Exactly. Let's get real. He's certainly friends with most if not all of the refs; he's not going to call them out, even though a reasonable person would say, "The player is on the ground with a defender on top of him, he's down."
nobody allows the ball to be taken away from them. that's just fucking stupid beyond belief. by that logic, any time a defender makes a play the offensive player allowed it. you get tackled - you allowed yourself to be tackled, the defender didn't overpower you. have the pass knocked out of your hands -- you allowed it and thus could have prevented it despite the laws of physics at play. your attempt to portray yourself as unbiased and thus reasonable only make you look the opposite. project the elements of your arguments broadly, which any logical argument requires, and you can see how fucking stupid your argument is.
Maybe this will help from MSN Sports: [Comment From ErikErik: ] What is the rule for simultaneous possesion? Tuesday November 2, 2010 1:23 Erik 1:25 Mike Pereira: Erik ... it is when two people have joint possession of a loose ball. The play does not end when either player goes to the ground. It ends when one player takes the ball away from the other OR when both players come to the ground and completely stop, still jointly in possession. If the defender pulls the ball away as both players are rolling around on the ground, as what happened in the Packers-Jets game, the defender gets the ball and it is ruled an interception. Key point to remember -- the play DOES NOT end when either or both players initially go to the ground. The bolded above clearly illustrates the point I've been making. The NFL has for the last couple years, deemed that in order for a COMPLETION to occur in the act of going to the ground, MOMENTUM must be completely stopped. I'm not trying to be difficult, its just how the NFL has been interpretting/enforcing the rules on these plays. Tramon Williams/Cotchery was definitely a TIE in which Williams wrestled it away when they were rolling. In the Keller case, the play did not stop simply because Keller made contact with the ground. Before Keller's MOMENTUM stopped, Woodson stripped the ball and was rewarded the INT. To answer your hypothetical: If Keller bobbles it during the slide and regains control AFTER the ball has crossed the plane of the goaline, then TD. If he never loses control, the completion will not be awarded until his momentum stops, but his forward progress will be spotted at the place of initial contact with the ground. Again, I'm not saying these are good rules, just how the NFL has interpreted them for the last couple seasons.
I'm sticking with my original statement. If it was so obvious...even with the "super-slo-mo replay", how come it wasn't overturned? I'm just giving an opinion on what I saw in the replay, they actually showed quite a bit on the big board (for once). Funny enough, most of the people in my section were in agreement that it would not get overturned, so I guess we're all a bunch of morons then, huh? My only point was, if you know you've only got one challenge left...save it for a challenge you know you'll win, or, at the very least, a challenge late in the game, not in the 1st half. The Woodson/Keller play was obvious, and to not have a chance to challenge that lies on the shoulders of the head coach. As much as I love the guy, and as little of a speed bump I think this game will ultimately prove to be, you have to have that challenge in the 4th quarter.
Apparently some people here simply don't know what the hell they are talking about. The Packers scouted our receivers and determined that we don't hang onto the football which is why they exploited that weakness and were ripping the ball away from us repeatedly. If you are too stupid to realize that defenses try to rip the ball away from receivers who notoriously don't hang on to the ball then you are completely fucking useless and naive. Keep pretending that takeaways happen for no reason at all and keep blaming the refs for weak ball control by the Jets. Its obvious that you have no fucking clue about how defenses scout receivers.
nothing about my post even remotely intimates I don't think defenders attempt to strip the ball away. the rest of your nonsense is simply speculation contrived to suit your argument that flies in the face of the obvious -- the Packers accomplished what they were attempting to do which in no way correlates to the Jets players not doing their job, simply the fact that they Packers did theirs better. what is naive and fucking stupid is to think that teams only succeed in accomplishing their tasks if the opponent doesn't do their job. to quote your stupidity...WRONG. a team can do their job and still not succeed at it because the other team beats them. by your logic, all sports comes down to is one team succeeding because the other team simply doesn't do their job. the only thing obvious in this exchange is that you have no fucking clue about the dynamics of competition if you think one team succeeds simply on the basis of the other team not doing their job.
Anybody read anything about those "interceptions"? If the Jets season had been on the line on Sunday, I would've come away from that game in tears over those calls. There also would've been a heck of a lot more scrutiny of both calls in the papers and on TV this week. It's reminiscent of the whole 'when is a catch a catch' thing we've had going on, best exemplified by the Calvin Johnson touchdown that wasn't. I'd swear neither was an interception, so if they somehow are, they should change the rules so they aren't, because they don't look like interceptions. I saw somewhere that the call wasn't actually reviewable for some idiotic reason, but does anybody know if the league has at least acknowledged that the calls on the field were wrong?
The Keller one is almost definitely an int. Watch the replay and ask yourself if the ball fell out of his hands and landed on the ground at that point would it be incomplete ? Most definitely. The Cotchery one we definitely got robbed on though
After that game the Jets DB's will be trying to strip balls even after they are "caught" - hopefully we'll get some INT's too. If the league wants to play like this I think we can be the best team at it.
Hindsight is 20 20. I get what you are trying to say and I think I absolutely hate reasoning itself. Rex had lost a challenge. If he challenges again, he won't get a third challenge no matter what the outcome. Thats a BS rule from the NFL imo. If HC gets one correct call and one wrong, he should get another challenge. I don't quite understand why a coach has to suffer if a ref makes a bad call. Coaches get a third challenge if they get two right, and thats it. They don't get a 4th challenge even if the coach was right on all 3 of them. Anyways, I've read several opinions about the call, one stating that the refs should have never allowed Rex to challenge the call in the first place. Apparently, dual possession is a non-reviewable call since its a judgment call. That is probably what Rex challenged. I put the blame on the refs for that challenge, but yeah, maybe Rex should have saved the challenge for later. Either way, an overturn would have given the Jets the ball. The outcome of the a game can change drastically if one turnover is reduced and that was the logic Rex used. Im not gonna blame him either way.
Problem is, the defenders were in on the catch as dual possession, not as tacklers. How often do you see dual possession in a game. I can swear I probably see it once or twice a year at the most. Ive seen it twice this year and Im pretty sure I won't see it again regardless of who's at offense.
Judgment calls can not be reviewed. They never been reviewable. Thats why the Chris Baker TD against Cleveland few years ago couldn't be reviewed since force out used to be a judgment call.
I disagree, especially with the Cotchery catch. Cotchery caught the ball, the defender went after the ball and yanked it out after Cotchery was already touched and down. Every time one of our DB's either tackles or arrives at the same time as the ball they just need to strip it while the receiver is on the ground and run away with it like it was an interception.
Who cares if the NFL admits the refs made a mistake? Jets wouldn't get a win back & there wouldn't be a do-over .... it's over. Jets had some bad calls but failed in so many ways when it comes to execution they can still blame themselves for the loss. What's the point of seeking a pointless apology which brings no gain?
To quote Ray Lucas from Jets Extra Point last night "RUN THE BALL!!" Then we wouldn't have to worry about two phantom picks.
And the fact that we got away with one. The pass interference that the Jets didn't get called on when they took down the reciever.
If we had run the ball more, the receivers caught the ball more and the coaches just generally called a better game we certainly wouldn't be having this conversation right now. One play (or two) doesn't make the game for a good team. We play 60 minutes. Our defense was lights out. There's absolutely no excuse for not scoring any points at all.
I tend to think, such call is a norm this season, not a reason to bitch about. Case in point? Look at how Bills lost to the Ravens. Pass is caught, then the forward progress is stopped. Instead of whistling, the refs wait till the ball is stripped. See any correlation?
I agree 100 percent with that. It's bullshit the team should suffer for the officials fucking up. If you're making challenges, and getting them correct, then I don't think you should lose the ability to challenge. If it makes the game a little longer, if it's that vital of a play, then so be it. I think the officials sometimes (as was the case here) make knee jerk decisions and leave it up to cameras to get it right for them, which is complete bullshit. They obviously fucked up, but that's been happening around the league for a couple of seasons now, and it's watering down the game. Quite sad.
