MNF: Packers at Seahawks [Merge]

[indy1888]

It was only a matter of time before they directly cost a team a game. That was just horrid. They have gotten worse each week. Those clowns doing the Colts game on Sunday were pathetic as well.

[RGIII]

I don't think that's correct. Yes, the Pass Interference is unchangeable by rule.

But the replay ref could have ruled that this was an interception and not a catch. This IS changeable by rule. And they missed it.

Shame on the NFL.

IIRC, it's actually not something that can be changed. I distinctly remember a situation involving Antwaan Randle El a few years ago where a legitimate simultaneous catch was made, the play was ruled an interception, and the play stood as called after review despite the fact that it should have been ruled an offensive completion.

[jjcolts]

Unbelievable.

I mean, they even reviewed and had the chance to call it correctly.

[Andy]

Russell Wilson is the first QB in the history of the game to throw a game winning interception.

[House]

I don't think that's correct. Yes, the Pass Interference is unchangeable by rule.

But the replay ref could have ruled that this was an interception and not a catch. This IS changeable by rule. And they missed it.

Shame on the NFL.

Simultaneous catch isn't reviewable. Unfortunately I don't believe they would have had the stones to correct their mistake even if they could.

[DarkHorseColts]

The Referee Apocalypse has begun...

[Happy2BeHere]

Peter King is frantically writing a story as we speak....I'm pretty sure that one is guaranteed...along with many other newscasters and sportswriters...

[stat2883]

Peter King is frantically writing a story as we speak....I'm pretty sure that one is guaranteed...along with many other newscasters and sportswriters...

my twitter is blowin up

[ColtsBlueFL]

Head referee could have made the final decision after conferring with the two officials that were not in agreement. Didn't make the effort and they let the TD officials call stand on the field. I don't think review can change posession, just decide whether it was caught or not.

[Blackhawk4]

@ReignofTroy - "Russell Wilson became the first QB in history to throw a game-winning interception."

@kirkmorrison - "Reality TV at its finest."

@AndrewLucksHead - "I don't know about you guys, but I'm putting a bounty on these replacement referees."

@jemelhill - "Somewhere Ed Hochuli is throwing up West-side with some chucks on."

@realmikewilbon - "One of the bogus moments in NFL history...what incompetence! One ref signaling touchback (interception) another signaling TD. Farce..."

I can go on and on and on.......It is hilarious and yet pathetic all at the same time.

[House]

Head referee could have made the final decision after conferring with the two officials that were not in agreement. Didn't make the effort and they let the TD officials call stand on the field. I don't think review can change posession, just decide whether it was caught or not.

And bingo was his name-o.......

[-JJ-]

Jennings did the discount double clutch and that let Tate get his hands on the ball..

I did see a double clutch too.

[Andy]

If the real refs aren't back this week, there's going to be a big revolt from the fans.

That's a guarantee.

[ruksak]

Unbelievable.

I mean, they even reviewed and had the chance to call it correctly.

The only thing that needs to be reviewed is the NFL's approach to commencing with the season without trained officials. WTH were they thinking?

[House]

If the real refs aren't back this week, there's going to be a big revolt from the fans.

That's a guarantee.

IF a deal got done, say tomorrow, week 5 will be the earliest we could have them on the field.

[Jules]

That is all you can do at this point really.

[Yehoodi]

people, people, people, it is simultaneous possession . . . its not that complicated . . . what is missing in all of this is the basic principal of possession . . .you can't have possession unless you have both physical possession of the ball followed by what is needed to then have legal (by NFL rule) possession . . . bottom line physical control of the ball is NOT possession in the NFL . . . you need both phyysical control of the ball and two feet on the GROUND and then make some sort of football move . . . (unles you can't if you are on the ground covered by a defender . . .

This principal has been crystal clear and we all have seen this 1000 times . . . control and two feet are not enough to have possession of the ball, you have seen it many times when a WR catches the ball, has control of the ball comes down and lands on the ground and it then strip and it is and incomplete pass, (hint hint NO POSSESSION, with the emphsis on possession) . . .

so bottom line in all of this is the GB defender, altho he had his hands on the ball first, can not, i repeat can not be credited with possession of the ball in the air, no way today, tomorrow and four times on Sunday . . .

the earliet point in which he can be credited with possession of the ball is when his second foot comes down, but by that time, Tate had also gain control of the ball so, at that point both players have controll and possession of the ball (as the Defender had his second foot on the ground and tate his back) . . .

so bottom line it does not matter how it started, we need to look to the point in which legal possession was obtained, and not earlier, and then decide if the possession (at that point in time) ws simulataneous, if it was then tie goes to the offense . . .

I think it was a brave, and correct, call by the offiicials . . .

[jjcolts]

people, people, people, it is simultaneous possession . . . its not that complicated . . . what is missing in all of this is the basic principal of possession . . .you can't have possession unless you have both physical possession of the ball followed by what is needed to then have legal (by NFL rule) possession . . . bottom line physical control of the ball is NOT possession in the NFL . . . you need both phyysical control of the ball and two feet on the GROUND and then make some sort of football move . . . (unles you can't if you are on the ground covered by a defender . . .

This principal has been crystal clear and we all have seen this 1000 times . . . control and two feet are not enough to have possession of the ball, you have seen it many times when a WR catches the ball, has control of the ball comes down and lands on the ground and it then strip and it is and incomplete pass, (hint hint NO POSSESSION, with the emphsis on possession) . . .

so bottom line in all of this is the GB defender, altho he had his hands on the ball first, can not, i repeat can not be credited with possession of the ball in the air, no way today, tomorrow and four times on Sunday . . .

the earliet point in which he can be credited with possession of the ball is when his second foot comes down, but by that time, Tate had also gain control of the ball so, at that point both players have controll and possession of the ball (as the Defender had his second foot on the ground and tate his back) . . .

so bottom line it does not matter how it started, we need to look to the point in which legal possession was obtained, and not earlier, and then decide if the possession (at that point in time) ws simulataneous, if it was then tie goes to the offense . . .

I think it was a brave, and correct, call by the offiicials . . .

That was not a simultaneous posession. Tate never had posession. Jennings pulled it to his chest and came down with it.

[ruksak]

people, people, people, it is simultaneous possession . . . its not that complicated . . . what is missing in all of this is the basic principal of possession . . .you can't have possession unless you have both physical possession of the ball followed by what is needed to then have legal (by NFL rule) possession . . . bottom line physical control of the ball is NOT possession in the NFL . . . you need both phyysical control of the ball and two feet on the GROUND and then make some sort of football move . . . (unles you can't if you are on the ground covered by a defender . . .

This principal has been crystal clear and we all have seen this 1000 times . . . control and two feet are not enough to have possession of the ball, you have seen it many times when a WR catches the ball, has control of the ball comes down and lands on the ground and it then strip and it is and incomplete pass, (hint hint NO POSSESSION, with the emphsis on possession) . . .

so bottom line in all of this is the GB defender, altho he had his hands on the ball first, can not, i repeat can not be credited with possession of the ball in the air, no way today, tomorrow and four times on Sunday . . .

the earliet point in which he can be credited with possession of the ball is when his second foot comes down, but by that time, Tate had also gain control of the ball so, at that point both players have controll and possession of the ball (as the Defender had his second foot on the ground and tate his back) . . .

so bottom line it does not matter how it started, we need to look to the point in which legal possession was obtained, and not earlier, and then decide if the possession (at that point in time) ws simulataneous, if it was then tie goes to the offense . . .

I think it was a brave, and correct, call by the offiicials . . .

You are all alone on that island of denial. NOBODY is calling that anything other than an INT. NOBODY!!!

It wasn't simultaneous, the defender had possession and the offensive player didn't even come close to getting any semblance of control until they wrestled with it for what seemed a full minute.

[stat2883]

Rogers was given a K-ball for that 2-pt conversion attempt.....

[House]

That was not a simultaneous posession. Tate never had posession. Jennings pulled it to his chest and came down with it.

Yep. Pretty obvious when you look at it.

[jjcolts]

The only thing that needs to be reviewed is the NFL's approach to commencing with the season without trained officials. WTH were they thinking?

Also the NFL referees that trains the "real" officials year after year, refused to train these replacement refs, so they were fired by the NFL.

So who trained these guys for the NFL????

[supremecoltsfan300]

people, people, people, it is simultaneous possession . . . its not that complicated . . . what is missing in all of this is the basic principal of possession . . .you can't have possession unless you have both physical possession of the ball followed by what is needed to then have legal (by NFL rule) possession . . . bottom line physical control of the ball is NOT possession in the NFL . . . you need both phyysical control of the ball and two feet on the GROUND and then make some sort of football move . . . (unles you can't if you are on the ground covered by a defender . . .

This principal has been crystal clear and we all have seen this 1000 times . . . control and two feet are not enough to have possession of the ball, you have seen it many times when a WR catches the ball, has control of the ball comes down and lands on the ground and it then strip and it is and incomplete pass, (hint hint NO POSSESSION, with the emphsis on possession) . . .

so bottom line in all of this is the GB defender, altho he had his hands on the ball first, can not, i repeat can not be credited with possession of the ball in the air, no way today, tomorrow and four times on Sunday . . .

the earliet point in which he can be credited with possession of the ball is when his second foot comes down, but by that time, Tate had also gain control of the ball so, at that point both players have controll and possession of the ball (as the Defender had his second foot on the ground and tate his back) . . .

so bottom line it does not matter how it started, we need to look to the point in which legal possession was obtained, and not earlier, and then decide if the possession (at that point in time) ws simulataneous, if it was then tie goes to the offense . . .

I think it was a brave, and correct, call by the offiicials . . .

I'm probably one of the few, but I agree. I thought it was a bad call at first, but after looking at it over and over again, they got it right

[Happy2BeHere]

If the real refs aren't back this week, there's going to be a big revolt from the fans.

That's a guarantee.

No it's not a guarantee...despite the fact that we all love the game we will still continue to watch even at this venture.

Why? Because most of us sports fans are addicted and willing to pay or have already paid. Unfortunately it's the way that it goes on something like this.

Ticket prices are ridiculous...the amount of money that players make is ridiculous...the amount we pay to watch it is ridiculous...the amount sports novelties and gear are is ridiculous...but yet we all still pay...

Yes this is a horrible thing...and sure a few fans will "revolt" I suppose...but the ripple effect will be such a faint fart in the wind it won't do much...it'd have to be on a pretty large scale.

Furthermore I think the fans have the least say in what goes on (which sucks)...but it's going to be up to the coaches, owners, and pundits alike that force the issue more than us fans...

[Yehoodi]

I just wished the mediots on the TV would remember the basic principals of possession and stop given legal possession to a guy in the air that has not landed on the ground with sole control of the ball . . .

[ColtsBlueFL]

That was not a simultaneous posession. Tate never had posession. Jennings pulled it to his chest and came down with it.

^ ^ ^ This ^ ^ ^

Jennings had the ball against his body when his feet were on the ground, Tate never did until both ere on th ground, even then Jennings had it against his chest.

[House]

You are all alone on that island of denial. NOBODY is calling that anything other than an INT. NOBODY!!!

It wasn't simultaneous, the defender had possession and the offensive player didn't even come close to getting any semblance of control until they wrestled with it for what seemed a full minute.

Well sure Tate had possession.......after his entire team (coach included) came down and swarmed the pile lol.

[Jules]

people, people, people, it is simultaneous possession . . . its not that complicated . . . what is missing in all of this is the basic principal of possession . . .you can't have possession unless you have both physical possession of the ball followed by what is needed to then have legal (by NFL rule) possession . . . bottom line physical control of the ball is NOT possession in the NFL . . . you need both phyysical control of the ball and two feet on the GROUND and then make some sort of football move . . . (unles you can't if you are on the ground covered by a defender . . .

This principal has been crystal clear and we all have seen this 1000 times . . . control and two feet are not enough to have possession of the ball, you have seen it many times when a WR catches the ball, has control of the ball comes down and lands on the ground and it then strip and it is and incomplete pass, (hint hint NO POSSESSION, with the emphsis on possession) . . .

so bottom line in all of this is the GB defender, altho he had his hands on the ball first, can not, i repeat can not be credited with possession of the ball in the air, no way today, tomorrow and four times on Sunday . . .

the earliet point in which he can be credited with possession of the ball is when his second foot comes down, but by that time, Tate had also gain control of the ball so, at that point both players have controll and possession of the ball (as the Defender had his second foot on the ground and tate his back) . . .

so bottom line it does not matter how it started, we need to look to the point in which legal possession was obtained, and not earlier, and then decide if the possession (at that point in time) ws simulataneous, if it was then tie goes to the offense . . .

I think it was a brave, and correct, call by the offiicials . . .

Stop drinking so much during MNF.

[Yehoodi]

That was not a simultaneous posession. Tate never had posession. Jennings pulled it to his chest and came down with it.

Tate had control of the ball in the eyes of the ref that called a TD and that is all that counts . . . you can chime all you want, ref say tate had joint possession of the ball when then landed and that is all that counts under the rules of the nfl, and not the rules of ESPN . . .

[Happy2BeHere]

You are all alone on that island of denial. NOBODY is calling that anything other than an INT. NOBODY!!!

It wasn't simultaneous, the defender had possession and the offensive player didn't even come close to getting any semblance of control until they wrestled with it for what seemed a full minute.

Wrong...the officials clearly did not call that an INT

[House]

Tate had control of the ball in the eyes of the ref that called a TD and that is all that counts . . . you can chime all you want, ref say tate had joint possession of the ball when then landed and that is all that counts under the rules of the nfl, and not the rules of ESPN . . .

Or the rules of reality.

I kid, I kid.......

[RGIII]

so bottom line it does not matter how it started, we need to look to the point in which legal possession was obtained, and not earlier, and then decide if the possession (at that point in time) ws simulataneous, if it was then tie goes to the offense . . .

I think it was a brave, and correct, call by the offiicials . . .

Even if you want to make this case, how about the no-call on the BLATANT offensive pass interference? They normally don't call interference on those jump balls but you also normally don't have a receiver shove a guy that hard, that early.

[stat2883]

Tate had control of the ball in the eyes of the ref that called a TD and that is all that counts . . . you can chime all you want, ref say tate had joint possession of the ball when then landed and that is all that counts under the rules of the nfl, and not the rules of ESPN . . .

what about the ref standing next to him that signaled INT? The gray area here is whether or not you feel Tate had possession. I don't think anyone is changing their mind from whatever it is at this point.

[ruksak]

Also the NFL referees that trains the "real" officials year after year, refused to train these replacement refs, so they were fired by the NFL.

So who trained these guys for the NFL????

[supremecoltsfan300]

Let's not look over what really happened tonight....packers' offense got schooled today. Both the packers D and seattles d looked very sharp

[Yehoodi]

Stop drinking so much during MNF.

when some one shows me a still shot of the GB defender with sole possession of the ball with his second foot on the ground, then I will agree, but until then and NOT UNTIL then, when i see clear and convincing evidence that the GB defender had SOLE possession of the ball when his second foot was on the ground, then I will change my mind,

but shot of real physical evidence of sole possession, its joint possession . . . people can whine and complain all they want . . . but reality is for those who think it was an INT they must prove clear and convincing evidence that the ball was in the sole possesion of the defender's hand and the time he had legal possession of the ball . . .

btw, fortunately I am sober . . . :-) . ..

[ruksak]

Wrong...the officials clearly did not call that an INT

Those aren't officials.

I could put on a fireman hat and a fireman coat, that does not suggest that I am a fireman.

[House]

Even if you want to make this case, how about the no-call on the BLATANT offensive pass interference? They normally don't call interference on those jump balls but you also normally don't have a receiver shove a guy that hard, that early.

Watch the replay again. The sideline ref watching the cluster of players Tate was in, is staring right at him do that. Pretty blatant miss for sure.

[NewColtsFan]

Simultaneous catch isn't reviewable. Unfortunately I don't believe they would have had the stones to correct their mistake even if they could.

I think the MNF announcers were saying this was NOT simultaneous catch... they were saying this WAS a reviewable play....

[stat2883]

when i see clear and convincing evidence that the GB defender had SOLE possession of the ball when his second foot was on the ground, then I will change my mind,

https://twitter.com/HichenbergSKINS/status/250447436877791233/photo/1