Packers-Seahawks

[DR RAM]

Wow. ESPN is interviewing everyone they can for their opinion on this. So far, everyone has the same opinion. What varies is the opinions on how soon the league and the union can reach an agreement. Leverage be damned.

Yeah, and I'm glad they are, but it wouldn't be fair to put some blame and responsibility on the refs themselves? What is everybody's thoughts on that?

 

[DR RAM]

I watched the entire game. I watched that play at least twenty times already, and I still can't believe that the people that dare to call themselves referees blew such an obvious call.

Absolutely fucking unacceptable. Completely fucking disgraceful. A fucking travesty of which the likes have never been seen. None of those adequately describe how I feel right now.

Get these replacements out of here. Get them all out. And as for the people who were put in charge of calling this game...ban them from football for good. I don't want to see them near any football field. This was a fix. What happened in this game can't be described as anything less.

There are Seahawks fans who are online right now who are saying that they should have lost. They're saying that all of the calls went against the Packers. That should tell you the magnitude of this. Nobody is happy with this call. Nobody.

Excluding the last call, the Seafucks first TD was aided by bad calls, and the Packers last TD was aided by a bad call. But the calls in general were hideous.

 

[JdashSTL]

If this situation were reversed, I would be just as upset in the Seahawks favor. I wouldnt want this to happen to any team in the NFL. I cant imagine what the ref signaling TD was thinking. I also thought that the replay officials could fix this. They made all turnovers and TDs automatically reviewed, but apparently they couldnt have overturned possession on that play.

For the ref that signaled the TD, just think about human nature in that situation. You think the play is kinda close (im being nice). Taint is hugging Jennings, one hand on the ball, your in a stadium full of 70,000 rabid fans, final play of the game, maybe part of you doesnt want to piss everybody off, even though they wouldnt have good evidence to be upset about.

 

[JdashSTL]

Wow. ESPN is interviewing everyone they can for their opinion on this. So far, everyone has the same opinion. What varies is the opinions on how soon the league and the union can reach an agreement. Leverage be damned.

Yeah, and I'm glad they are, but it wouldn't be fair to put some blame and responsibility on the refs themselves? What is everybody's thoughts on that?

Thats a good question. This whole experience with the replacement refs has actually made me appreciate the regular refs. These replacements have ZERO nfl experience, but have experience with reffing other football games. I just have a hard time putting much blame on them.

 

[MTRamsFan]

I believe that Steve Young talked about it after the game. Because the two officials had different calls on the play, it is the head officials responsibility to pull them aside and discuss what they both saw and then determine what the official ruling on the field should be. They both looked at each other in total bewilderment. There was no way the replay booth was going to overturn the call of touchdown.

I agree, that if the roles were reversed and it cost the seahawks the game due to the refs not making the right call, I would be saying that they got screwed too. However, I would not show the same conviction because I really hate Pete Carroll and the seahawks. :sly:

 

[MTRamsFan]

It's hard to blame the replacement refs for all of the debacle because they were asked to read, interpret, and understand a rulebook that is the approximate size of the New York City Yellow Pages, and do it within a few weeks/months. Also, as one analyst pointed out yesterday, these replacement refs haven't been trained to watch for certain things like pass interference, helmet-to-helmet contact, etc. as they pertain to rules in the NFL. Because of this, some refs will revert back to how they interpret these things using college rules. Lastly, the speed of the game is so much faster than college. As we all know, when rookies enter the league most will tell you that the biggest difference between college and the NFL is the speed of the game. So, the replacement refs are dealing with the same issue.

As I stated earlier, Godell and the owners need to get their act together and get the regular refs back sooner than later. Stop the insanity over a few bucks that they will probably recover in a season.

 

[JdashSTL]

I believe that Steve Young talked about it after the game. Because the two officials had different calls on the play, it is the head officials responsibility to pull them aside and discuss what they both saw and then determine what the official ruling on the field should be. They both looked at each other in total bewilderment. There was no way the replay booth was going to overturn the call of touchdown.

I agree, that if the roles were reversed and it cost the seahawks the game due to the refs not making the right call, I would be saying that they got screwed too. However, I would not show the same conviction because I really hate Pete Carroll and the seahawks. :sly:

An NFL reporter told me that they couldnt overturn possession on that play. Im getting so confused by these TD and INT reviews. They made those rules in favor of more replay, and wanted to have less plays that the coaches could challenge. If this was ruled an INT, I think its confirmed.

EDIT: So, because it was ruled a TD, all the replay official could do was determine whether or not the ball hit the ground. and rule TD or no TD.

 

[ScotsRam]

When was the last time a game involving regular officials had 24 penalties? It wasn't even just the last call, which was clearly wrong, but the whole game. We have had our fair share of bad decisions from the replacements but nothing like that, it really is time they sorted it out.

 

[xander47]

I don't think it should matter of whether or not they can or can't rule a change of possession. If you're giving teams extra timeouts/challenges, or letting them challenge a change of possession when you're not allowed to, then you can definitely break this rule. :fk:
The point of replay is getting the call right. This should be the number one rule and take precedence over anything else. :grr:

 

[JdashSTL]

I don't think it should matter of whether or not they can or can't rule a change of possession. If you're giving teams extra timeouts/challenges, or letting them challenge a change of possession when you're not allowed to, then you can definitely break this rule. :fk:
The point of replay is getting the call right. This should be the number one rule and take precedence over anything else. :grr:

All replay could do here was confirm TD or no TD because of the head official calling it a TD. This reminds me of when there are end-of-quarter shots in NBA games. All the refs can do is review whether it counts or not, the player could have blatantly traveled, or they may have been another foul, but they cant factor that in.

 

[-X-]

I don't think it should matter of whether or not they can or can't rule a change of possession. If you're giving teams extra timeouts/challenges, or letting them challenge a change of possession when you're not allowed to, then you can definitely break this rule. :fk:
The point of replay is getting the call right. This should be the number one rule and take precedence over anything else. :grr:

All replay could do here was confirm TD or no TD because of the head official calling it a TD. This reminds me of when there are end-of-quarter shots in NBA games. All the refs can do is review whether it counts or not, the player could have blatantly traveled, or they may have been another foul, but they cant factor that in.

The head official, in that case, is supposed to confer with the two officials who had conflicting calls. At that point, if neither will concede, then he has to go to review and make a call. But, like you said, only on whether or not it actually WAS a TD. Which it wasn't. I think they did confer, though I never saw them do it. Probably went like this.

Ref 1: "That wasn't a touchdown. GB had possession and SEA was trying to tear the ball away."
Ref 2: "Jimmy No-Nose told us to cover the spread, and he didn't ask this time."

Head Ref: "I think you know what we have to do here."

 

[JdashSTL]

I don't think it should matter of whether or not they can or can't rule a change of possession. If you're giving teams extra timeouts/challenges, or letting them challenge a change of possession when you're not allowed to, then you can definitely break this rule. :fk:
The point of replay is getting the call right. This should be the number one rule and take precedence over anything else. :grr:

All replay could do here was confirm TD or no TD because of the head official calling it a TD. This reminds me of when there are end-of-quarter shots in NBA games. All the refs can do is review whether it counts or not, the player could have blatantly traveled, or they may have been another foul, but they cant factor that in.

The head official, in that case, is supposed to confer with the two officials who had conflicting calls. At that point, if neither will concede, then he has to go to review and make a call. But, like you said, only on whether or not it actually WAS a TD. Which it wasn't. I think they did confer, though I never saw them do it. Probably went like this.

Ref 1: "That wasn't a touchdown. GB had possession and SEA was trying to tear the ball away."
Ref 2: "Jimmy No-Nose told us to cover the spread, and he didn't ask this time."

Head Ref: "I think you know what we have to do here."

Haha, that just makes me think of all the folks that bet on the Packers, I dont think they could have slept last night haha.

 

[JdashSTL]

Im also wondering how much it hurts the Packers to have public ownership when it comes to spurning action to get the real refs back. What if this was the Cowboys getting screwed and Jerry Jones would be going nuts?