Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

These refs have got to go


SteveSmithTD89

Recommended Posts

I thought you couldn't get possession of the ball in the air. If you catch the ball in the air but you can't bring it to the ground, it's never called a catch then fumble. It's an incomplete pass. That's the way it's always been. Tate reached in while the defender was still in the air. I don't see why that wouldn't be considered simultaneous.

A catch is not completed until the player is down and maintains possession. That is true. And yes, the rule is the tie on simultaneous possession goes to the receiver. But in this case there was no tie. The defender had the ball intercepted and kept possession all the way to the ground. He had both his hands on it. Only after it was intercepted did Tate reach in and also get his two hands on the remaining parts of the ball.

At least, that is how I would have ruled in my unprofessional capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean by disqualified?

Well, if one team doesn't show up to a game, do they make one team play out the full game by themselves or do they just disqualify the other team for not showing up? I know an offense can run a play with less than 11 defenders on the field, but I've never seen a situation where a defense sends nobody onto the field. I'm just curious what would happen if a team refuses to continue to play. Anybody know what the rule is on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A catch is not completed until the player is down and maintains possession. That is true. And yes, the rule is the tie on simultaneous possession goes to the receiver. But in this case there was no tie. The defender had the ball intercepted and kept possession all the way to the ground. He had both his hands on it. Only after it was intercepted did Tate reach in and also get his two hands on the remaining parts of the ball.

At least, that is how I would have ruled in my unprofessional capacity.

Tate still reached in while Jennings was still in the air. You can't "complete" an interception while still in the air, the same way a receiver can't complete a pass before making it to the ground. Jennings shouldn't have left it up for discussion and should have just batted the pass down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving into unions is why this country sucks and you want the NFL to give into a union that couldn't do their jobs well enough to begin with and had pet teams (steelers always getting a yard extra on the spot)

Still willing to watch the entire season with them.

Union membership is at an all-time low, so your theory is invalid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if one team doesn't show up to a game, do they make one team play out the full game by themselves or do they just disqualify the other team for not showing up? I know an offense can run a play with less than 11 defenders on the field, but I've never seen a situation where a defense sends nobody onto the field. I'm just curious what would happen if a team refuses to continue to play. Anybody know what the rule is on this?

I guess whether they would have been disqualified or not wouldn't have mattered because they couldn't win. They should have stood up to the dictator that is Goodell and the owners. It might have been the only time where we see a field goal, where there was no defense against it. It would have been an epic message, but they missed it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving into unions is why this country sucks and you want the NFL to give into a union that couldn't do their jobs well enough to begin with and had pet teams (steelers always getting a yard extra on the spot)

Still willing to watch the entire season with them.

yeah thats because the foulcunts are 3-0.

I guarantee if this happened to your team you would be freaking the fug out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess whether they would have been disqualified or not wouldn't have mattered because they couldn't win. They should have stood up to the dictator that is Goodell and the owners. It might have been the only time where we see a field goal, where there was no defense against it. It would have been an epic message, but they missed it!

If I was the owner of a team, I sure as hell wouldn't want my coach to make that decision for me. If I want to suddenly boycott (even for one game that was already lost) the ref's ruling to send a message to Roger Goodell and the NFL, I sure as hell would want to be the one making that call. I don't think it would have been smart for McCarthy to make that decision himself. He did a good job keeping his cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...