Last play of GB Seattle

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by KMBReferee

But did B (Jennings) actually have control though? Jennings had two hands on the ball vs. A (Tate)'s 1 while airborne. Can you clearly say that Jennings had control over Tate from the initial contact of the ball?

Isn't this the exact reason why we have a dual possession rule in football? Because there is really no way to truly know who had clear control?

In his example the ball is given to A, not to B in the first play which mirrors the example tonight. I am not sure he realizes what example he quoted.

Peace

[KMBReferee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

In his example the ball is given to A, not to B in the first play which mirrors the example tonight. I am not sure he realizes what example he quoted.

Peace

Actually, I don't think either does.

The question here is does one person have more control over the ball with two hands vs. a player with one? Unless they can point to a rule defining which is control and which isn't when both a receiver and defender have contact, then I doubt you can have anything but dual control/possession.

[brainbrian]

Trying to make sense of this, looks to me like the Packer had possession first?



and everyone clearly is inbounds when they land...



We can see whether or not the NFL takes this down, but here's the clip as of now: Seahawks vs Packers controversial touchdown - YouTube

[Matt]

Doubt they'll take it down (unless they are going for copyright issues.)

They have their own guys on their own website with the video talking about how this is a horrific call.

[JRutledge]

You cannot have possession of a football in the air. And the GB player is in the air in the first two pictures.

Peace

[Matt]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You cannot have possession of a football in the air. And the GB player is in the air in the first two pictures.

Peace

Take it up with Gerry Austin. He says differently.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Matt

Take it up with Gerry Austin. He says differently.

Do you know when Gerry Austin was a deep wing?

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Do you know when Gerry Austin was a deep wing?

Peace

He worked a Super Bowl as a side judge.

[parepat]

Originally Posted by Rich

He worked a Super Bowl as a side judge.

By the way. Whose job is it to go under the hood and make decisions about these types of plays during the normal review? That would be the referee (dumb, but that is an argument for another day). To disparage a guy w Austin's credentials in order to advance your argument is silly.

[Texref]

Jeff, in the NFL rules, per the case book plays cited, you can have possession in the ait. In the first play, the offense, A, controls the ball first and then the defense, B, attains possession and then they go to the ground. A ball. In the second, the defense ,B, gets possession first followed by the offense, A, and then they go to the ground. B ball. Clearly the NFL defines this differently than what your experience is, which means it is different from HS and ncaa.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Texref

Jeff, in the NFL rules, per the case book plays cited, you can have possession in the ait. In the first play, the offense, A, controls the ball first and then the defense, B, attains possession and then they go to the ground. A ball. In the second, the defense ,B, gets possession first followed by the offense, A, and then they go to the ground. B ball. Clearly the NFL defines this differently than what your experience is, which means it is different from HS and ncaa.

You did not read your own example. It said that player A gained possession on the ground first. You quoted the Accepted Ruling not me. The ground is apart of this equation, not who has control in the air. That is all I am saying to you. And in the NFL there is more required to have a catch than at the NCAA or NF level.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

I do. I think the call was horrid. Had the officials called it a touchback on the field immediately, there'd be *nobody* talking about this play right now.

Who gives a crap what people would have said. That is the problem with this discussion, what does the rule say? I would not ruled this in an NCAA game and would have felt good about it on replay.

Peace

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by Rich

Had the officials called it a touchback on the field immediately, there'd be *nobody* talking about this play right now.

Without getting into a long argument on that...I totally disagree. OK, one point to make...not saying the call was correct, but since when do officials make a call based on what is going to cause less "water cooler" discussions?

[bcl1127]

Originally Posted by PSU213

Without getting into a long argument on that...I totally disagree. OK, one point to make...not saying the call was correct, but since when do officials make a call based on what is going to cause less "water cooler" discussions?

I don't think that was the point, I think that if they both went up with the same call, it would have been less of a talking point...I don't really agree, I think that even if the regulars called this it would be a huge discussion point today.

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by Rich

I do. I think the call was horrid. Had the officials called it a touchback on the field immediately, there'd be *nobody* talking about this play right now.

If GB bats the ball down to the ground or OOB instead of trying to catch the ball, more than likely same would be true.... Nobody would be talking about this right now.