Goodell just compared the Packers call to the tuck rule

[Armchair Quarterback]

During his press conference, problem is one was a legit call on an actual rule and one was a blown call made by his gang of Division III incompetents and Lingerie League rejects. Does he even know the rules of the game he is commissioner of? He is such douchebag. I can't stand him.

 

[jmt57]

It's one of those things that gets repeated so often that it is accepted as fact. That call always makes the obligatory 'ten worst calls' in sports history whenever a ref/umpire blows a call. Nobody in the media wants to stand up and say 'actually the ref made the right call', because the agenda for those type of lists is to rile up fans who feel their team got jobbed.

Bad rule, right call.

But that message is not going to attract viewers/readers/listeners - the agenda when those lists are compiled is to show how bad refs have screwed up, and spark debate over which call was the worst. Ratings trump honest analysis every time.



I haven't heard what Goodell said yet, so it's difficult for me to comment on that part of it. Was he saying that Walt Coleman blew the call against Oakland? Or was he saying that both were perhaps poorly worded rules, and the refs in both cases actually made the right call - even though in both examples that doesn't appear to be the case when you see the replay?

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Not even close Screw-dell

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

It's one of those things that gets repeated so often that it is accepted as fact. That call always makes the obligatory 'ten worst calls' in sports history whenever a ref/umpire blows a call. Nobody in the media wants to stand up and say 'actually the ref made the right call', because the agenda for those type of lists is to rile up fans who feel their team got jobbed.

Bad rule, right call.

But that message is not going to attract viewers/readers/listeners - the agenda when those lists are compiled is to show how bad refs have screwed up, and spark debate over which call was the worst. Ratings trump honest analysis every time.

He compared the two as blown calls throughout history that teams just have to learn to live with

I haven't heard what Goodell said yet, so it's difficult for me to comment on that part of it. Was he saying that Walt Coleman blew the call against Oakland? Or was he saying that both were perhaps poorly worded rules, and the refs in both cases actually made the right call - even though in both examples that doesn't appear to be the case when you see the replay?

My interpretation is that he was comparing the two as blown calls that teams just have to learn to live with. If I can find a transcript I'll post it.

 

[cardiak]

They were both the right call, there is a reason when the NFL released its letter it did not say it was not a simultaneous catch. It said the play should of been reversed because they missed a pass interference penalty. Just like I stated when this happened before the media and fans got all riled up for blood. It was a simultaneous catch by both players. You can have possession of a ball around someones back or holding it on your helmet it doesnt matter, all that matters is both players came down from the air with possession of that ball in their hands.

Is it unfair? No not really I've seen just as iffy simultaneous catch calls numerous times, they just never ended a game. The media and fans were out looking for blood waiting on any little discrepency to jump down on the new refs.

And I'm no fan of the new refs, they are slow and have a bad understanding of the rules but what most people have been criticising has been there with the old refs. It's just that it was more taboo to come out and say it 500 times on a broadcast.

Go watch the seattle vs pittsburg superbowl game and tell me how much better those refs were? Where was the outrage then?

Anyways back to the point, the call was correct just as the tuck rule was.. it just wasn't popular

 

[PatsWSB47]

During his press conference, problem is one was a legit call on an actual rule and one was a blown call made by his gang of Division III incompetents and Lingerie League rejects. Does he even know the rules of the game he is commissioner of? He is such douchebag. I can't stand him.

He's an idiot. He claiming the simultaneous catch rule is a bad rule, don't blame his keystone cop refs. It isn't. It is the only way you call it aside from repeating the down. What he won't admit is that it was not a simultaneous catch so he can protect his crew of refs that couldn't shoot straight. He needs to do that so he can save face. Everyone sees through you this time Badell.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

They were both the right call...It was a simultaneous catch by both players.

Great... Pete Carroll is posting here, because nobody else believes it one bit.

A catch requires possession. Tate never had clear possession, just a hand on top of the ball AFTER Jennings had already caught the ball and had completed the catch by maintaining control as his butt hit the ground.

The NFL supported the call becuase

1) Until today they need to keep using those guys and didn't want to undermine them any more, especially since they had asked everyone else to respect them

2) They were in negotiations with the real refs. Admitting just how bad it is would have undermined their negotiations

3) If a video replay was ruled to have been improperly conducted on the final play of a game, and the ruling was based on more video replay showing the on-site replay decision to be wrong (as is the case here), then logically they could be asked why they do not change the outcome of the game, since no game action occurred after the mistake. Changing the outcome of a game a day later is a precedent that they never ever want to set. People would be forever looking for the next instance when this could occur, and that is unthinkable.

Goodell will continue to support the call for reason #3.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Great... Pete Carroll is posting here, because nobody else believes it one bit.

A catch requires possession. Tate never had clear possession, just a hand on top of the ball AFTER Jennings had already caught the ball and had completed the catch by maintaining control as his butt hit the ground.

The NFL supported the call becuase

1) Until today they need to keep using those guys and didn't want to undermine them any more, especially since they had asked everyone else to respect them

2) They were in negotiations with the real refs. Admitting just how bad it is would have undermined their negotiations

3) If a video replay was ruled to have been improperly conducted on the final play of a game, and the ruling was based on more video replay showing the on-site replay decision to be wrong (as is the case here), then logically they could be asked why they do not change the outcome of the game, since no game action occurred after the mistake. Changing the outcome of a game a day later is a precedent that they never ever want to set. People would be forever looking for the next instance when this could occur, and that is unthinkable.

This!

I rarely waste space quoting entire posts but the above bears repeating

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I just tried to listen to the presser but it cuts out at 5 minutes just as he is talking about how it's unfortunate to ever see game outcomes turn on controversial calls but it happens. Tuck rule was certainly controversial call and you can never convince Raider fans or Patriot haters it was right call. Just like they will never convince Packers fans or most other fans and mediots who live for something to biatch at the league about that the call that ended the game monday night was merely another in a long line of controversial game changing calls.

 

[jnug]

Quickly, cause this has been beaten to death...Tates right hand always trails the play...always. Jennings has two hands on the ball and is drawing the ball to his chest to secure. He has caught the ball, is controlling the ball and ultimately secures the ball. Tate has nothing more than a left arm pinned between the ball and the defenders chest which is how he ends up with his left hand on the ball. Tates right hand and arm always trails the play and by enough so that you don't even need replay to see it. Tates right hand and arm are continually trying to get around and onto the ball after Jennings has already caught it is controlling it and ultimately secures it.

The minute the league admitted that simultaneous catch in the end zone was reviewable, it was in trouble because that play should have been overturned in replay.

I am absolutely convinced that had the correct call been made on the field (INT), the announcement from the league would have supported that call as vigorously as it has supported the call that was made.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

This!

I rarely waste space quoting entire posts but the above bears repeating

I don't remember many of us complaining that time when Tedy basically ripped the ball out of the hands of the receiver who posessed it as they tumbled to the ground because he wanted it more... Of course I believe that was before the replay rules were changed to allow review or challenge of change of possession calls. Not to mention before the advent of twitter.

 

[signbabybrady]

I dont even want to get into to the tuck play because we all have our opinions of that and it doesnt matter it was so long ago.

To me bottom line there are a lot of rules that are grey and leave a lot to judgement and the speed of the game requires this in a lot of cases.

And possesion of a reception or interception is one of those things that can be very grey but none of that really matters because that is not what is really up for debate.

The key here is who arrived to the football first and Jennings is the first one there. Then you start to interpret the rules of catch (did he come down clean without bobbling it and staying in bounds) which he does end of argument this is not one of those confusing grey area rules like the tuck play.

Had the play gone down slightly different then you could get into grey area. Lets say Jennings didnt fully control it all the way down you could then argue that since he lost control when he regained he was simalteneously possesing it but this did not occur. Jennings was there first and never lost control thus there was no sulaltenous anything and we all know it.

 

[cardiak]

Great... Pete Carroll is posting here, because nobody else believes it one bit.

A catch requires possession. Tate never had clear possession, just a hand on top of the ball AFTER Jennings had already caught the ball and had completed the catch by maintaining control as his butt hit the ground.

The NFL supported the call becuase

1) Until today they need to keep using those guys and didn't want to undermine them any more, especially since they had asked everyone else to respect them

2) They were in negotiations with the real refs. Admitting just how bad it is would have undermined their negotiations

3) If a video replay was ruled to have been improperly conducted on the final play of a game, and the ruling was based on more video replay showing the on-site replay decision to be wrong (as is the case here), then logically they could be asked why they do not change the outcome of the game, since no game action occurred after the mistake. Changing the outcome of a game a day later is a precedent that they never ever want to set. People would be forever looking for the next instance when this could occur, and that is unthinkable.

Goodell will continue to support the call for reason #3.

Neither of them had possession untill they came down to the ground they were still catching and bringing it in. Tate had (2) hands on the ball, just because you can only see his right arm doesn't mean his left arm disapeared unless you think jennings is so weak he couldnt wrestle out from tates one arm on the ball. It doesn't matter if he caught it in his but cheeks it's still is considered possession they both came down from the air with their hands on that ball.

If it was the wrong call they would of said it, they didn't because it wasn't. No matter how much these media pundants huff and puff about this controversial call it doesn't change the fact that they are all dead wrong. It was the right call... it shouldn't of matter though because the offensive PI should of ended the game right then and there.

 

[everlong]

When Bruschi ripped the ball away from Rhodes by the time they got to the ground he had full possession and hopped up with it IIRC. I can hit YouTube from work to confirm but that's my memory of it.

 

[signbabybrady]

I don't remember many of us complaining that time when Tedy basically ripped the ball out of the hands of the receiver who posessed it as they tumbled to the ground because he wanted it more... Of course I believe that was before the replay rules were changed to allow review or challenge of change of possession calls. Not to mention before the advent of twitter.

Pretty sure Teddy ripped out before they hit the ground.

 

[Jackson 2]

For the Commish of the NFL to make that comparison in a public forum like today's, where the entire country, and likely parts of the entire world, are listening to every word is frightening, as well as revealing. Simply more evidence in my mind to support a theory I've had about him for a long, long time - namely, in addition to being incredibly arrogant, his position over-matches his ability to function in it effectively. He's simply not up to the requirements.

 

[DaBruinz]

They were both the right call, there is a reason when the NFL released its letter it did not say it was not a simultaneous catch. It said the play should of been reversed because they missed a pass interference penalty. Just like I stated when this happened before the media and fans got all riled up for blood. It was a simultaneous catch by both players. You can have possession of a ball around someones back or holding it on your helmet it doesnt matter, all that matters is both players came down from the air with possession of that ball in their hands.

Is it unfair? No not really I've seen just as iffy simultaneous catch calls numerous times, they just never ended a game. The media and fans were out looking for blood waiting on any little discrepency to jump down on the new refs.

And I'm no fan of the new refs, they are slow and have a bad understanding of the rules but what most people have been criticising has been there with the old refs. It's just that it was more taboo to come out and say it 500 times on a broadcast.

Go watch the seattle vs pittsburg superbowl game and tell me how much better those refs were? Where was the outrage then?

Anyways back to the point, the call was correct just as the tuck rule was.. it just wasn't popular

No offense, but there was TONS of outrage regarding the Referees after that SB. Numerous petitions with hundreds of thousands of signatures were sent to the NFL.

And, prior to this week, which saw very egregious blown calls on both Sunday Night and Monday Night football, the regular refs only had a bad game or two a season.. Not 1 or 2 a week..

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Good article on Goodell's untruthfulness and arrogance.

Roger Goodell: 'That's the beauty of sports' - NFL Nation Blog - ESPN

During a conference call to discuss the league's labor agreement with its regular officials, Goodell offered measured sympathy for the mistakes that contributed to the Packers' defeat. He classified them in the broader sense of the league's history of officiating blunders. (This is where he directly mentioned the tuck rule)

 

[Dragda]

Great... Pete Carroll is posting here, because nobody else believes it one bit.

I think it was a simultaneous catch, too. There is no way his arm could have been pinned under the ball like that unless he caught the ball at the same time. I can see that it could have gone either way, but I just don't see how he could have got his arm in there like that if it wasn't simultaneous.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

When Bruschi ripped the ball away from Rhodes by the time they got to the ground he had full possession and hopped up with it IIRC. I can hit YouTube from work to confirm but that's my memory of it.

By today's standards I'm not sure that ruling stands. Rhodes clearly possessed the ball first, they wrestled for it all the way to the ground and then tedy on a final rip while they were on the ground wrestled it away and stood up. Starts around 5:30 of this you tube video.

It's human nature that when the tip of a ball crosses the plane of the goal the winning team is elated and the loser's fans lament the whole ball doesn't have to cross the plane or that possession doesn't have to be retained until the ball hits the ground. Fans and some players are by nature sore losers. And officials are human and they make mistakes. You could review almost every play and we'd have 5 hour games. The speed and intensity of the NFL game has long been one of it's draws.

Tedy Bruschi Tribute - NFL Linebacker - YouTube