If you haven’t stopped reading already, thanks!
I thought I had my column written two separate times between Sunday night and Tuesday evening. I was initially going to highlight two refreshing moments during a weekend of spotty officiating (shocker!). Those moments, by the way, were Torrey Smith’s phenomenal performance on Sunday Night Football less than 20 hours after hearing his younger brother had died in a motorcycle crash and Brandt Snedeker’s incredibly heart-warming comments after banking over $11 million with a win in the TOUR Championship.
By Tuesday, however, I sat down to write my column about the replacement referees costing the Packers a potential playoff-berth-deciding game. And then my editor in chief made a strong argument against that stance.
“A player only needs one hand on the ball to have possession,” he said. “Football players make one-handed catches sometimes.”
Some random section and article in the NFL rulebook says if two opponents simultaneously catch the ball and retain possession throughout the catch, the ball goes to the offensive player. However, if Player A first gains control and Player B gains joint control afterward, the ball goes to Player A.
Nowhere does it say a player needs two hands on the ball to gain possession.
While I refuse to believe M.D. Jennings didn’t intercept that pass, I had to watch Monday night’s final play on repeat until I was certain there wasn’t even a sliver of a chance Golden Tate had simultaneous possession of the ball (if I wanted to make that argument). Plus I’m a huge Packers fan, so I needed to rewatch that play to truly view it from an objective position. You know, the essence of journalism or whatever.
It doesn’t appear Tate ever gains possession when watching that play in real time. Jennings gets two hands on the ball right away, and Tate’s left arm is somewhere between the ball and Jennings’ chest. Tate uses his right arm to pull Jennings down and subsequently latches onto whatever he can with his right hand.
The image most people will point to as the defining “HOW CAN YOU SAY TATE HAS POSSESSION OF THAT BALL?” shot is when Jennings winds up in Tate’s lap, the ball pinned to the safety’s chest.
But that shot doesn’t matter. Based on the aforementioned possession rules, the play’s ruling rests on the moment when the ball first hits Jennings' and (maybe) Tate’s hands. That’s when, if Tate’s hand were on the ball, he would have gained “simultaneous” possession with Jennings.
After two hours of watching that play—most of which was spent analyzing a three-second sequence—I still couldn’t find a frame that showed Tate’s left hand off the ball as Jennings gained possession. The replay refs—who aren't replacements—had to make a call in a matter of minutes, and I frankly can’t fault them for concluding Tate’s hand never disconnected from the ball.
The replay officials aren’t in the wrong here. That play was going to stand as called on the field, regardless of the initial ruling. Unfortunately for Green Bay, the replacement officials made two different calls, failed to convene and determined the game’s outcome by ruling a touchdown on the field.
Who knows what would’ve happened if the refs had discussed the call before making a ruling? I’ve watched the play close to 100 times and can’t conclude Tate doesn’t “possess” the ball, but I know Jennings intercepted that pass. I think the refs would’ve ruled as such if they had convened.
It’s an eerily similar situation to Week 1 two seasons ago, when Calvin Johnson’s late go-ahead touchdown catch against Chicago was ruled, upon booth review, incomplete because Megatron didn’t stand up with possession of the ball. He had complete control as his knees and butt hit the endzone, but he dropped it while bouncing up off the ground to celebrate. The strict, word-for-word interpretation of the rulebook called for an incomplete pass; the correct call didn’t line up with the one that made football sense, if that’s a thing. Just like last night.
Ultimately, the replacement refs ruled the play a touchdown, and the NFL lost its credibility. Even if they had huddled up, discussed the play—what the regular refs would’ve done—and ruled touchdown, the league still would’ve lost its credibility.
Throughout the first three weeks, Roger Goodell and the NFL have insisted the replacement referees are capable of officiating this league. Roger that, Cornelius Fudge. Continue to tell us the Ministry of Magic hasn’t been infiltrated.
The players, coaches and fans were simply too fed up with the replacement refs; it didn’t matter if they followed the correct procedure on that final play. They awarded Seattle the game-winning touchdown, the replay officials couldn’t find conclusive evidence—based on strict interpretation of the NFL rules—to overturn the call, and the most popular professional sports league can’t be taken seriously anymore.
Do you think the replacement referees made the correct on-field call? Do you think the replay officials should have overturned the touchdown? Email Vince at vhuth@dailycardinal.com.
