Last play of GB Seattle
 

We just thought the replacement guys were catching heat before.

Ok I know nothing about football officiating - but how can the GB player basically intercept the ball - and then the SEA player gets credit for a touchdown for basically sticking his hands in there after the GB player already has control of the ball?

:confused:

Somebody needs to explain this one to me - and I'm a Seahawks fan lol

Warm up the bus
 

I'll be GLAD to throw those clowns under the bus.....

Simultaneous possession ends everything. Touching proceeds possession and it looked to me like the right call. The GB player did not come down in the field of play with the ball.

Peace

Really? :confused:

So one player can outright catch it in the air, and another player can come in clearly afterwards and as long as he gets a hand on the ball it's simultaneous?

I'll take your word for it, Rut - you've reffed football probably as long as I've been alive :D - but to this casual fan it seems like a strange rule.

You have GOT to be kidding me...

The broadcasters only mentioned it once during initial occurrence, and then briefly discussed it while GB was getting back onto the field for the try.
The concept of simultaneous possession is that if A and B both achieve possession of a loose ball at the same time, then possession is awarded to A and the ball is dead immediately. Essentially the side judge ruled that both A and B had the ball, and so it belonged to A. In NCAA and NFHS, it is irrelevant who had it "more", as the broadcasters were discussing. I'm not sure if that applies at all in NFL, but this is such an old, basic, and infrequently-applied rule, that I'd be surprised if it's different. What is not irrelevant is if B grabbed it and then A just stuck his hands onto the ball. I can see why the officials would take a look at the situation on the ground, since they have to make a call on the field.

It would be a cluster even if the regular officials were in place.

First of all you do not catch the ball in the air. You catch the ball when you come down with it. Again, you said you were not a football official right? ;)

I do not care what casual fans think because that is silly when it moves to basketball either. Basketball fans think that it is a foul on a defender if he moves. And I am a deep wing in college and a Back Judge in high school and rule on these kinds of plays all the time. Players always go up for the ball and it does not mean anything until they come down to the ground.

Peace

How can you have possession in the air? Show me the rule?

Peace

I don't think it was 'clearly afterwards'.

They were both still in the air when there were four arms around the ball. The 'four arm' situation continued onto the field of play.

I don't have a problem with the call either way.

If I had to guess how the NFL wants this particular play called, I bet there will be a downgrade on a certain LOS offical. The call would have been a much easier sell had we not had differing, simultaneous signals from the covering officials. Verbal communication prior to a signal would have helped considerably here.

dual possession?
 

You guys are arguing with the White Hat on the broadcasts who worked 2 Super Bowls....

Irrelevant, since he had possession on the ground.

Oh, so he has to land with it all to himself for it to be an interception....I suppose it makes sense - kind of like that catch in the Super Bowl where the guy caught it, but the defender reached in and popped it loose, so no TD; the explanation was that he has to have the catch 'through the finish of the play' - one of those subtleties about football rules that most people don't know, I guess.

And making it worse is that it was not reviewable...?

The only time there were four arms on the ball was after both players were on the ground.

I get the dual possession. I don't get the lack of OPI on that play. The shove in the back was quite blatant.