In Monday’s game between the Green Bay Packers and Seattle Seahawks, Seattle faced a 4th-and-10 from the Green Bay 24 with eight seconds remaining in the game.
Seattle quarterback Russell Wilson threw a pass into the end zone. Several players, including Seattle wide receiver Golden Tate and Green Bay safety M.D. Jennings, jumped into the air in an attempt to catch the ball.
While the ball is in the air, Tate can be seen shoving Green Bay cornerback Sam Shields to the ground. This should have been a penalty for offensive pass interference, which would have ended the game. It was not called and is not reviewable in instant replay.
When the players hit the ground in the end zone, the officials determined that both Tate and Jennings had possession of the ball. Under the rule for simultaneous catch, the ball belongs to Tate, the offensive player. The result of the play was a touchdown.
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.
The result of the game is final.
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
That’s the right call just as this one was… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoRzn3ZVTa0 You have to maintain possession through contact of the ground. If either rips the ball away before then they have the ball… if neither… joint possession. People make a big deal because refs screwed up other calls as all refs do and they want to stand on soap box and rant for no reason.
The confusion lies in the verbiage that states that if one player has “control” first and then the other subsequently tries to take it away, then it is NOT joint possession. However I believe the “control” is referring to who the controlling member of the ball is i.e. the player who controls it which they only can AFTER possession, not control as in their ability to influence the ball’s movement. In other words, if a player catches it and has an official reception and then the other player subsequently holds onto it and goes to the ground, it’s not joint possession.
I find it funny though how much outrage their is over this call which to me seems correct and does not seem much different than a call made in the past to which their was no outrage.
That’s because the “outrage” is trumped up by union sympathizers in the broadcast booth. Not that I had a tonne of respect for Trent Dilfer before, but now I actively loathe that drama queen.
________
isnt it why they have instant replay from every possible camera angle,in order to make the right call when in doubt?