Update:NFL statement: Result final,Tate should have been flagged

[Dragda]

How long I wonder would it honestly take to get an impact in TV ratings to have an actual impact to the league and teams revenues? I wonder how much flexibility or leverage the networks actually have in the short term to adjust the payments to the league? It's not like it is believable that any of them would actually think of dropping coverage of NFL games.

A reduction in ticket and merchandise purchases would hurt pretty quickly but I don't see people giving up on the league that easily. By the time it would make a difference I would think this issue will be solved. Either by reaching an agreement or just firing the current ones and poaching from Division 1 who might be more likely to if they know it will be a long term gig.

I considered a personal boycott. Then I remembered I bought tickets to the Seattle game. If the replacements are still doing a bad job of things after that game, I will boycott. I did so with the NBA and its inequitable officiating long ago.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Tate has really improved his game since leaving the Pats

 

[yukon cornelius]

It looks to me like Tate's arm was pinned in the defender's grip around the ball, but we can't really see from any angle. I can see making a case for not enough evidence to overturn.

the very fact that jennings had two hands on the ball long before (relatively speaking) tate stuck a hand in there negates the simultaneous argument, imho


tate also had no hands on the ball as they went/after they went to the ball - even if he HAD simultaneous control, he lost it


absolutely bogus, and ignoring their own rules just to save $3.3 million a year in pension monies

 

[IllegalContact]

honestly......watching games with replacement players was easier than watching games with replacement refs

 

[signbabybrady]

So really, what they've said is that it never should've been ruled a TD. There isn't obvious enough evidence to overturn - doesn't mean the right call was made.

You're not reading that right or I am huge idiot (either is possible) but they are saying more then that. They are saying the original call was right. They also said the the original call was infact reviewable.

BUT THE REAL BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT THERE WAS NO SIMALTENOUS CATCH END OF STORY. A SIMALTENEOUS CATCH IS FOR THOSE VERY RARE INSTANCES WHERE TWO GUYS ACTUALLY GET THERE HANDS OR POSSES THE BALL AT THE EXACT SAME TIME. WHAT IS BEING CLEARLY LOST HERE IS THAT THE DEFENDER GETS HIS HANDS AROUND THE BALL FIRST YES THERE WAS A POINT IN AIR WHERE BOTH HAD THE BALL BUT ONE HAPPENED FIRST THEN AGAIN ON THE GROUND THEY BOTH HAD THE BALL BUT THE DEFENDER POSSESED IT FIRST AND NEVER GAVE UP POSSESION. the caps and anger is directed at the NFL not any poster.



Basically what the NFL has said is that it doesnt matter when the offensive player grabs the ball so long as he grabs it before a full catch is established (Feet in bounds and came to the ground) then it is simalteneous and the offense wins a simaltensous catch. So instead of trying to break up would be interception just try and stick a hand in there and its yours.

 

[Deus Irae]

You're not reading that right or I am huge idiot (either is possible) but they are saying more then that. They are saying the original call was right. They also said the the original call was infact reviewable.

BUT THE REAL BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT THERE WAS NO SIMALTENOUS CATCH END OF STORY. A SIMALTENEOUS CATCH IS FOR THOSE VERY RARE INSTANCES WHERE TWO GUYS ACTUALLY GET THERE HANDS OR POSSES THE BALL AT THE EXACT SAME TIME. WHAT IS BEING CLEARLY LOST HERE IS THAT THE DEFENDER GETS HIS HANDS AROUND THE BALL FIRST YES THERE WAS A POINT IN AIR WHERE BOTH HAD THE BALL BUT ONE HAPPENED FIRST THEN AGAIN ON THE GROUND THEY BOTH HAD THE BALL BUT THE DEFENDER POSSESED IT FIRST AND NEVER GAVE UP POSSESION. the caps and anger is directed at the NFL not any poster.

The NFL lied, and contradicted itself in its own statement. They'll never again be able to talk about integrity with any authority. They've just become the WWE. And they did it for about 100 pensions that are a financial drop in the bucket.


Way to protect that Shield, Roger!

 

[BradyFTW!]

Fans should quit Thursday night football on NFL network, it wont matter this week though as Browns are playing and their own fan base wont be watching the one sided game along with the rest of the nation

Good idea - personally, I think I'm prepared to take it a step further and not watch any non-Patriots games.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Wilson is the top QB in the NFL.

Any QB can win a game for his team with a TD pass, but only Wilson can win a game for his team with an INT.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Good idea - personally, I think I'm prepared to take it a step further and not watch any non-Patriots games.

Ive already done that and if by halftime the Buffalo game is as bad as the Ravens game Im going out to do yardwork and thats it for me until they put a quality product on the field.

 

[signbabybrady]

Wilson is the top QB in the NFL.

Any QB can win a game for his team with a TD pass, but only Wilson can win a game for his team with an INT.

For the record and I was reminded of it by another poster in another ref thread but Brady actually won a playoff game largely effected positively for us on his own interception. The game was vs the Chargers and Brady threw a pick (It was either 3rd and long or fourth and long) and then after the pick Troy stripped it from the defender. Result of the play a key first down for us after dual change of possesions.

 

[Bill B.]

I am glad that they did not change the result. It would have sent a bad precedent. As much as we hate them, bad calls are part of the game. The NFL has acknowledged bad calls before and never changed the outcome of the game. If they changed the result of a game after the fact, then that would be the beginning of the end for the NFL.

 

[KoolAid]

BREAKING NEWS: The NFL has decided on a radical redesign of their "Shield" logo to more closely represent the true values of the league. Here is a preview:

 

[signbabybrady]

I am glad that they did not change the result. It would have sent a bad precedent. As much as we hate them, bad calls are part of the game. The NFL has acknowledged bad calls before and never changed the outcome of the game. If they changed the result of a game after the fact, then that would be the beginning of the end for the NFL.

In my anger last night I was screaming for the NFL to fix it and award it to green bay but with hindsight I agree it is a bad precedent to set but the real problem is that the NFL isnt even acknowledging that a mistake was made. Well other then the non PI.

 

[Deus Irae]

I am glad that they did not change the result. It would have sent a bad precedent. As much as we hate them, bad calls are part of the game. The NFL has acknowledged bad calls before and never changed the outcome of the game. If they changed the result of a game after the fact, then that would be the beginning of the end for the NFL.

This isn't a holding call in the first quarter. It's the final play of the game, and it's a win/lose call. Changing it isn't bad precedent. It's righting a wrong, and it would have been the right thing to do.

 

[Timbo717]

In my anger last night I was screaming for the NFL to fix it and award it to green bay but with hindsight I agree it is a bad precedent to set but the real problem is that the NFL isnt even acknowledging that a mistake was made. Well other then the non PI.

The non-PI exposes a flaw in the system, in my opinion. If a scoring play is under review automatically, the entire play should be under review. Or if a potential error B (the catch) causes a play to be under review, then error A (the non-PI) should be able to overturn the call. If they don't want to have non-calls be the cause of reviews, O.K. But once a play is ordered to be reviewed, review the entire dang thing or don't bother.

What they are saying is, "well we can't review that aspect of the play, just this other one even though we admit that the play as a whole was not called correctly." It's silly and doesn't fool anyone.

 

[12ClutchFactor]

This isn't a holding call in the first quarter. It's the final play of the game, and it's a win/lose call. Changing it isn't bad precedent. It's righting a wrong, and it would have been the right thing to do.

You cannot start changing wins/losses after the fact though regardless of how egregious the error was. That just begins us down a slippery slope no matter what.

 

[PittPatriot]

The NFL just gave the finger to its entire customer base.

And we answered with, "Really, when and where? You can do me any time you want!"
I am still watching every minute of football my work and wife allow me to this week…still wasting time on the fantasy team…and yes, hoping we get to celebrate a victory on Patsfans. Nothing will change unless the owners lose something.

 

[KoolAid]

It should have been reversed via replay, doing it the day after would be a bad idea IMO.

 

[KoolAid]

And we answered with, "Really, when and where? You can do me any time you want!"
I am still watching every minute of football my work and wife allow me to this week…still wasting time on the fantasy team…and yes, hoping we get to celebrate a victory on Patsfans. Nothing will change unless the owners lose something.

If they have any pride, I think they are losing something. Is that enough? Maybe not, I guess we will see.

 

[PittPatriot]

Can we trade Devin McCourty for MD Jennings?
Jennings should have knocked the ball down/away instead of trying to catch it…and nobody knocks down catchable balls like Devin.