Shame on the angry mob: golden tates TD was legit

[3irty1]

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/shame-the-angry-mob-golden-tates-touchdown-was-legit/17706/

Thought this was an interesting read. I'd like to see what others think.

[Teamcheez1]

If you subscribe to their argument, any time a receiver has one hand touching the ball when a defensive player goes to the ground with an interception, it would be dual possession.

Preposterous.

[KYPack]

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com...s-legit/17706/

Thought this was an interesting read. I'd like to see what others think.

Cold Hard Football Facts needs to change it's name to Lukewarm Soft Football Opinions.

Golden Tate didn't have the first catch or a simultaneous catch.

He was an interested interloper.

I do agree that hoping for a PI call on a Hail Mary ain't gonna happen.

There is so much interference on Hail Mary's, the games would never end if you called all the PI.

CHFF swung and missed on this one.

[Patler]

I didn't even bother reading past his discussion of frame 1. Tate touching the ball with the finger tips of his left hand constitutes control? It would take a lot of stickum for that to happen. Jennings has the ball between two hands, stopping its free fall. If not for Jennings controlling the ball, it would have simply glanced off Tate's fingertips. In frame 1, Jennings has control of the ball, Tate has contact with the ball. They are not the same.

The rest is irrelevant by their own interpretations of the rules.

[George Cumby]

I didn't even bother reading past his discussion of frame 1. Tate touching the ball with the finger tips of his left hand constitutes control? It would take a lot of stickum for that to happen. Jennings has the ball between two hands, stopping its free fall. If not for Jennings controlling the ball, it would have simply glanced off Tate's fingertips. In frame 1, Jennings has control of the ball, Tate has contact with the ball. They are not the same.

The rest is irrelevant by their own interpretations of the rules.

Yeah, what the really rational guy, said.

[sharpe1027]

The rest is irrelevant by their own interpretations of the rules.

There's a lot of wasted analysis on a simple issue by the few trying to legitimize the catch.

[Zool]

2 hands on the ball vs 2 fingertips on the same hand touching the ball. The guy is making the counter argument just to get hits.

Don't bother reading it.

[mmmdk]

2 hands on the ball vs 2 fingertips on the same hand touching the ball. The guy is making the counter argument just to get hits.

Don't bother reading it.

I won't.

[LegandofthePack15]

There is so much interference on Hail Mary's, the games would never end if you called all the PI.

Just b/c its a Hail Mary doesn't mean anarchy is the name of the game. I can understand no call on so-so contact, but Shields was pushed down blatantly. Refs need to make the call. If it was Shields doing what Tate did, there would've been a million flags.

[Patler]

Just b/c its a Hail Mary doesn't mean anarchy is the name of the game. I can understand no call on so-so contact, but Shields was pushed down blatantly. Refs need to make the call. If it was Shields doing what Tate did, there would've been a million flags.

Agreed. There is a difference between bumping and shoving for position, and knocking a guy completely to the ground. No body wants ticky-tack calls to be made, but a player also shouldn't be allowed to simply knock a competitor completely out of the play.

[Pugger]

Cold Hard Football Facts needs to change it's name to Lukewarm Soft Football Opinions.

Golden Tate didn't have the first catch or a simultaneous catch.

He was an interested interloper.

I do agree that hoping for a PI call on a Hail Mary ain't gonna happen.

There is so much interference on Hail Mary's, the games would never end if you called all the PI.

CHFF swung and missed on this one.

The game would have been over had they called OPI on that play.

[OS PA]

CHFF also fails to recognize that some of the gold you see "between" Jennings hands in the second frame is the tips of his gloves rather than his helmet. Which completely undermines their argument. Also failed to be mentioned is Jennings possessing the ball on more of his body than Tate. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the definition of possession when in the endzone is different than the definition listed in argument. Also why has nobody made the argument that a receiver must maintain possession through the ground? If this is the case, as possession is being determined while they're falling, Tate has already lost the catch to Jennings who maintains more contact.

Also none of his one handed possession examples come anywhere near this catch. They don't show any defenders touching the ball or possessing the ball. One handed catches do happen every now and then, but they are usually in the open field. I'd make an argument that Jennings possessed the ball through Tates hand, like the catch a few years ago made by Alabama's Tyrone Prothro http://youtu.be/Y7DSmFvDoYk.

[mraynrand]

"I will tell you I've worked over 450 games in this league. I have never seen a simultaneous catch," Hochuli said. "To get four hands on the ball at the same time is a pretty unusual situation.
"I've seen simultaneous recoveries. That's not uncommon. You un-pile the players, they're going after a loose ball and there are two guys who are completely wrapped around the football, and you have a simultaneous recovery. You're going to give the ball to the offense.
"But a simultaneous catch is a hard thing to have."

'nuff said

[denverYooper]

I saw the author and scrolled through the pictures this morning. Once I saw the absurdly grainy closeup, the gig was up on his borderline conspiracy-theoretic exercise.

I have entertained the notion that the call played to everyone's expectation that the replacements would screw up the end of a game and so amplified the beliefs of Packers fans everywhere but I have yet to see a truly compelling case arguing that it was the right call. This article is no different.

[sharpe1027]

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but the definition of possession when in the endzone is different than the definition listed in argument. Also why has nobody made the argument that a receiver must maintain possession through the ground? If this is the case, as possession is being determined while they're falling, Tate has already lost the catch to Jennings who maintains more contact.

It is a bit more complicated (or simpler in some respects) as the simultaneous catch deals with control, not possession. To establish "control," Mr. Hochuli explained you (generally) are required to have two hands on the ball. This is not the same as establishing possession in the context of a completed catch. It is that an instantaneous instant where you "control" the ball.

Jennings "controlled" the ball first. Tate just touched it with his finger tips. That's enough to alter the path of the ball, but its no more control than when a DL tips a pass up in the air.

If Tate's fingertips are enough for control, then there are hundreds of simultaneous catches ever year because two players often touch the ball at about the same time. That's just unbelievably stupid.

That being said, you do have an additional point. If at any time in the air Jennings has possession and Tate does not, it is an interception.