Pictures of the catch.

[MigratingOsprey]

here is another still - clearly shows his left hand in there

You must be registered for see images attach

his left hand never comes off the ball

when they hit the ground his right hand is on the ball

a catch isn't a catch until it's a catch - see megatron last year or countless other examples

you don't need to pull the ball to your body to have a catch - if you did there would never be extension plays on the sideline or nice leaping grabs for TDs

merely having the ball in your hands in the air doesn't make it a catch ... if it did then all those plays where a defender knocks it out of their hands would be fumbles and not incompletions

if tate used his left hand to jab free the ball as they were falling would it be a fumble? - of course not because the DB didn't have possession and without possession you can't have a fumble ... you also can't have an interception

there is no weight to possession .... there is no 70%/30% ... there is no weight to if you pull it to your body or if you get your hands on it first ..... it's who has their hands on secured on the ball as they are ruled down through the act of completing a catch ..... that's it

it doesn't matter if tates right hand came off and then back on ... his left hand never left and there was no legal possession at that point ... the catch wasn't completed .... receivers do tip the ball to themselves, sometimes catching the ball while laying on the ground, do those not count because they didn't control it the whole way?!

you can argue if tate had his hands on the ball or not - i think it's pretty clear that he did (and the play is reviewable by the non-replacement video officials) ..... however, you can't argue that the DB had possession of the ball until after he hits the ground .... it's not an interception until the completion of the motion, which would be him coming down and completing the act of catching the ball

 

[Mulli]

here is another still - clearly shows his left hand in there

You must be registered for see images attach

his left hand never comes off the ball

when they hit the ground his right hand is on the ball

a catch isn't a catch until it's a catch - see megatron last year or countless other examples

you don't need to pull the ball to your body to have a catch - if you did there would never be extension plays on the sideline or nice leaping grabs for TDs

merely having the ball in your hands in the air doesn't make it a catch ... if it did then all those plays where a defender knocks it out of their hands would be fumbles and not incompletions

if tate used his left hand to jab free the ball as they were falling would it be a fumble? - of course not because the DB didn't have possession and without possession you can't have a fumble ... you also can't have an interception

there is no weight to possession .... there is no 70%/30% ... there is no weight to if you pull it to your body or if you get your hands on it first ..... it's who has their hands on secured on the ball as they are ruled down through the act of completing a catch ..... that's it

it doesn't matter if tates right hand came off and then back on ... his left hand never left and there was no legal possession at that point ... the catch wasn't completed .... receivers do tip the ball to themselves, sometimes catching the ball while laying on the ground, do those not count because they didn't control it the whole way?!

you can argue if tate had his hands on the ball or not - i think it's pretty clear that he did (and the play is reviewable by the non-replacement video officials) ..... however, you can't argue that the DB had possession of the ball until after he hits the ground .... it's not an interception until the completion of the motion, which would be him coming down and completing the act of catching the ball

You get credit for trying really hard. Now, about the pushoff...

 

[MigratingOsprey]

absolutely agree on the pushoff ... they typically let a lot go on hail mary attempts (and 2 seattle WRs were erased on this play) .... however, the shove by tate was definitely excesive with the two hand knock to the back and that was pretty much the only reason why he was able to head up

the roughing call on wilson was horrible

but there were a lot of horrible calls (and non-calls) all night

 

[Russ Smith]

here is another still - clearly shows his left hand in there

You must be registered for see images attach

his left hand never comes off the ball

when they hit the ground his right hand is on the ball

a catch isn't a catch until it's a catch - see megatron last year or countless other examples

you don't need to pull the ball to your body to have a catch - if you did there would never be extension plays on the sideline or nice leaping grabs for TDs

merely having the ball in your hands in the air doesn't make it a catch ... if it did then all those plays where a defender knocks it out of their hands would be fumbles and not incompletions

if tate used his left hand to jab free the ball as they were falling would it be a fumble? - of course not because the DB didn't have possession and without possession you can't have a fumble ... you also can't have an interception

there is no weight to possession .... there is no 70%/30% ... there is no weight to if you pull it to your body or if you get your hands on it first ..... it's who has their hands on secured on the ball as they are ruled down through the act of completing a catch ..... that's it

it doesn't matter if tates right hand came off and then back on ... his left hand never left and there was no legal possession at that point ... the catch wasn't completed .... receivers do tip the ball to themselves, sometimes catching the ball while laying on the ground, do those not count because they didn't control it the whole way?!

you can argue if tate had his hands on the ball or not - i think it's pretty clear that he did (and the play is reviewable by the non-replacement video officials) ..... however, you can't argue that the DB had possession of the ball until after he hits the ground .... it's not an interception until the completion of the motion, which would be him coming down and completing the act of catching the ball

Are you contending that at the point this pic is taken Tate has a legal catch?

 

[Jetstream Green]

That play in real time would be a tough call for even the old refs. A lot easier with still instant photos. I think the real refs could have got that one wrong also. It is not like the real refs never make mistakes that cost a team a game. Like everyone I wish we had the real guys back. But should we have them back at any cost. Is there any limit as to what the NFL should give them? In the end it is the fans that pay the refs salary so the NFL is negotiating for us. Since I do not go to many games I do not worry about what they pay them but I do not like the principal that all leverage is now with the refs and the union. Anything they want now they will likely receive.

Clearly these replcements are not nearly as good as the regular guys. They are very slow to make calls and try to get it right by consulting. It slows the game down and now has the fans, players, coaches, all on fire. The media adds to all this by making this the story of the year. In fact the stadiums are still sold out. The Commissioner has backed himself into a corner and will have to cave and be embarrassed when in fact he was trying to negotiate what he thought was fair compensation and benefits. It is out of his hands now and is in the medias hands. Ultimately the owners will have to order the Commissioner to settle on the unions terms.

Every year the refs make calls that can change the outcomes of games. They are humans and subject to human errors. We have to live with that. When the old guys come back things will speed up and it will be more enjoyable to watch the games but will the number of bad calls really change that much? Probably not but the perception will be that things have greatly improved. The media will have settled this in the end. Not the union or the Commissioner.

I sure wanted Green Bay to win as we still have to deal with our division rival Seattle who is rather good. For what ever reason I really do not like the Seattle coach. Not sure why but he just rubs me the wrong way. Yes it very much looks like the refs made a bad call last night and ignored a push in the back of a defender which could have possible changed the entire play. One might also say that Green Bay lost the game by poor play throughout the game not just the last play which we all focused on. Games are usually not decided by any one play but by a long list of bad plays by one team or the other throughout the game.

Players and coaches will still be mad and pout when they lose a game no matter who is reffing the game. Now they can put it all on the substitute refs. They have someone new to blame for their loss. Perhaps a missed pass catch early in the game which negated a TD really cost a loss but that is not remembered. It is always the last bad mistake by ref or player that is remembered.

Losers will always blame someone and not there own poor play over 60 minutes.

Why do you hate Carroll, that is easy. He is a rah rah arrogant coach who acts like he is still in highschool. Seeing that egotistical idiot running onto the field right into the area of the play during the final scramble for possession of the ball when the refs were sorting it out defines Carroll for what he is, a loony

 

[MigratingOsprey]

what I contend is that photo shows his left hand in there on the ball - his left hand never came off the ball - neither player could have "possession" at that point as it was a live ball and neither player completed the motion of catching the pass

You must be registered for see images

with this photo you see the packers player in the air and tate with 2 hands on the ball coming down ...... his right hand comes off then goes back on, but players are allowed to juggle a pass to infinity until the ball hits the ground, they go out of bounds or the play otherwise comes to it's conclusion

however, at this point neither player has possession

possession can't be awarded until the play comes to it's conclusion - this is well established

when they come to the ground tate's left hand is still in there - it never left and had his right hand on there as well ...... that looks like simultaneous to me ... it's very close, but you can possess with your hands and he has his hands on it as they complete the motion

 

[Russ Smith]

what I contend is that photo shows his left hand in there on the ball - his left hand never came off the ball - neither player could have "possession" at that point as it was a live ball and neither player completed the motion of catching the pass

You must be registered for see images

with this photo you see the packers player in the air and tate with 2 hands on the ball coming down ...... his right hand comes off then goes back on, but players are allowed to juggle a pass to infinity until the ball hits the ground, they go out of bounds or the play otherwise comes to it's conclusion

however, at this point neither player has possession

possession can't be awarded until the play comes to it's conclusion - this is well established

when they come to the ground tate's left hand is still in there - it never left and had his right hand on there as well ...... that looks like simultaneous to me ... it's very close, but you can possess with your hands and he has his hands on it as they complete the motion

I see red X on this post btw so I can't comment on the pic here.

on the other one I asked because neither player has his feet on the ground at that point so i wanted to be sure what you were actually trying to show with the pic.

His right hand has 2 fingers touching the ball. Just after that Jennings pulls the ball into his chest. The left hand is touching the ball but touching is not possession and the right hand as you said comes off the ball.

So to be a simultaneous catch he had to have caught the ball with his left hand because at the point Jennings has it, Tate only has his left hand on the ball and again it's not really possessing just touching.

My guess is after the season the NFL will change the rule to make this tougher to happen again.

I said it last night back in 1975(?) there was a play where the Cards got a TD because Mel Gray had the ball and then Pat Fisher nailed him popping the ball out. the refs huddled forever(whcih is how it's supposed to work) and then Fred Silva came out and said TD. After the season, they changed the rule to the current definition of possession for a TD catch.

I still say if you just magically remove Jennings from the play Tate will probably catch the ball, the problem is at the point Jennings has it, Tate doesn't.


oh well the NFL has ruled and in the end there's no way GB can fight it,. My guess is somewhere down the line the refs will make up for it with a call that gives GB a game, and a call that takes one from Seattle.

I just hope the GB makeup isn't against the Cards.

 

[CardsFan88]

The play goes on. No one touched out of bounds, and from the time the ball hit Jenning's facemask, he clearly had control of the ball with Tate barely having a hand on it.

It was an INT.

Hey if the hawks are 2-1, great, but it's not about that. It's about a WR getting a td for having one hand on the ball a guy intercepted in the endzone, and sometimes trying to have a 2nd hand around it.

A catch is supposed to be two feet and a football move or down by contact. It's quite clear that even at the beginning, while closer, it still was 70-30 Packers-Seahawks control while they were both in the air, as time goes on it went to 95-5 (if you call a hand in there at the end a 5).

I would say the same thing no matter what. You're looking at a snapshot of a hand wedged in there while someone else clearly has it and are calling it a catch. At no point did Tate ever have it anywhere near his own chest in control. It was always securely from face mask to chest, Jennings. As the interception was completed...about here.

You must be registered for see images attach

Butt on the ground, not out of bounds, clearly in control with an almost mangled seahawks paw in there as he's being squished from Jennings back on top of Tate's body.

It's not that both receivers were in the fetal position with nearly equal grip. That's a tie catch. We've all seen it, where both arms of both players are locked together as they go down with the ball in the middle.

 

[MigratingOsprey]

So to be a simultaneous catch he had to have caught the ball with his left hand because at the point Jennings has it, Tate only has his left hand on the ball and again it's not really possessing just touching.

Jennings doesn't have it at that point

He can't have it by rule

He has his hands on the ball - tate has one hand on and during the motion has the other come off and back on again

There is no possession by either party at that time

If the ball came loose it would be an incompletion at that time - not a fumble

Possession is an act - not a freeze frame, not a matter of percentages or who got it first

You may secure something - but that doesn't mean you have possession

Lots of WRs secure the ball and then have it knocked away before gaining possession by rule - same with DBs where the WR turns into a defender and knocks it loose

 

[Mulli]

Jennings doesn't have it at that point

He can't have it by rule

He has his hands on the ball - tate has one hand on and during the motion has the other come off and back on again

There is no possession by either party at that time

If the ball came loose it would be an incompletion at that time - not a fumble

Possession is an act - not a freeze frame, not a matter of percentages or who got it first

You may secure something - but that doesn't mean you have possession

Lots of WRs secure the ball and then have it knocked away before gaining possession by rule - same with DBs where the WR turns into a defender and knocks it loose

Tate touching the ball from start to finish (as you claim) makes it a catch?

 

[MigratingOsprey]

A catch is supposed to be two feet and a football move or down by contact. It's quite clear that even at the beginning, while closer, it still was 70-30 Packers-Seahawks control while they were both in the air, as time goes on it went to 95-5 (if you call a hand in there at the end a 5).

You do realize there is nothing in the rule book about "majority possession" or percentages right?

Who controls it most is irrelevant

 

[MigratingOsprey]

Tate touching the ball from start to finish (as you claim) makes it a catch?

Him having two hands grabbing the football and maintaining that contact as he comes to the ground and the play finishes makes it a catch .... doesn't matter if the other guy also had his hands on it in a better position, because all that is needed is for the WR to have his hands grabbing the football as the play comes to it's conclusion

 

[82CardsGrad]

Jennings doesn't have it at that point

He has his hands on the ball - tate has one hand on and during the motion has the other come off and back on again

Until the scrum ensued well after they were on the ground, Jennings had both hands on the ball the entire time.

 

[Mulli]

Him having two hands grabbing the football and maintaining that contact as he comes to the ground and the play finishes makes it a catch .... doesn't matter if the other guy also had his hands on it in a better position, because all that is needed is for the WR to have his hands grabbing the football as the play comes to it's conclusion

Touching does not equal grabbing or catching or controlling. That must be why Ref #84 said it was an interception.

 

[ryanshaug]

Here's a good read:

Silver Article - What did Seahawk players think?

Oops.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Touching does not equal grabbing or catching or controlling. That must be why Ref #84 said it was an interception.

Ref #84, all of the analysts and experts who were at the game or those who have watched the tape 100x now, and just about every other non-Seahawk viewer...

 

[MigratingOsprey]

Until the scrum ensued well after they were on the ground, Jennings had both hands on the ball the entire time.

doesn't matter as long as tate had his hands on the ball as well as the play was coming to completion - it sure looks like he did

 

[82CardsGrad]

doesn't matter as long as tate had his hands on the ball as well as the play was coming to completion - it sure looks like he did

You're wrong dude...

 

[MigratingOsprey]

not on that i'm not

it doesn't matter if the DB has and doesn't lose control of the ball as long as the WR is able to also gain control - the DB is irrelevant

there is no "i had it first" or "i had it more" .... you either have it all to yourself or you don't and if you don't you really have nothing

 

[Mulli]

Note to receivers everywhere, make sure to try to get your hand on the ball when a pass is being intercepted...

 

[MigratingOsprey]

and get the other one on there too and go to the ground with your hands on the ball ... it become a reception, just like every other time you go to the ground with two hands on the ball without the ball hitting the ground

and with that I'm done ..... really nothing left to go through and no ones opinion is going to change

onto rams week and back into the shadows ...... best of luck against the 'phins

 

[Mulli]

and get the other one on there too and go to the ground with your hands on the ball ... it become a reception, just like every other time you go to the ground with two hands on the ball without the ball hitting the ground

and with that I'm done ..... really nothing left to go through and no ones opinion is going to change

onto rams week and back into the shadows ...... best of luck against the 'phins

cheers!

 

[jbeecham]

and get the other one on there too and go to the ground with your hands on the ball ... it become a reception, just like every other time you go to the ground with two hands on the ball without the ball hitting the ground

and with that I'm done ..... really nothing left to go through and no ones opinion is going to change

onto rams week and back into the shadows ...... best of luck against the 'phins

As Ryanshaug just posted.... Lynch Shocked by Replay

Even Marshawn Lynch doesn't believe it was a catch.

When Seattle's own players don't think they deserved to win the game then that's all the answer you should need.

 

[Russ Smith]

Jennings doesn't have it at that point

He can't have it by rule

He has his hands on the ball - tate has one hand on and during the motion has the other come off and back on again

There is no possession by either party at that time

If the ball came loose it would be an incompletion at that time - not a fumble

Possession is an act - not a freeze frame, not a matter of percentages or who got it first

You may secure something - but that doesn't mean you have possession

Lots of WRs secure the ball and then have it knocked away before gaining possession by rule - same with DBs where the WR turns into a defender and knocks it loose

When Jennings' foot touches(the 2nd one) and he goes to the ground he's met every single criteria for a legal catch. At the same point what criteria has Tate met, he has one hand touching the ball the other one touching the facemask and neck of Jennings. He's literally reaching in when Jennings is down trying to get his right hand on the ball to pull it away from Jennings. If he had possession he wouldn't be doing that.

We're just not going to agree and it doesn't matter the NFL has already spoken.

 

[MigratingOsprey]

Lynch didn't say that .... and there was nothing specific to the catch

I think cardinals fans should know about the journalism of michael silver

and this is really my last post and I only put it up because I just saw it and it pretty much is my vantage point in action

everyone is free to take from it what they will

but I see his left hand in there and as they go to the ground his right hand shifting over the arm and grabbing at the ball ...... it's definitely close - but the play was called a TD, was upheld by the normal replay officials (and yes possession is reviewable on simultaneous calls as long as it's in the end zone) and the hyperbole of this being the most egregious call ever is hyperbole based on 2 months of bad officiating

You must be registered for see images

and Mulli - if you ever hit town there's a beer in it from me - glad to have you back