Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Cheese Bites: Green Bay Packer updates
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 42, 43, 44 ... 81, 82, 83  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 73671
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The NFL has confirmed that it plans to issue a formal statement today on the Seahawks’ game-winning touchdown pass on Monday night, which the replacement officials on the field ruled to be simultaneously possessed by both Seattle receiver Golden Tate and Green Bay defensive back M.D. Jennings, but virtually everyone else agrees was intercepted by Jennings before Tate put his hand on the ball.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/25/nfl-will-issue-formal-statement-on-packers-seahawks-controversy/


Now that a game has been decided by what most if not all non-Seahawks fans regard as a very bad call on the final play, the question becomes whether there’s a procedure in place for the Packers to seek relief from the league office.

And now we know there isn’t.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello tells PFT that there’s no appeal process. And thus there’s no way to change the outcome of the game.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/25/league-says-theres-no-appeal-process-for-packers/
_________________


Webmaster wrote:
Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 47874
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The outcome should not be changed, but i dont like that they couldnt change the call with the booth review. I dont think they could have ruled the pass incomplete due to a technicality of a judgement call made by the ref. I think there needs to be some overriding factor, simply based on what should be the right call. Regardless of the call on the field. I think the booth upstairs should be able to overturn any ref call that was made on the field for scoring plays.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
since72


Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 3560
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vike daddy wrote:
The NFL has confirmed that it plans to issue a formal statement today on the Seahawks’ game-winning touchdown pass on Monday night, which the replacement officials on the field ruled to be simultaneously possessed by both Seattle receiver Golden Tate and Green Bay defensive back M.D. Jennings, but virtually everyone else agrees was intercepted by Jennings before Tate put his hand on the ball.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/25/nfl-will-issue-formal-statement-on-packers-seahawks-controversy/


Now that a game has been decided by what most if not all non-Seahawks fans regard as a very bad call on the final play, the question becomes whether there’s a procedure in place for the Packers to seek relief from the league office.

And now we know there isn’t.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello tells PFT that there’s no appeal process. And thus there’s no way to change the outcome of the game.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/25/league-says-theres-no-appeal-process-for-packers/


This just kills me. I can't stop laughing.

So Packer fans are finally finding out there's no appeal for bad calls. That's something the rest of the League (with perhaps the exception of New England or Dallas fans) have known for years.

One questionable call goes against the Packers and suddenly it's come to the "tipping point". Suddenly the officials deciding games is an issue worthy of notice that the rest of the League is all of a sudden supposed to be up in arms about. Sorry, if you want sympathy, then some should have been shown toward all the other teams that have gotten screwed year in and year out, especially at Lambeau Field where the refs let the Packers get away with murder on nearly every play.

If the Vikings game would have ended that way, it would have been just another routine, indistinguishable Sunday.


Edit [ Oh and if the NFL wants to make a "formal statement" to try to soothe things over, they should have a standard "fill-in-the-blank" form by now. Or maybe borrow one of the many they must have on file under "Vikings - questionable calls that determined the outcome of the game".]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skywindO2


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 14127
Location: Minneapolis, MN
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

skywindO2 wrote:
I still don't understand how review couldn't have overturned the call on the field.

Catches are reviewed all the time, why is this one any different? Couldn't a review have confirmed that Tate did not maintain possession of the ball through the entire process, or whatever wordage they like to use on that?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqAuFs6Deko
How does the same logic applied to Johnson's non-catch not apply to Tate's? Did a rule change happen in the last year that changed this?
_________________

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つZIMMER༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
since72


Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 3560
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

skywindO2 wrote:
skywindO2 wrote:
I still don't understand how review couldn't have overturned the call on the field.

Catches are reviewed all the time, why is this one any different? Couldn't a review have confirmed that Tate did not maintain possession of the ball through the entire process, or whatever wordage they like to use on that?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqAuFs6Deko
How does the same logic applied to Johnson's non-catch not apply to Tate's? Did a rule change happen in the last year that changed this?


From my understanding, they can change whether or not a receiver caught the ball (CJ) but can't overturn a call that changes possession.

They can't say Tate didn't catch the ball because the ball never hit the ground. It was a catch. By someone. If the booth says Jennings caught the ball then they would have to change who has possession which they can't do.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 47874
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

since72 wrote:
skywindO2 wrote:
skywindO2 wrote:
I still don't understand how review couldn't have overturned the call on the field.

Catches are reviewed all the time, why is this one any different? Couldn't a review have confirmed that Tate did not maintain possession of the ball through the entire process, or whatever wordage they like to use on that?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqAuFs6Deko
How does the same logic applied to Johnson's non-catch not apply to Tate's? Did a rule change happen in the last year that changed this?


From my understanding, they can change whether or not a receiver caught the ball (CJ) but can't overturn a call that changes possession.

They can't say Tate didn't catch the ball because the ball never hit the ground. It was a catch. By someone. If the booth says Jennings caught the ball then they would have to change who has possession which they can't do.


So then, why not determine that Tate never had possession and dont give him credit for the catch. Int or not, it would have corrected the outcome by not rewarding Tate with the score.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
milanb


Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 6067
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As far as I understand it the only way the league can overturn the results of the game after the fact is if they decide that the refs misapplied the rules in some significant way. But from what I can see this is just a case of a bad judgement call by the refs in question.

The Vikings might have had a case for appeal if the 49ers had come back to win after the absurd extra timeouts that were granted to Jim Harbaugh.
_________________

The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. — Ecclesiastes 9:11

But that’s the way to bet. — Jimmy The Greek
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ArcticNorseman


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2108
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, I think I figured this thing out . . . Bill Gates and Paul Allen were giving the replay official a bathroom break when the play happened . . . Laughing

Other than the story it is . . . I'm sure the Packers will play just fine the rest of the year . . . except, for two games late in the season. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
since72


Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 3560
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
So then, why not determine that Tate never had possession and dont give him credit for the catch. Int or not, it would have corrected the outcome by not rewarding Tate with the score.


How can you rule it an incomplete pass? Impossible in this situation. Both players inbounds and the ball never hit the ground.

Either INT or TD.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 47874
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

milanb wrote:
As far as I understand it the only way the league can overturn the results of the game after the fact is if they decide that the refs misapplied the rules in some significant way. But from what I can see this is just a case of a bad judgement call by the refs in question.

The Vikings might have had a case for appeal if the 49ers had come back to win after the absurd extra timeouts that were granted to Jim Harbaugh.


Probably not, since the refs didnt directly give the 49ers points. The Vikes were still up by 11 and its reasonable to expect the defense to come up with a stop.Cant fault the refs if your defense blows an 11 point lead with that little time to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 47874
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

since72 wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
So then, why not determine that Tate never had possession and dont give him credit for the catch. Int or not, it would have corrected the outcome by not rewarding Tate with the score.


How can you rule it an incomplete pass? Impossible in this situation. Both players inbounds and the ball never hit the ground.

Either INT or TD.


That is what I am saying in this situation, I think the booth should be given a bit more flexibility in terms of calls in the end to make sure no one is screwed over by a technicality because of a ref error. Yes, literally there couldnt have been an incomplete pass but its clear that Tate never possessed it. It really doesnt matter if there was an INT or not, there was 00 on the clock. Just dont give them the points in this situation.

I know its probably not by the book to do this, but i think the booth should have more discretion to get it right. why have this technology if its not fully taken advantage of. regular refs make errors, replacement refs make errors, accepting a call that was clearly an error by the refs does not seem like its benefiting in getting the call correct.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
milanb


Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 6067
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
milanb wrote:
As far as I understand it the only way the league can overturn the results of the game after the fact is if they decide that the refs misapplied the rules in some significant way. But from what I can see this is just a case of a bad judgement call by the refs in question.

The Vikings might have had a case for appeal if the 49ers had come back to win after the absurd extra timeouts that were granted to Jim Harbaugh.


Probably not, since the refs didnt directly give the 49ers points. The Vikes were still up by 11 and its reasonable to expect the defense to come up with a stop.Cant fault the refs if your defense blows an 11 point lead with that little time to go.


Yes, but it was two changes of possession and two extra timeouts late in the game that should never have happened.

But I do agree that it is very unlikely that the Commissioner's Office would have overturned the results.

The league has lost a ton of credibility in allowing this lockout to continue. And for what? A few million dollars, which amounts to maybe 0.01% of their annual revenue?
_________________

The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. — Ecclesiastes 9:11

But that’s the way to bet. — Jimmy The Greek
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skywindO2


Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 14127
Location: Minneapolis, MN
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

since72 wrote:
skywindO2 wrote:
skywindO2 wrote:
I still don't understand how review couldn't have overturned the call on the field.

Catches are reviewed all the time, why is this one any different? Couldn't a review have confirmed that Tate did not maintain possession of the ball through the entire process, or whatever wordage they like to use on that?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqAuFs6Deko
How does the same logic applied to Johnson's non-catch not apply to Tate's? Did a rule change happen in the last year that changed this?


From my understanding, they can change whether or not a receiver caught the ball (CJ) but can't overturn a call that changes possession.

They can't say Tate didn't catch the ball because the ball never hit the ground. It was a catch. By someone. If the booth says Jennings caught the ball then they would have to change who has possession which they can't do.

thanks. While a frustrating answer, it still clarifies it. Even if it's an extremely rare situation, I think the NFL rules committee should take a look at how both catches and simultaneous possession are defined to correct this in the future. Basically, for simultaneous possession to occur, the "maintain possession through the process" line should apply, the ground shouldn't be a factor.
_________________

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つZIMMER༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disaacs


Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 22695
Location: Brownbackistan
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's an easy way to make sure that doesn't happen again...get the professional referees back.
_________________


Thx to Uncle Buck!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 47874
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

disaacs wrote:
There's an easy way to make sure that doesn't happen again...get the professional referees back.


That is not a sure thing either. Though, the lesser of two evils. The professional refs have also cost teams big games for bad or missed calls.

The only way to eliminate human error as the play happens is enabling more freedom when looking at the replay. There will always be an element of human error.


Last edited by vikingsrule on Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 42, 43, 44 ... 81, 82, 83  Next
Page 43 of 83

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group