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

I need ur guys expertise on "The Catch Gate"
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
malachi2532


Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 190
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:56 am    Post subject: I need ur guys expertise on "The Catch Gate" Reply with quote

First I'll say I know its kind of late to be asking but.......

Was it a catch by Golden Tate or a INT by MD Jennings?

Just wondering what you guys felt here in Vikings land considering it was the Packers.

My opinion is and has been since i first saw it on TV was TD ties go to the WR.

Just a couple of bullet points that are in my head after thinking about it and watching so call professionals talk about it:

1. Define a catch.(there is not one in the rule book it basically says see possession)
2. Is a play over on the ground or in the air?(this is obvious it's just the smart a** in me)

From what I've seen for a WR to make a catch he has to maintain possession throughout the play as well as stay in bounds.....from what i was watching Golden was in the play thew whole time fighting for the ball(ESPN even shadowed out the whole screen then highlighted Tate's hand "barley" on the ball)....At its high point both players contact the ball Jennings completely catches it and maintains possession all the way to the ground NO doubt about it.....where my argument comes in is if a WR has a hand on the ball throughout the play when can and should we determine when he has possession.....was it at the beginning when he 1st came in to contact with the ball, is it when he hits the ground or is it when the ref determines all prerequisites where met for a "catch" was made or if a possession has been made.....I TRULY don't no but who does...

Thanx Guyz SKOL!!!!!!!!!!!! WE'RE COMIN (in my KFAN voice) LOL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 4788
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

When he hits ground/falls to the ground is when its an official catch
(for example you could catch a ball in midair and sail out of bounds, therefore no catch).

No matter how much it may "look" like an INT, if Tate has one hand on the ball throughout the act, he should be awarded possession (as ties go to the offense).

It is not defined 2 hand vs 1 hand. (WRs can physically catch balls with 1 hand)

Just my opinion, its a catch because it falls into an undefined area in the rules, and becomes a straight ref judgement.

In the offseason, they should identify a rule for this kind of play.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Gnat


Moderator
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 35961
Location: Minneapolis
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was an INT 70%.
It was a TD 30%.

That's how I'm split on it.

However, it wasn't nearly the worse call that week by replacement officials and since it was believed to be unreviewable for possession by former officials and the former head of officials, their not overturning it made sense. When slowed down I'm not sure Tate maintained control throughout the whole play. However, it is much more bang-bang than ESPN tried to make it and you can't conclusively say that with his left hand Tate didn't maintain control once he touched the ball, which was a fraction of a second after Jennings got his hands on the ball. It was a call that went against the Packers, it is iffy if Tate maintains control, but hardly conclusive video that he doesn't, and it is iffy if Tate gets control of the ball at the same time as Jennings, and this is more conclusive in a slow motion replay after watching it four times.

Overall, this is a call that the regular officials could have easily called the same way and the video evidence isn't as highly conclusive as people like to say it is to the point that you could guarantee reversal of the call on the field and guarantee that it was right. However, I do think that was an INT over a TD, just one within the context of indisputable visual evidence it is difficult for them to overturn the call.
_________________
Gnat's Movie Reviews

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kellerman


Joined: 16 May 2010
Posts: 3561
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If it looks like an interception, it probably is one. At least, that's my take on it. I don't buy that a WR can have possesion with just one hand, when the other guy clutches the ball to his chest with 2.
_________________

#97 Everson Griffin: 27 tackles : 5.5 sacks : 1 FF ; 16 games played
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
milanb


Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 6044
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why are people still dwelling on this?

I agree it was a bad call, but that's just my opinion. It was a judgement call, and a difficult one at that. There is no absolute correct or incorrect call on the play, and the game is full of calls and non-calls of this nature.

The bottom line is that Jennings made a selfish play going for the INT instead of just knocking the ball down. The result was that the game came down to a ref's decision, and the call didn't go the Packers' way.

It's time for everyone to stop dwelling on this one play and move on.
_________________

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
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 47780
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kellerman wrote:
If it looks like an interception, it probably is one. At least, that's my take on it. I don't buy that a WR can have possesion with just one hand, when the other guy clutches the ball to his chest with 2.


There is no rule in regards to who has "greater" possession of the ball. You can possess the ball with one hand just as you can with two hands. If Tate had one hand on the ball while Jennings had two hands on the ball, that would be dual possession, which goes to the offense. I think the replay shows that Tate had his left arm hooked on the ball between Jennings chest as his feet hit the ground. So many focus on what happens after the fact, but if Tate possess the ball in the endzone, as soon as his feet hit the ground the play is over. Jennings gained substantially more control of the ball after the fact when Tate's feet hit the ground. That doesnt matter, since the play was over before that point.

From what I saw, Jennings had two hands on the ball while Tate had one hand on the ball when Tate's feet first hit the ground. Therefore, I think the Refs made the right call in that regard.

But they still missed a blatant offensive pass interference.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 73328
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Gnat wrote:
It was an INT 70%.
It was a TD 30%.

That's how I'm split on it.

sounds about right.


milanb wrote:
It's time for everyone to stop dwelling on this one play and move on.

sounds very right. who cares? bad calls happen. always have, always will.

it's not like it knocked a team out of a playoff game.
_________________


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


Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 6044
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those of us who have been around for a while distinctly remember the Packers getting into the playoffs in 2003 because of a questionable judgement call.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_QzwbZJyFg

I didn't hear anyone from Green Bay complaining about that one.
_________________

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
twslhs20


Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 12206
Location: Where the true depth of one's soul doesn't resonate with the world
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Was an interception.

Do not feel bad for the Packers.

Next.
_________________

Joe_is_the_best ^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rpmwr19


Moderator
Joined: 23 Dec 2006
Posts: 24376
Location: Stillwater, MN
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was pass interference on the offense.
_________________
RPMs Viking Roster/Cap Tracker
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
malachi2532


Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 190
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanx again guys, not dwelling just didn't see you guys having a discussion on it or at least its not on the 1st page. I had to get a sports fan's opinion not a TV personality or casual fan's. And I only wanted the opinion of the people I read posts from.

We can all go back to current events now...LOL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SteelKing728


Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 14153
Location: Gibsonia, Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CatchGate? Laughing There is no gate. there never was, never will be. Just call it something original.

I'm up in the air. At this point, I'm just calling it a catch. I don't feel bad for the Packers at all. In fact, if this happened to the Vikings, no one would have cared probably.
_________________

Not your typical Vikings anymore.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Yfz01


Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 8631
PostPosted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rpmwr19 wrote:
It was pass interference on the offense.



Boom.

Also an Interception.
_________________


Lil Uno with the sig.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darth Brooks


Joined: 01 Sep 2012
Posts: 35
Location: Ozarks
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was a play that should never have been run because of the Offensive pass interference a few plays earlier that was bizarrely called a DPI.

Other than that I would have called it an interception. Tate never had possession of the ball (at best he had possession of Jennings) Jennings had control first and never lost control of the ball.
_________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vikefan79


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 29761
Location: Atlanta
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was the football gods way of making things a little better in Minnesota.
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 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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