
I'm a Seahawks fan (one of my favorite teams). I felt like it was a hard hitting and rather good game but it was marred by that call and I would rather have taken a hard fought loss with dignity than this joke. Not really a Packers fan anymore but that game was literally stolen. That said, I can't agree with ESPN that this was the game that was finally given away. While it was given away, they are stupid if they don't consider what happened in that Pats - Ravens game. I guess a W is a W but an asterisk will remain next to them like it or not.
Asked by Lindsay Rhodes if Seahawks wide receiver Golden Tate really caught that ball, Carroll provided a response that could melt Cheesehead Nation.
"Yeah, and I think it's cool that the league thought that, too," he said. "It's very questionable, it's a very questionable call to make. But it's simultaneous when they hit the ground. "
Gee, anything happen last night during the Monday night game?
After seeing the play, here's my conclusion. I know I'll get ripped for saying it but when I watch the play, I can tell Jennings catches the ball but you dont know if Golden Tate wrestles the ball away from Jennings. The camera shows Jennings' back is toward the camera. BUT with that being said I have a link that explains the play better. I had thought it was a simultaneous catch but if you see and read the link thats not it. Jennings had possession first so it would be an INT.
I do have a question, what if while Jennings was up in the air grabbing the ball, as hes coming down what if gets it wrestled away by Tate? Would it be a touchdown?
Heres the link anyway: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-seahawks-packers-call-was-wrong-2012-9
I think the big difference on the game ending call is that the real officials would have conferred first before signaling anything. I'm a HS football official, and that's what we're trained to do when two or more of us have a different angle on a call. It doesn't take a long time to ask "What do you have?", and if different, talk it over. The guys in Seattle didn't do that.and to think we used to complain about the regular refs. they're not perfect but better. let me add that this call could've been screwed up by the pro refs as well. its not a common thing to see.
I think the big difference on the game ending call is that the real officials would have conferred first before signaling anything. I'm a HS football official, and that's what we're trained to do when two or more of us have a different angle on a call. It doesn't take a long time to ask "What do you have?", and if different, talk it over. The guys in Seattle didn't do that.
i agree. what i don't understand (maybe i'm missing something) is why the replay official who is not a replacement didn't catch it either?
cosmo_kramer said:From what I understand, the possession issue is not reviewable. Scores are reviewed for things like the ball crossing the goal line, receiver's feet in, did the ball hit the ground, etc. Possession is deemed a judgement call....
From what I understand, the possession issue is not reviewable. Scores are reviewed for things like the ball crossing the goal line, receiver's feet in, did the ball hit the ground, etc. Possession is deemed a judgement call....
Here's another view once Jennings is on the ground
Looks to me Tate was tackling him at that point, Not trying to wrestle the ball away. Tates arm is around his neck No hand on the ball.
ESPN's Mortensen is now reporting that a deal with the real refs is "very close" and there is a possibility that they could be back for this Sunday's games....