***Official Green Bay Packers Thread***

1383941434490

Comments

  • DS1119
    DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    First of all, I'm not even saying this as a Packer fan. I was speechless last night over the Baltimore/Patriots game, and that was over something 1/100th as bad as this one. Turn it to ESPN, people are foaming at the mouth mad. I've never seen Steve Young so pissed off, or Dilfer. This isn't like anything I've EVER seen. It's bad for the game, and I think it's extenuating circumstances. It's not just a blown call (you can't remove the human element) but a case of the refs not knowing the rulebook.

    Gotta love Stu Scott, he called Jennings last play the "game-winning interception". Stu is saying the same thing. This is a different type of blown call. I think the circumstances are extenuating enough that it would warrant turning it over. It doesn't mean you have to go back and turn over other games from the distant past, what would be the point anyway? Maybe turn over last night's game, and this one, that's it. You can turn over those games and make the record right so the season isn't fucked up. The NHL are very good about making/changing rules on the fly, the NFL should go about it the same way. They don't have to do it again, unless the league feels it is warranted.


    All I will say is have you ever seen a professional sports game ever reversed from the NFL, MLB, NHL, or NBA? Not happening and they play under protest quite often actually...especially in baseball. If this were ever reversed...and it won't...every team that has video evidence of a blown call in any of their previous three games will be knocking on the league's office door within minutes.
  • DS1119 wrote:
    First of all, I'm not even saying this as a Packer fan. I was speechless last night over the Baltimore/Patriots game, and that was over something 1/100th as bad as this one. Turn it to ESPN, people are foaming at the mouth mad. I've never seen Steve Young so pissed off, or Dilfer. This isn't like anything I've EVER seen. It's bad for the game, and I think it's extenuating circumstances. It's not just a blown call (you can't remove the human element) but a case of the refs not knowing the rulebook.

    Gotta love Stu Scott, he called Jennings last play the "game-winning interception". Stu is saying the same thing. This is a different type of blown call. I think the circumstances are extenuating enough that it would warrant turning it over. It doesn't mean you have to go back and turn over other games from the distant past, what would be the point anyway? Maybe turn over last night's game, and this one, that's it. You can turn over those games and make the record right so the season isn't fucked up. The NHL are very good about making/changing rules on the fly, the NFL should go about it the same way. They don't have to do it again, unless the league feels it is warranted.


    All I will say is have you ever seen a professional sports game ever reversed from the NFL, MLB, NHL, or NBA? Not happening and they play under protest quite often actually...especially in baseball. If this were ever reversed...and it won't...every team that has video evidence of a blown call in any of their previous three games will be knocking on the league's office door within minutes.

    This isn't just a blown call. It is the officials not going by the rule book. The blown call was bad, but then to uphold it even though the rulebook said something else entirely is the real issue, and the reason this is a different circumstance. As I said, you can't take out the human element and some games in the future might be won/lost on the bad eyesight of some old man or something. This is a ref doing one thing when the rulebook said to do another.
    "See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
  • pureoc
    pureoc Posts: 2,383
    DS1119 wrote:
    First of all, I'm not even saying this as a Packer fan. I was speechless last night over the Baltimore/Patriots game, and that was over something 1/100th as bad as this one. Turn it to ESPN, people are foaming at the mouth mad. I've never seen Steve Young so pissed off, or Dilfer. This isn't like anything I've EVER seen. It's bad for the game, and I think it's extenuating circumstances. It's not just a blown call (you can't remove the human element) but a case of the refs not knowing the rulebook.

    Gotta love Stu Scott, he called Jennings last play the "game-winning interception". Stu is saying the same thing. This is a different type of blown call. I think the circumstances are extenuating enough that it would warrant turning it over. It doesn't mean you have to go back and turn over other games from the distant past, what would be the point anyway? Maybe turn over last night's game, and this one, that's it. You can turn over those games and make the record right so the season isn't fucked up. The NHL are very good about making/changing rules on the fly, the NFL should go about it the same way. They don't have to do it again, unless the league feels it is warranted.


    All I will say is have you ever seen a professional sports game ever reversed from the NFL, MLB, NHL, or NBA? Not happening and they play under protest quite often actually...especially in baseball. If this were ever reversed...and it won't...every team that has video evidence of a blown call in any of their previous three games will be knocking on the league's office door within minutes.

    This isn't just a blown call. It is the officials not going by the rule book. The blown call was bad, but then to uphold it even though the rulebook said something else entirely is the real issue, and the reason this is a different circumstance. As I said, you can't take out the human element and some games in the future might be won/lost on the bad eyesight of some old man or something. This is a ref doing one thing when the rulebook said to do another.

    After watching a video replay nonetheless too. Fucking disgraceful.
    Alpine Valley 6/26/98, Alpine Valley 10/8/00, Champaign 4/23/03, Chicago 6/18/03, Alpine Valley 6/21/03, Grand Rapids 10/3/04
    Chicago 5/16/06, Chicago 5/17/06, Grand Rapids 5/19/06
    Milwaukee 6/29/06, Milwaukee 6/30/06, Lollapalooza 8/5/07
    Eddie Solo Milwaukee 8/19/08, Toronto 8/21/09, Chicago 8/23/09
    Chicago 8/24/09, Indianapolis 5/7/10, Ed Chicago 6/29/11, Alpine Valley 9/3/11 and 9/4/11, Wrigley 7/19/13, Moline 10/18/14, Milwaukee 10/20/14
  • DS1119
    DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    This isn't just a blown call. It is the officials not going by the rule book. The blown call was bad, but then to uphold it even though the rulebook said something else entirely is the real issue, and the reason this is a different circumstance. As I said, you can't take out the human element and some games in the future might be won/lost on the bad eyesight of some old man or something. This is a ref doing one thing when the rulebook said to do another.


    Rules are interpreted. The ruling on the field was a TD and the replacement refs and the replay officials (who are not replacements by the way per Adam Schefter) didn't overturn the call. Shitty call, but it will never be overturned. If this ever happens, then even when the real refs come back, wouldn't the NFL do the same thing if video evidence ever shows a bad or blown call to keep the league's integrity in tact? There weren't any rules broken here. It was just really bad and inexpereinced interpretaion. It's done.
  • DS1119 wrote:
    This isn't just a blown call. It is the officials not going by the rule book. The blown call was bad, but then to uphold it even though the rulebook said something else entirely is the real issue, and the reason this is a different circumstance. As I said, you can't take out the human element and some games in the future might be won/lost on the bad eyesight of some old man or something. This is a ref doing one thing when the rulebook said to do another.


    Rules are interpreted. The ruling on the field was a TD and the replacement refs and the replay officials (who are not replacements by the way per Adam Schefter) didn't overturn the call. Shitty call, but it will never be overturned. If this ever happens, then even when the real refs come back, wouldn't the NFL do the same thing if video evidence ever shows a bad or blown call to keep the league's integrity in tact? There weren't any rules broken here. It was just really bad and inexpereinced interpretaion. It's done.

    There's not really a lot to interpret about the rule. The rule clearly states that the first player to get possession in that circumstance gets the ball. Even if they argue that Tate got possession (the only part of this play up for interpretation) with his one hand and arm, he still clearly got to the ball second and therefore wouldn't be awarded the touchdown.
    "See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
  • Oh yeah, and I did hear that about the booth people not being replacements. That makes it even worse to me. What's wrong with those people? I smell Vegas.
    "See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
  • Mamasan23
    Mamasan23 Posts: 16,390
    I'm still speechless and so angry that I can't even properly articulate what happened tonight. So many thoughts jumbled right now...I have to sleep on this one before I can discuss it. The NFL should be ashamed.
    WI '98,  WI '99 (EV),  WI '00,  Chgo '00,  MO '00,  Champaign '03,  Chgo '03,  WI '03,  IN '03,  MI '04,  Chgo '06:N1 & 2,  WI '06,  Chgo '07,  Chgo '08 (EV:N1),  Chgo '09:N1 & 2,  Chgo '11 (EV:N1),  WI '11:N1 & 2,  Philly '12,  Wrigley '13,  Pitt '13,  Buff '13, Detroit '14, MKE '14, Wrigley '16: N1 & N2, Seattle '18 N2, Wrigley '18: N1 & N2, Fenway '18 N1, STL '22, St Paul '23 N2, Chgo '23: N1 & N2, Wrigley '24 N1 & 2
  • Mamasan23 wrote:
    I'm still speechless and so angry that I can't even properly articulate what happened tonight. So many thoughts jumbled right now...I have to sleep on this one before I can discuss it. The NFL should be ashamed.

    Nah, relax. We won the game by the rulebook, and even Seattle knows it, fuck the W/L column, we can make it up.
    "See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
  • DS1119
    DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    There's not really a lot to interpret about the rule. The rule clearly states that the first player to get possession in that circumstance gets the ball. Even if they argue that Tate got possession (the only part of this play up for interpretation) with his one hand and arm, he still clearly got to the ball second and therefore wouldn't be awarded the touchdown.


    I don't know the exact language here so please excuse me and I don't feel like rewinding the TV and finding it. :lol: But they were talking about if the on field decision determines it's joint possession it's ruled the passers ball. (Again I don't have the exact verbage). Keep in mind one ref said interception/touchback and one ruled a TD. It was a bad call all the way around. I can not dispute that. I'm just saying it will never be reversed.
  • DS1119 wrote:
    There's not really a lot to interpret about the rule. The rule clearly states that the first player to get possession in that circumstance gets the ball. Even if they argue that Tate got possession (the only part of this play up for interpretation) with his one hand and arm, he still clearly got to the ball second and therefore wouldn't be awarded the touchdown.


    I don't know the exact language here so please excuse me and I don't feel like rewinding the TV and finding it. :lol: But they were talking about if the on field decision determines it's joint possession it's ruled the passers ball. (Again I don't have the exact verbage). Keep in mind one ref said interception/touchback and one ruled a TD. It was a bad call all the way around. I can not dispute that. I'm just saying it will never be reversed.

    Well that's the first part, here's the whole rule:

    If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, it is the passers ball.

    It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control.

    I guess that second part could be up for some interpretation, but you would have to be blind not to see that Tate got to the ball second, even if you were blind enough to thing he had anything like control of it with one hand.
    "See a broad to get dat booty yak 'em, leg 'er down, a smack 'em yak 'em!"
  • Mamasan23
    Mamasan23 Posts: 16,390
    Guaranteed Gooddell comes out tomorrow and backs the call. I may have to swear off the rest of the season if that happens. That was very clearly NOT a simultaneous catch and the fact that they upheld it upon review makes me want to barf.

    I have never witnessed a game this terrible in my life.
    WI '98,  WI '99 (EV),  WI '00,  Chgo '00,  MO '00,  Champaign '03,  Chgo '03,  WI '03,  IN '03,  MI '04,  Chgo '06:N1 & 2,  WI '06,  Chgo '07,  Chgo '08 (EV:N1),  Chgo '09:N1 & 2,  Chgo '11 (EV:N1),  WI '11:N1 & 2,  Philly '12,  Wrigley '13,  Pitt '13,  Buff '13, Detroit '14, MKE '14, Wrigley '16: N1 & N2, Seattle '18 N2, Wrigley '18: N1 & N2, Fenway '18 N1, STL '22, St Paul '23 N2, Chgo '23: N1 & N2, Wrigley '24 N1 & 2
  • DS1119
    DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    DS1119 wrote:
    There's not really a lot to interpret about the rule. The rule clearly states that the first player to get possession in that circumstance gets the ball. Even if they argue that Tate got possession (the only part of this play up for interpretation) with his one hand and arm, he still clearly got to the ball second and therefore wouldn't be awarded the touchdown.


    I don't know the exact language here so please excuse me and I don't feel like rewinding the TV and finding it. :lol: But they were talking about if the on field decision determines it's joint possession it's ruled the passers ball. (Again I don't have the exact verbage). Keep in mind one ref said interception/touchback and one ruled a TD. It was a bad call all the way around. I can not dispute that. I'm just saying it will never be reversed.

    Well that's the first part, here's the whole rule:

    If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, it is the passers ball.

    It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control.

    I guess that second part could be up for some interpretation, but you would have to be blind not to see that Tate got to the ball second, even if you were blind enough to thing he had anything like control of it with one hand.


    Gains control is both feet down. Just not enough to overturn the call on the field.
  • stipe19
    stipe19 Posts: 237
    I hate the Packers for 2 reasons. Brett Favre and beating my Steelers in the Super Bowl. But lets be real here. That was a FUCKED up call. And the morons review the play and STILL GET IT WRONG. What a joke.

    Did the NFL just leapfrog wresting and the NBA in officiating.

    And to all the people laughing at the Packers and their fans. Be Warned. Your team is next to lose a game because of a bullshit call.

    And to all the baseball fans. Armando Galarrago is saying yo Green Bay I feel your pain.
  • DS1119
    DS1119 Posts: 33,497
    stipe19 wrote:
    Did the NFL just leapfrog wresting and the NBA in officiating.



    Not yet. :lol:
  • pandora
    pandora Posts: 21,855
    that was just wrong...
    go Pack but stay away from my Falcons ;):mrgreen:
  • eeriepadave
    eeriepadave West Chester, PA Posts: 43,254
    I went to bed before the game was over but just caught the highlights :shock:
    8/28/98- Camden, NJ
    10/31/09- Philly
    5/21/10- NYC
    9/2/12- Philly, PA
    7/19/13- Wrigley
    10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
    10/21/13- Philly, PA
    10/22/13- Philly, PA
    10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
    4/28/16- Philly, PA
    4/29/16- Philly, PA
    5/1/16- NYC
    5/2/16- NYC
    9/2/18- Boston, MA
    9/4/18- Boston, MA
    9/14/22- Camden, NJ
    9/7/24- Philly, PA
    9/9/24- Philly, PA
    Tres Mts.- 3/23/11- Philly. PA
    Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly, PA
    RNDM- 3/9/16- Philly, PA
  • JK_Livin
    JK_Livin South Jersey Posts: 7,365
    I think the PI call before the end was worse.
    Alright, alright, alright!
    Tom O.
    "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
    -The Writer
  • lukin2006
    lukin2006 Posts: 9,087
    That was just terrible...to lose a game that way...but you got to respect the class of the organization for sending 11 guys out for a meaningless extra point. The NFL should look to adopt the college rule that if you intercept or block a conversion attempt and return it you get 2 points. A little late for this game, but would make extra points in situations like this less meaningless.
    I have certain rules I live by ... My First Rule ... I don't believe anything the government tells me ... George Carlin

    "Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
  • davidtrios
    davidtrios Posts: 9,732
    it was so good listening to am540 espn milwaukee coming in to work this morning. hearing packers fans moaning after a loss is a great way to start the day.
  • davidtrios wrote:
    it was so good listening to am540 espn milwaukee coming in to work this morning. hearing packers fans moaning after a loss is a great way to start the day.
    lol
    Take me piece by piece.....
    Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....