WOW! That Was Weird!!! Seattle 14 GB 12

[BluePhantom]

Seahawk fan goes off! Funny shit!...

A Must watch!!

Seattle Seahawks vs Green Bay Packers Game Ending Play "Controversy" - YouTube

Give the man a cigar....and a valium

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

no there isn't, and no they didnt get it right.

And this isnt even mentioning Tate's push off.

You have no clue as to what you are talking about per usual.

I do know? Look at the fucking rule. It says if they both control the ball at the same time then the tie goes to the offensive player. They both took control at the same time; they both began the catch at the same fucking time. The rule doesn't regard if one player has 2 hands on it to a players 1 hand or if one player has it closer his chest. So blow it out your ass fuckface. You just don't want to look at shit fairly as per usual.

there is more than one rule cumstain.

There's one rule in question dilhole. But go ahead and try and explain your retarded logic. I could use a laugh.

 

[rightwinger]

no there isn't, and no they didnt get it right.

And this isnt even mentioning Tate's push off.

You have no clue as to what you are talking about per usual.

I do know? Look at the fucking rule. It says if they both control the ball at the same time then the tie goes to the offensive player. They both took control at the same time; they both began the catch at the same fucking time. The rule doesn't regard if one player has 2 hands on it to a players 1 hand or if one player has it closer his chest. So blow it out your ass fuckface. You just don't want to look at shit fairly as per usual.

The GB player touched the ball first..true.. but his feet were not on the ground. He does not have "control" of the football untill he has both feet inbounds. The Seattle player had his left hand wrapped around the ball before either player was on his feet and the Seattle player never lost his gip on the football once he had established his part of the control of the ball. If you want to use the "one guy had two hands on the ball and the other guy had one hand on the ball"...that doesn't fly either. Many TDs have been ruled good with one hand catches. There is no rule that says two hands are better than one.

I saw the GB player with two hands on the ball and the ball on his chest. I saw the Seattle player underneath him with one hand on the ball

No question as to possession

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I do know? Look at the fucking rule. It says if they both control the ball at the same time then the tie goes to the offensive player. They both took control at the same time; they both began the catch at the same fucking time. The rule doesn't regard if one player has 2 hands on it to a players 1 hand or if one player has it closer his chest. So blow it out your ass fuckface. You just don't want to look at shit fairly as per usual.

The GB player touched the ball first..true.. but his feet were not on the ground. He does not have "control" of the football untill he has both feet inbounds. The Seattle player had his left hand wrapped around the ball before either player was on his feet and the Seattle player never lost his gip on the football once he had established his part of the control of the ball. If you want to use the "one guy had two hands on the ball and the other guy had one hand on the ball"...that doesn't fly either. Many TDs have been ruled good with one hand catches. There is no rule that says two hands are better than one.

I saw the GB player with two hands on the ball and the ball on his chest. I saw the Seattle player underneath him with one hand on the ball

No question as to possession

They both came down with possession by the rule. It doesn't matter who you think had a better grasp on the ball.

 

[HUGGY]

I do know? Look at the fucking rule. It says if they both control the ball at the same time then the tie goes to the offensive player. They both took control at the same time; they both began the catch at the same fucking time. The rule doesn't regard if one player has 2 hands on it to a players 1 hand or if one player has it closer his chest. So blow it out your ass fuckface. You just don't want to look at shit fairly as per usual.

The GB player touched the ball first..true.. but his feet were not on the ground. He does not have "control" of the football untill he has both feet inbounds. The Seattle player had his left hand wrapped around the ball before either player was on his feet and the Seattle player never lost his gip on the football once he had established his part of the control of the ball. If you want to use the "one guy had two hands on the ball and the other guy had one hand on the ball"...that doesn't fly either. Many TDs have been ruled good with one hand catches. There is no rule that says two hands are better than one.

I saw the GB player with two hands on the ball and the ball on his chest. I saw the Seattle player underneath him with one hand on the ball

No question as to possession

OK ...If the GB guy had the ball on his chest where was the Seahawk player"s hand?

The ball WAS NOT on Jenkins chest. The back of Tate's hand was on Jenkin's chest. If Tate had his hand on the ball at all it was UNDER Jenkin's grip. Think about it! Two hands are not better than one in a reception. You think those two guys are fighting with all their strength for ownership of that football and Tate has some super human power to keep his hand on the OUTSIDE of Jenkins grip while they are falling to the ground and rolling around? The ref called it a touchdown BECAUSE Tate had his hand between Jenkins chest and the ball.

 

[candycorn]

I do know? Look at the fucking rule. It says if they both control the ball at the same time then the tie goes to the offensive player. They both took control at the same time; they both began the catch at the same fucking time. The rule doesn't regard if one player has 2 hands on it to a players 1 hand or if one player has it closer his chest. So blow it out your ass fuckface. You just don't want to look at shit fairly as per usual.

The GB player touched the ball first..true.. but his feet were not on the ground. He does not have "control" of the football untill he has both feet inbounds. The Seattle player had his left hand wrapped around the ball before either player was on his feet and the Seattle player never lost his gip on the football once he had established his part of the control of the ball. If you want to use the "one guy had two hands on the ball and the other guy had one hand on the ball"...that doesn't fly either. Many TDs have been ruled good with one hand catches. There is no rule that says two hands are better than one.

I saw the GB player with two hands on the ball and the ball on his chest. I saw the Seattle player underneath him with one hand on the ball

No question as to possession

Absolutely right.

At the end of the day though; Green Bay should have never been in a position where they were in jeopardy of losing. Green Bay was out played

 

[Plasmaball]

I do know? Look at the fucking rule. It says if they both control the ball at the same time then the tie goes to the offensive player. They both took control at the same time; they both began the catch at the same fucking time. The rule doesn't regard if one player has 2 hands on it to a players 1 hand or if one player has it closer his chest. So blow it out your ass fuckface. You just don't want to look at shit fairly as per usual.

there is more than one rule cumstain.

There's one rule in question dilhole. But go ahead and try and explain your retarded logic. I could use a laugh.

nope there is two rules. One about both players and the other about if a player comes in. The GB player had the ball while tate ( who pushed off) hand a hand on the back. That is not equal possesion of the ball. One has 2/3rds and the other 1/3rd of the ball. It is evident from Tate having to REACH in to the GB player that he didnt have the ball at all.

We have had these calls NUMEROUS times and its always been called a certain way.

But what do you expect from refs who got fired from the lingerie league.

Yeah thats who you are defending. They got fired because they couldnt do the job right.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

there is more than one rule cumstain.

There's one rule in question dilhole. But go ahead and try and explain your retarded logic. I could use a laugh.

nope there is two rules. One about both players and the other about if a player comes in. The GB player had the ball while tate ( who pushed off) hand a hand on the back. That is not equal possesion of the ball. One has 2/3rds and the other 1/3rd of the ball. It is evident from Tate having to REACH in to the GB player that he didnt have the ball at all.

We have had these calls NUMEROUS times and its always been called a certain way.

But what do you expect from refs who got fired from the lingerie league.

Yeah thats who you are defending. They got fired because they couldnt do the job right.

I'm not really debating the push-off; just like I'm not debating the roughing the passer.

As far as the catch goes; the rule doesn't mention equal possession of the ball and thus you've proved your dumbassery again.

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:

Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Thanks for the laugh brah. I knew you were ignorantly speaking as usual.

 

[Papageorgio]

There's one rule in question dilhole. But go ahead and try and explain your retarded logic. I could use a laugh.

nope there is two rules. One about both players and the other about if a player comes in. The GB player had the ball while tate ( who pushed off) hand a hand on the back. That is not equal possesion of the ball. One has 2/3rds and the other 1/3rd of the ball. It is evident from Tate having to REACH in to the GB player that he didnt have the ball at all.

We have had these calls NUMEROUS times and its always been called a certain way.

But what do you expect from refs who got fired from the lingerie league.

Yeah thats who you are defending. They got fired because they couldnt do the job right.

I'm not really debating the push-off; just like I'm not debating the roughing the passer.

As far as the catch goes; the rule doesn't mention equal possession of the ball and thus you've proved your dumbassery again.

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:

Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Thanks for the laugh brah. I knew you were ignorantly speaking as usual.

To me having on hand on the ball, while the other guy has two hands and has brought to his chest is not equal possession. Many players, and retired refs are saying the same.

 

[ginscpy]

Tate made plays like that all the time at Notre Dame.

A short guy who always went up and fought for the ball.

Finally he is justifying the early pick the Seahawks made for him.

 

[Papageorgio]

Tate made plays like that all the time at Notre Dame.

A short guy who always went up and fought for the ball.

Finally he is justifying the early pick the Seahawks made for him.

So he often committed pass interference? Otherwise, that play was over.

 

[xsited1]

Bill Clinton on Packers-Seahawks: I would not have called that last play the way they did. - The Early Lead - The Washington Post

 

[Plasmaball]

There's one rule in question dilhole. But go ahead and try and explain your retarded logic. I could use a laugh.

nope there is two rules. One about both players and the other about if a player comes in. The GB player had the ball while tate ( who pushed off) hand a hand on the back. That is not equal possesion of the ball. One has 2/3rds and the other 1/3rd of the ball. It is evident from Tate having to REACH in to the GB player that he didnt have the ball at all.

We have had these calls NUMEROUS times and its always been called a certain way.

But what do you expect from refs who got fired from the lingerie league.

Yeah thats who you are defending. They got fired because they couldnt do the job right.

I'm not really debating the push-off; just like I'm not debating the roughing the passer.

As far as the catch goes; the rule doesn't mention equal possession of the ball and thus you've proved your dumbassery again.

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:

Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Thanks for the laugh brah. I knew you were ignorantly speaking as usual.

this rule would be in play if it actually happened this way. It didnt.

 

[Paulie]

Who picked these refs?

The real refs?

My understanding is that they were recruited from the ranks of small colleges and indoor pro football.

They seem clueless to the point that they seem to make almost intentional mistakes in judgement.

An average NFL viewer seems to know the rule-book better and is a better judge of what pass interference is.

Seattle should have lost but were given a gift to keep their final drive going and the interception in the end-zone that won the game for them was ruled a TD even though the receiver had less control over the ball than that defender. He only had on hand on the ball while the Defensive Back for Green Bay had both arms wrapped around the ball and had is securely against his chest.

This didn't seem to matter to these idiots.

One would think they're intentionally blowing calls to hurry negotiations between the refs and the owners.

A ref in one game a week or 2 ago was said to have been overheard talking about having one of the players on his fantasy team...maybe he said he started him, I don't know for sure I don't remember.

Take that for whatever it's worth.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

nope there is two rules. One about both players and the other about if a player comes in. The GB player had the ball while tate ( who pushed off) hand a hand on the back. That is not equal possesion of the ball. One has 2/3rds and the other 1/3rd of the ball. It is evident from Tate having to REACH in to the GB player that he didnt have the ball at all.

We have had these calls NUMEROUS times and its always been called a certain way.

But what do you expect from refs who got fired from the lingerie league.

Yeah thats who you are defending. They got fired because they couldnt do the job right.

I'm not really debating the push-off; just like I'm not debating the roughing the passer.

As far as the catch goes; the rule doesn't mention equal possession of the ball and thus you've proved your dumbassery again.

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:

Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Thanks for the laugh brah. I knew you were ignorantly speaking as usual.

this rule would be in play if it actually happened this way. It didnt.

They grabbed the ball at the same time. It did happen that way. There is no "equal possession" rule, just a simultaneous catch rule and once again you're talking out of your ass.

 

[Plasmaball]

I'm not really debating the push-off; just like I'm not debating the roughing the passer.

As far as the catch goes; the rule doesn't mention equal possession of the ball and thus you've proved your dumbassery again.



Thanks for the laugh brah. I knew you were ignorantly speaking as usual.

this rule would be in play if it actually happened this way. It didnt.

They grabbed the ball at the same time. It did happen that way. There is no "equal possession" rule, just a simultaneous catch rule and once again you're talking out of your ass.

lol.....

 

[Lakhota]

Boycott The NFL, Now

 

[Montrovant]

I think the ignored offensive PI was far more controversial than the simultaneous catch. When the play happened I was actually wondering if there was a simultaneous catch. I don't think that aspect of the play would necessarily be improved with the old refs. The missed PI, the apparently missed roughing the passer, the need to inform the refs that the extra point had to be played out, and the bevy of missed or mistaken calls throughout the game are a much bigger problem than the iffy simultaneous catch ruling.

We all know the replacement refs have been horrible. However, I don't know if the old refs are making unreasonable demands or not. What I would like to see from the NFL is a speedy resolution; how they resolve it isn't as important to me. If they get a deal with the old refs done quickly, fine. If they don't, set up a new contract with the replacements (which hopefully makes them full time rather than part time) and admit that they have had problems, but that they are growing into their roles and make sure they continue to receive the training and practice they need to be effective.

I want refs who have a long term deal and are full time. If that means keeping the replacements and having to deal with this poor officiating for a while, so be it. Just do SOMETHING definitive about the situation instead of leaving us hanging.

 

[Lakhota]

I think the ignored offensive PI was far more controversial than the simultaneous catch.

What "simultaneous catch"...? The only thing the Seahawk had possession of was the Packer who had control and possession of the football. Plus, the Seahawk was BEHIND the Packer.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Boycott The NFL, Now

I'd rather boycott you.