After Week 1--Impression of Replacement Refs

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1348593913' post='1163009']
I think people (and by "people" I mean BAB and Weston) are confusing what constitutes a catch, and what constitutes "simultaneous possession". It's not that, until someone has established a catch, ie: 2 feet on the ground and a football move, or possession through to the ground, that another player can grab the ball and hence gain "simultaneous possession".

In this instance Jennings without a doubt has control of the ball when he leaps and grabs it with 2 arms. Tate barely gets 1 hand between the ball and Jennings chest. Nothing else after this is relevant. Tate did not catch the ball simultaneously with Jennings.. Having 1 hand on the ball does not constitute possession.
[/quote]

You may be correct. However I don't see him as having posession for certain because the ball disappears between the two of them. I do see your point though. Its not like someone could high ball it and the other guy grab it on the way down and claim simultaneous posession. However, the ball dissapears in the group there, and i don't think his posession at the top was that clear. Tate had a hand on it immediately as you said. Now imagine this all sped up. I am not saying it was a catch, I would lean toward pick. I just don't think it was so clear cut that the outrage is warranted. More a climate was right for outrage kind of moment.

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1348595448' post='1163025']
Banned for a disagreement? Is this for real? People have called me an idiot and I get banned? Seems odd.

Take a look at the picture in this link. Seems a little less obvious.

[url="http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/sports/2012/09/25/nfl-upholds-seahawks-disputed-win-over-packers.html"]http://www.dispatch....er-packers.html[/url]
[/quote]

I don't think you should be banned.. You definitely cleaned things up since you were Globetrotter.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1348593251' post='1163005']
Ok I used to defend Weston sometimes because I didn't think he deserved the title of being a troll, but after seeing him try to defend the Ref's call for 11 pages I have to call it like I see it. Weston you are a troll. It's one thing to take the minority opinion in an argument, but to take the minority opinion in a decidedly obvious argument for 11 pages is a troll. You continue to ignore the facts people have given you, and instead manufacture things to help your opinion. Golden Tate did NOT have two hands on the ball until both players were laying in the ground, contrary to you. Maybe you should just take a break from this board and come back after the season with a new screen name. If not that, then mods should limit you to 5 or less postings per day so you will think twice before trying to troll a thread.


[/quote]

Before last night I had not posted in a week. Disagreeing is not trolling bro. We are on page 12 and I happened to mention that I did not think the refs were all that bad literally 3 plays before the melt down. Bad timing on my part I guess.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1348595905' post='1163033']
I don't think you should be banned.. You definitely cleaned things up since you were Globetrotter.
[/quote]

I appreciate it.


I don't get the fuss with this one. You are all entitled to your opinions, as am I. If the next statement is "You are entitled to your opinion, but if you are an idiot I will call you one" I assume that runs opposite to the point of adults being on a discussion board.

I am just saying that I can see how a ref in the spur of the moment can see it as mutual. Thats what I saw without the review, thats what the announcer said as well and thats what the ref said. I am more then anything sick of hearing Steve Young whine about the refs.

[Jeb]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1348595615' post='1163030']
This isn't quite the same old same old, some of these guys have nothing on their resume but high school games or sub division college games.

With that being said, I kind of feel sorry for them. Here they are thrust into the spotlight and are under huge pressure to get everything right. How many death threats do you think those guys from last night got? I mean some of these guys could be your kids school teacher, coach, or principal.
[/quote]

I would like to see the same analysis of the regular refs when they come back, ...it won't happen. The controversy will be over because it's not really about bad calls.

All this hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth is about settling with a union not about bad calls. I don't care how bad the call was at the time. it's the same as the bad calls (and especially missed calls) by the regular refs. They happen all the time. Our team has to play against the refs as well. This group of refs don't seem to favor any team so all teams are getting a taste of our medicine, ...I'm OK with that.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1348596197' post='1163037']
I appreciate it.


I don't get the fuss with this one. You are all entitled to your opinions, as am I. If the next statement is "You are entitled to your opinion, but if you are an idiot I will call you one" I assume that runs opposite to the point of adults being on a discussion board.

I am just saying that I can see how a ref in the spur of the moment can see it as mutual. Thats what I saw without the review, thats what the announcer said as well and thats what the ref said. I am more then anything sick of hearing Steve Young whine about the refs.
[/quote]

If you think people are getting frustrated with you because of your opinion, you are CooCoo for CoaCoa Puffs. The fact that you quickly dismiss everyone's facts of evidence, and that you fabricate things to fit your argument, and continue an argument that should have been over by midnight last night, is why you are a troll. Tate did not have two hands on the ball when his feet hit the ground because one of them was on Jennings shoulder pad/helmet. Jennings CLEARLY had the ball cradled to his chest. There are no if's, and's, or but's about it. The fact that you continue to argue otherwise is ludicrous. Almost EVERY major sports site, television show, and newspaper say the refs blew it. So just because you hate Jon Gruden has nothing to do with it. That's all there is, finished, finito, kaput.

[oldschooler]

[media]http://youtu.be/AzPBcCF9yKc[/media]

[Mikey6866]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1348588345' post='1162979']
I believe thats after it was called a TD. Could be wrong though.



LOl. Thats after he called it and pulled away.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtYeeFpPPz0&feature=player_embedded[/media]
[/quote]

This is actually incorrect as well that is a still shot less than 1 second after TD was signaled...that still is almost simultanious with the td signal from referee 28.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Jeb' timestamp='1348596517' post='1163040']
I would like to see the same analysis of the regular refs when they come back, ...it won't happen. The controversy will be over because it's not really about bad calls.

All this hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth is about settling with a union not about bad calls. I don't care how bad the call was at the time. it's the same as the bad calls (and especially missed calls) by the regular refs. They happen all the time. Our team has to play against the refs as well. This group of refs don't seem to favor any team so all teams are getting a taste of our medicine, ...I'm OK with that.
[/quote]

Haha you sure about that? There was instance of a Saints game Ref getting yanked at the last minute because someone pointed out to the league that had pictures on his facebook showing him with a Saints hat and t-shirt. There was another episode where the league found another ref had already done a game and they later found out he had worked for the team as a ref at their mock game and practices!

[|Lucid|]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1348596197' post='1163037']
I appreciate it.


I don't get the fuss with this one. You are all entitled to your opinions, as am I. If the next statement is "You are entitled to your opinion, but if you are an idiot I will call you one" I assume that runs opposite to the point of adults being on a discussion board.

I am just saying that I can see how a ref in the spur of the moment can see it as mutual. Thats what I saw without the review, thats what the announcer said as well and thats what the ref said. I am more then anything sick of hearing Steve Young whine about the refs.
[/quote]

First off the announcer should be the last place we look to set a baseline.. I didn't watch the game, so there was no emotion for me when examining the evidence, nor was I influenced by announcers or other fans.. I first saw it when my dad was watching the news and they were showing the play.. At real time it looked like an INT, and even more so on slow mo.. I was stunned to learn it had been ruled a TD and upheld with replay.

I started off defending the replacements because I saw mistakes that are made by the officials.. But it's not about the mistakes themselves, but the frequency of the mistakes, and the almost comically bad management of the game from spots to marking off yards for penalties to clock management. The officiating has been sub par to say the least and seems to be getting worse.

[Mikey6866]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1348590890' post='1162993']
Why would someone get pissed off by someone's differing opinion?

Also I have said I like to play devil's advocate but not when it's outside of my own opinion. I am not arguing that it was a catch. Simply that there is more gray then people are acting like. When he has clear possession the play is already called a TD.
[/quote]

Probably because you have no clue on the actual rules. And once again you last sentence is a complete farce the packer has clear possesion almost simultanious with the actual td signal.

[BengalBacker]

I'm not going to read through the whole thread, but I'll just say I've seen the "real" refs make worse calls. I don't think this deserved the outrage against the refs on the field. If the call was so bad it warrants outrage, then the replay official (who is not a replacement) should have reversed it, and that's who everyone should be pissed at, not the replacement refs.

I do think it was an int, but it's not as cut and dry as everyone thinks.

[Jeb]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1348596925' post='1163045']
Haha you sure about that? There was instance of a Saints game Ref getting yanked at the last minute because someone pointed out to the league that had pictures on his facebook showing him with a Saints hat and t-shirt. There was another episode where the league found another ref had already done a game and they later found out he had worked for the team as a ref at their mock game and practices!


[/quote]

...and how many of the regular refs are Stooler fans? How many missed calls and bad calls are in that team's favor?

They've won Superbowls due to bad calls.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Lucid' timestamp='1348596970' post='1163046']
First off the announcer should be the last place we look to set a baseline.. I didn't watch the game, so there was no emotion for me when examining the evidence, nor was I influenced by announcers or other fans.. I first saw it when my dad was watching the news and they were showing the play.. At real time it looked like an INT, and even more so on slow mo.. I was stunned to learn it had been ruled a TD and upheld with replay.

I started off defending the replacements because I saw mistakes that are made by the officials.. But it's not about the mistakes themselves, but the frequency of the mistakes, and the almost comically bad management of the game from spots to marking off yards for penalties to clock management. The officiating has been sub par to say the least and seems to be getting worse.
[/quote]

i meant for everything beyond I appreciate it to go towards the group as a hole. fwiw.

[quote name='BengalBacker' timestamp='1348597662' post='1163050']
I'm not going to read through the whole thread, but I'll just say I've seen the "real" refs make worse calls. I don't think this deserved the outrage against the refs on the field. If the call was so bad it warrants outrage, then the replay official (who is not a replacement) should have reversed it, and that's who everyone should be pissed at, not the replacement refs.

I do think it was an int, but it's not as cut and dry as everyone thinks.
[/quote]

Apparently the replay guy cant reverse it.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Mikey6866' timestamp='1348596879' post='1163044']
This is actually incorrect as well that is a still shot less than 1 second after TD was signaled...that still is almost simultanious with the td signal from referee 28.
[/quote]

Its a still shot after he rolled over and pulled out the ball.

[url="http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/sports/2012/09/25/nfl-upholds-seahawks-disputed-win-over-packers.html"]http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/sports/2012/09/25/nfl-upholds-seahawks-disputed-win-over-packers.html[/url]

There is the still shot as he calls the TD.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1348596743' post='1163041']
If you think people are getting frustrated with you because of your opinion, you are CooCoo for CoaCoa Puffs. The fact that you quickly dismiss everyone's facts of evidence, and that you fabricate things to fit your argument, and continue an argument that should have been over by midnight last night, is why you are a troll. Tate did not have two hands on the ball when his feet hit the ground because one of them was on Jennings shoulder pad/helmet. Jennings CLEARLY had the ball cradled to his chest. There are no if's, and's, or but's about it. The fact that you continue to argue otherwise is ludicrous. Almost EVERY major sports site, television show, and newspaper say the refs blew it. So just because you hate Jon Gruden has nothing to do with it. That's all there is, finished, finito, kaput.
[/quote]

Hate Gruden? WTF? Listen, you have lost your mind with this one. I think you are a pretty ok guy half the time, but you are all over the place with your opinions soemtimes and generally really childish. Just stay steady bro, there is no need for this type of crap. This isn't something to get angry about. Take a few breathes.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='BengalBacker' timestamp='1348597662' post='1163050']
I'm not going to read through the whole thread, but I'll just say I've seen the "real" refs make worse calls. I don't think this deserved the outrage against the refs on the field. If the call was so bad it warrants outrage, then the replay official (who is not a replacement) should have reversed it, and that's who everyone should be pissed at, not the replacement refs.

I do think it was an int, but it's not as cut and dry as everyone thinks.
[/quote]

The replay booth couldn't overturn the call on the field because the Ref's initial call was a simultaneous catch so it went to the offense. A play under review can not change that decision. They looked at the play because it was a scoring play and the only thing that could be reviewed was if the ball hit the ground, the defender's foot was out of bounds when he touched it, etc.

I have been watching football for A LOT of years and I have never seen ref's make calls like this. Hell in the Minnesota game the side judge threw his hat into the endzone and the Vikings WR who was wide open slipped and fell on the hat costing them a TD. I don't have the stats in front of me to show your right or wrong, but I just don't see any other refs doing worse.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1348598191' post='1163055']
Hate Gruden? WTF?
[/quote]

Someone last night said not to listen to what Gruden had to say because they didn't like him? To be honest I thought you said it and I didn't feel like going back through all these pages to find it. So partially it is your fault for busting this argument for 11 pages.

[MichaelWeston]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1348598498' post='1163059']
Someone last night said not to listen to what Gruden had to say because they didn't like him? To be honest I thought you said it and I didn't feel like going back through all these pages to find it. So partially it is your fault for busting this argument for 11 pages.


[/quote]

I love Gruden. But Gruden either loves or hates everything. He has no middle ground. There is no gray area. I love his enthusiasm, but he loves every body. "I Like this guy" is what he says after every hit. That doesn't mean I don't like Gruden. Because I do.

[Gary]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1348595803' post='1163032']
You may be correct. However I don't see him as having posession for certain because the ball disappears between the two of them. I do see your point though. Its not like someone could high ball it and the other guy grab it on the way down and claim simultaneous posession. However, the ball dissapears in the group there, and i don't think his posession at the top was that clear. Tate had a hand on it immediately as you said. Now imagine this all sped up. I am not saying it was a catch, I would lean toward pick. I just don't think it was so clear cut that the outrage is warranted. More a climate was right for outrage kind of moment.
[/quote]

What part of the reception don't you understand? [u]WHEN JENNINGS FEET TOUCH THE GROUND HE HAS THE INT END OF STORY. [/u]You cannot take possession away from the person that caught the ball in the end zone after the possession is made like you can in open field.

And when Jennings feet touch the count there is no arguing over who has possession. Tate only had one hand on the ball at that time.

That picture you posted they were already on the ground. Who cares who has possession then anyway? The reception was already made by Jennings, and he already came down in the endzone with both feet. So all this crap you are posting is irrelevant.

[|kennethmw|]

[quote name='Jeb' timestamp='1348596517' post='1163040']
I would like to see the same analysis of the regular refs when they come back, ...it won't happen. The controversy will be over because it's not really about bad calls.

All this hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth is about settling with a union not about bad calls. I don't care how bad the call was at the time. it's the same as the bad calls (and especially missed calls) by the regular refs. They happen all the time. Our team has to play against the refs as well. This group of refs don't seem to favor any team so all teams are getting a taste of our medicine, ...I'm OK with that.
[/quote]

Sorry, I disagree wholeheartedly. To me, it's not just the bad calls, it's the lack of calls, the mistakes on rule fundamentals, and the feeling that these Refs are in awe of the players and coaches. I have never seen a coach yell at a ref and the ref decide to change his call until the last two weeks. I watched the ref go on the field last week and say that the clock needed a 10 second run off, but then not ensure that it happened in our game. I watched them give SF's Harbaugh two challenges even after he had used all of his time outs. I watched numerous hits over the last two weeks that should have been flagged and weren't, and at the same time seen calls that were called that shouldn't have been. It's not these guys fault that they are in way over their heads, but THEY ARE IN WAY OVER THEIR HEADS. That's why you see all of the uproar.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='MichaelWeston' timestamp='1348598191' post='1163055']
Hate Gruden? WTF? Listen, you have lost your mind with this one. I think you are a pretty ok guy half the time, but you are all over the place with your opinions soemtimes and generally really childish. Just stay steady bro, there is no need for this type of crap. This isn't something to get angry about. Take a few breathes.
[/quote]

Ok first off I'm not pissed and my blood pressure is A-ok. I'm sorry I don't vote a straight ticket and enjoy my freedom to have whatever views I deem fit. Childish? That's pretty funny really, is that your comeback for not having a high enough IQ to recognize a blown call by the refs? I'm really ready to petition you a limit of post per day, so that you don't troll some more.

[Vol_Bengal]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1348598318' post='1163057']
The replay booth couldn't overturn the call on the field because the Ref's initial call was a simultaneous catch so it went to the offense. A play under review can not change that decision. They looked at the play because it was a scoring play and the only thing that could be reviewed was if the ball hit the ground, the defender's foot was out of bounds when he touched it, etc.
[/quote]

Actually, simultaneous possession can be overturned by replay... when it occurs in the endzone. Goal line to goal line, no it can't, but in the endzone it can.

And, the replay official and the supervisor of officials can only offer suggestions, advice, what have you but the referee on the field is the one under the hood, looking at the replay, with the headset on that has to make the final determination.

[Jeb]

[quote name='kennethmw' timestamp='1348599353' post='1163071']
Sorry, I disagree wholeheartedly. To me, it's not just the bad calls, it's the lack of calls, the mistakes on rule fundamentals, and the feeling that these Refs are in awe of the players and coaches. I have never seen a coach yell at a ref and the ref decide to change his call until the last two weeks. I watched the ref go on the field last week and say that the clock needed a 10 second run off, but then not ensure that it happened in our game. I watched them give SF's Harbaugh two challenges even after he had used all of his time outs. I watched numerous hits over the last two weeks that should have been flagged and weren't, and at the same time seen calls that were called that shouldn't have been. It's not these guys fault that they are in way over their heads, but THEY ARE IN WAY OVER THEIR HEADS. That's why you see all of the uproar.
[/quote]

...I think winning a Superbowl due to bad calls is more repulsive, ...but that's me.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1348599966' post='1163077']
Actually, simultaneous possession can be overturned by replay... when it occurs in the endzone. Goal line to goal line, no it can't, but in the endzone it can.

And, the replay official and the supervisor of officials can only offer suggestions, advice, what have you but the referee on the field is the one under the hood, looking at the replay, with the headset on that has to make the final determination.
[/quote]
[indent]
[quote]
Replay Official Howard Slavin stopped the game for an instant replay review. The aspects of the play that were reviewable included if the ball hit the ground and who had possession of the ball. In the end zone, a ruling of a simultaneous catch is reviewable. That is not the case in the field of play, only in the end zone.
Referee Wayne Elliott determined that no indisputable visual evidence existed to overturn the call on the field, and as a result, the on-field ruling of touchdown stood. The NFL Officiating Department reviewed the video today and supports the decision not to overturn the on-field ruling following the instant replay review.[/quote][/indent]
You are right, the possession was reviewable. The funny thing is the replay booth aren't scabs, and they can't actually make the call on the field, but just give suggestions to the Umpire.