Goodell just compared the Packers call to the tuck rule

[buile]

> It said the play should of been reversed because they missed a pass interference penalty.

Uhh, wow... it really says that? You mean the door's now open to reverse plays based on missed penalties? A missed holding call can now negate a play upon review?

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

- By the time Tate's 2 feet touch the ground, he has both hands on the ball..

only very briefly, then he removes one hand than does not get it back onto the ball until the play is long since over, meanwhile, Jennings had both hands on the ball throughout, never let it move, had it in firm control on his chest, maintained control as his butt hit the turf, at which point he has established both possession and control, unlike Tate.

that part you omitted!

 

[Crononaut]

only very briefly, then he removes one hand than does not get it back onto the ball until the play is long since over, meanwhile, Jennings had both hands on the ball throughout, never let it move, had it in firm control on his chest, maintained control as his butt hit the turf, at which point he has established both possession and control, unlike Tate.

that part you omitted!

Good point, I was paraphrasing the article, went back and watched it and saw that he indeed lets go with his right hand before falling to the endzone. Still, at no point is it conclusive that the other hand is not on the ball. Control does not require both hands, otherwise any one-handed catch would not be possible. Jennings wanted to hold it to his chest, but he ended up holding it to Golden Tate's hand.

Look, I agree it was a blown call from the start, and if nothing else the rules should be modified because I agree that what happened should undoubtedly be an interception. Do I think Tate would have had control without Jennings essentially forcing his hand to be touching the ball? No. Do I think he had his hand firmly on it even with this being the case? I don't know. And that's why I don't think the refs could have overturned it, no matter how dubious the evidence. With his hand in there, you can't say for certain whether or not he had control. For this same reason if it had been ruled an interception it also couldn't have been overturned.

If you still disagree, that's understandable; I realize arguing that it was a bad call yet the refs were right to uphold it is a peculiar position. I just thought the article made some convincing points (and some not, especially the possession stuff you mentioned) that highlight some limitations of the current rules (perhaps degree of control should be taken into consideration?).

At this point I've given one play between two teams not even in the Pats conference far too much analysis and commentary so I will bow out. Thanks for the reply though! I look forward to returning to watching plays that I'm either unequivocally biased towards (Pats games), or don't care enough to have an opinion.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Good point, I was paraphrasing the article, went back and watched it and saw that he indeed lets go with his right hand before falling to the endzone. Still, at no point is it conclusive that the other hand is not on the ball. Control does not require both hands, otherwise any one-handed catch would not be possible. Jennings wanted to hold it to his chest, but he ended up holding it to Golden Tate's hand.

Look, I agree it was a blown call from the start, and if nothing else the rules should be modified because I agree that what happened should undoubtedly be an interception. Do I think Tate would have had control without Jennings essentially forcing his hand to be touching the ball? No. Do I think he had his hand firmly on it even with this being the case? I don't know. And that's why I don't think the refs could have overturned it, no matter how dubious the evidence. With his hand in there, you can't say for certain whether or not he had control. For this same reason if it had been ruled an interception it also couldn't have been overturned.

If you still disagree, that's understandable; I realize arguing that it was a bad call yet the refs were right to uphold it is a peculiar position. I just thought the article made some convincing points (and some not, especially the possession stuff you mentioned) that highlight some limitations of the current rules (perhaps degree of control should be taken into consideration?).

At this point I've given one play between two teams not even in the Pats conference far too much analysis and commentary so I will bow out. Thanks for the reply though! I look forward to returning to watching plays that I'm either unequivocally biased towards (Pats games), or don't care enough to have an opinion.

But Jennings had control first and thats all that matters, Tate didnt gain control until after Jennings had it in both arms wrapped up.

 

[jnug]

I do not believe Tate's pinned left hand and arm amount to control. Jennings is pulling the ball into his body. That exhibits control. If Tate had control with his one hand, he would not have allowed Jennings to pull the ball in to him pinning Tates arm and hand. Tate does nothing to exhibit that he is anything more than along for the ride, literally.

In part this is where I think the league is really vulnerable as far as its credibility in its ruling that night and the following day regarding this play. The rule has specifically been written such that the player must exhibit control. I think the league focusing on the uncalled offensive pass interference call for pushing off by Tate is simply a convenient way to avoid directly addressing the error that could have been reviewed and overturned that evening.

I think the simple catch rule requires that the player exhibit control as well. In pulling the ball into his body Jennings to my mind has exhibited control. What does Tate ever do besides having his arm pinned by Jennings as Jennings pulls the ball into his body? What sort of a football move does Tate perform with the ball? What kind of control does he exhibit as he tries to find some access way for his right hand so he can get it onto the ball? While Tate is trying to do that, from what i can see, Jennings has already caught the ball and has exhibited control. Further Tate never exhibits that he has robbed control from Jennings. Tate only manages to finally get both hands onto some part of the ball as they finally hit the ground. But he never robs Jennings of control on their way to the ground nor even on the ground.

They may have to add some additional verbiage to the rule so that it is less open to interpretation although I still just do not see what Tate does to exhibit control. The rule is not written such that Tate need only establish doubt about control. He must actually exhibit control. I don't see that Tate does anything to exhibit control even long after Jennings has already done so.

 

[Wolfpack]

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.

I don't consider it a bad rule and apparently neither does the NFL because, unlike so many of those other controversial/blown calls, the tuck rule was not changed after that season ended. It still exists today in the same form as it did that fateful, snowy night in January 2002

 

[ExpatPack]

For all of you who are still trying to say that this call was the right, please take the time to read PFT analysis which makes a very clear statement as to why it was the wrong call.

NFL’s rulebook, casebook confirm call was incorrect | ProFootballTalk

Most notable on the part of most of you trying to defend it is that you are mixing up "possession" with "control." Jennings had "control" from beginning to end. You cannot claim simultaneous "possession" as the end result unless you have secured "control" of the ball. One hand on the ball does not constitute "control." Tate did not establish "joint control" of the ball at the same time Jennings did. He had one hand underneath the ball and one hand only as Jennings secured the ball to his chest and then he reached over with his second hand.

To repeat: Jennings had clear "control" from beginning to end. Tate did not. You cannot claim simultaneous possession under those circumstances.

 

[goheels22002]

What Goodell was really thinking when he compared the tuck rule to the snafu in Seattle:

"Heh, heh, listen to this Bevis. I just made Belicheat pay me fifty thousand samoleons while I let Harbaugh off the hook. Now I'm gonna take a crap on his head by linking the tuck rule to that blown call in Seattle that gave Pete Carroll the win. Heh, heh."

 

[Joker]

what I stated 5 years ago still stands today....Roger Goodell should NEVER sit in absolute judgement of ANY issue concerning the Patriots as far as sanctions go...this should be handled by an independent arbitrator. He was employed by the Patriots nearest geographical rival that also plays in the same division. Any negative sanctions of the Patriots directly impact the fortunes of the New York Jets, no matter how slight. An ex-employee of the NY Jets should have NEVER been given the power to rule absolutely in regards to the New England Patriots. I have nothing against him levying appropriate sanctions as long as they are arrived at independently, by a neutral third party arbitrator or panel. Goodell is from big NY power and money, has numerous close business friends, partners and allies from the NYC metro area. I would expect A TRULY UNBIASED commissioner to see this obvious conflict of interest and offer the NEP the chance to be adjudicated in an atmosphere of complete impartiality.

His actions speak even louder than his words.....just look at his judgements concerning Ryan ...deviant, disgusting ,openly displayed examples of profanity and sexual fetishism that no family should have their children exposed to....either no fines/sanctions (pornographic video with wife) or a slap on the wrist...25K for throwing the middle finger at a public event in front of of people of all ages,swearing, vicious profanities directed at paying NFL fans as he leaves the field...this is all documented fact...when compared to Bill Belichick running after an official and trying to get his attention at the end of a game marred by horrific officiating and decided by a kick that has now been shown to be no good , one has to wonder just how big the axe Goodell is grinding on the Patriots can be...why he is still afforded the absolute right to judge the NEP and levy sanctions is a mystery yet to be solved.

 

[jcdavey]

i think the play wasn't as bad as people who snowballed the whole replacement ref thing, are making it out to be

i thought the tuck rule play was called correctly

i do think it's wrong for goodell to compare the two, because i do believe the tuck rule was MORE cut and dry

but i still love my boy goodell, best nfl commish ever!

 

[jcdavey]

anyway both calls PALE in comparison to ed ******* ****** hochuli's call of a fumble by cutler, into a forward incomplete pass

that was the biggest abortion of officiating ever seen in an nfl game in the history of time

 

[Joker]

well then...you should ask your hero for a job...maybe he can get you in as a clown in the Big Apple circus...after seeing the troupe of sad sacks he just saddled the league with for weeks, I think you may have a bright future...

 

[jcdavey]

well then...you should ask your hero for a job...maybe he can get you in as a clown in the Big Apple circus...after seeing the troupe of sad sacks he just saddled the league with for weeks, I think you may have a bright future...

no thanks lol

 

[tuckeverlasting]

lets face it, goodell is an idiot and we have four of the worst commissioners in the history of each sport.

 

[Joker]

Are Commissioners Pointless?

Goodell pulls down TEN MILLION a year to be the NFL's Baghdad Bob...think about that...

 

[Joker]

after Goodell fined Troy polamalu 10,000 dollars for talking into his cell phone to his wife telling her he was OK after a brutal concussion inducing hit, the Steeler fans struck back....

 

[Wolfpack]

what I stated 5 years ago still stands today....Roger Goodell should NEVER sit in absolute judgement of ANY issue concerning the Patriots as far as sanctions go...this should be handled by an independent arbitrator. He was employed by the Patriots nearest geographical rival that also plays in the same division. Any negative sanctions of the Patriots directly impact the fortunes of the New York Jets, no matter how slight. An ex-employee of the NY Jets should have NEVER been given the power to rule absolutely in regards to the New England Patriots. I have nothing against him levying appropriate sanctions as long as they are arrived at independently, by a neutral third party arbitrator or panel. Goodell is from big NY power and money, has numerous close business friends, partners and allies from the NYC metro area. I would expect A TRULY UNBIASED commissioner to see this obvious conflict of interest and offer the NEP the chance to be adjudicated in an atmosphere of complete impartiality.

His actions speak even louder than his words.....just look at his judgements concerning Ryan ...deviant, disgusting ,openly displayed examples of profanity and sexual fetishism that no family should have their children exposed to....either no fines/sanctions (pornographic video with wife) or a slap on the wrist...25K for throwing the middle finger at a public event in front of of people of all ages,swearing, vicious profanities directed at paying NFL fans as he leaves the field...this is all documented fact...when compared to Bill Belichick running after an official and trying to get his attention at the end of a game marred by horrific officiating and decided by a kick that has now been shown to be no good , one has to wonder just how big the axe Goodell is grinding on the Patriots can be...why he is still afforded the absolute right to judge the NEP and levy sanctions is a mystery yet to be solved.

Let me solve the mystery for you:

No one in their right mind thinks the fact that Roger Goodell interned for the Jets for 1 year almost 30 years ago actually affects his impartiality here and now in the 21st Century.

 

[1960Pats]

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

As accurate as that is, it doesn't change the fact that Goody is a dope and we'd be better off without his pompous ass in charge.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Let me solve the mystery for you:

No one in their right mind thinks the fact that Roger Goodell interned for the Jets for 1 year almost 30 years ago actually affects his impartiality here and now in the 21st Century.

So you're setting qualifications of being in our right mind for posting here on Patsfans?

You should be banned for trying to shut down Ian's site.

 

[jnug]

It would be hard to imagine that Goodell gets high marks for his stewardship of the NFL so far.

I don't exactly know why but having starting out setting a pretty arrogant tone (the sheriff) if anything he has become even more arrogant and willing to shoot first and ask questions later. Surely has not done the commissioner's position much good in Bountygate. Whenever you can tell the commish in any sport that he can take his deal and stuff it, then take his penalties and cram them right back into his face, the commish and the position of commish has been stomped pretty good. The way that all came down, the commish had an opportunity to present his case and.....nothing. So if anything he will find opponents more willing to contest him on that score alone.

Goodell will find NFL constituants less and less willing to just roll over when the commish makes a ruling now that he has been taken down a peg or two. Worse for him and for the league is that it means that opponents of the commish will seek out other venues in order to get satisfaction, like the courts for example. The very last thing the owners are going to want to see.

As for the rep-refs, Goodell has got so many marks on his body over this one it is hard to know where to start. Clearly he did not step in early enough in an effort to at least try to head this off at the pass. Does not matter that the league is viewed as an extension of the owners...Goodell works for the league. He could have made more of an effort to save the owners from themselves. In addition without doubt the league was responsible for having a contingency plan for reffing games that would work and clearly it did not. If anything the owners can't be to happy with Goodell on that score either. Their strategy has been completely exposed and it failed to boot, for the most part because the rep-refs were an abomination. Who was best positioned to both help the owners understand the hole they were digging for themselves and who had the responsibility to come up with a working formula for getting these games reffed....hummmm....that would be the same Mr. Goodell. The integrity of the league has been tarnished and its credibility rightfully called into question with Goodell left to support rulings that are in truth unsupportable.

As for the four of them from the four major pro leagues, can you believe that Selig is now the cream of the crop? I don't know whether to laugh or cry.