Woodson's INT· Page 3 · PACKERSHOME

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

14 years ago

You do have to have control of the ball if you go to the ground in the process of making the catch. The receivers didn't and Woodson and Williams capitalized on that. They were both the appropriate calls.

The network didn't pick up on that key part of the rule. When they hit the ground and didn't control the ball, it was up for grabs.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#22

http://www.nfl.com/videos/green-bay-packers/09000d5d81bbfcc5/Woodson-INT

Watch it again. Hard to tell from the 2 angles we have in this video. It looks to me that to overturn the ruling on the field it has to be definite. It doesn't look definite enough to overturn the ruling on the field. However, like I said, not the best 2 angles.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Finley88Beast
Registered

14 years ago

#23

I thought it was a clean INT looked like Woodson took it away before keller got his knee down.Didn't this happen in the bills game to with Morgan Burnett taking the ball away from the WR.

A Quote from my brother Mike(Bears Fan)
"Fucking Greg Jennings"
After he makes a catch

Greg C.
Registered

14 years ago

#24

I thought it was a clean INT looked like Woodson took it away before keller got his knee down.Didn't this happen in the bills game to with Morgan Burnett taking the ball away from the WR.

"Finley88Beast" wrote:

That one was clearly won by Burnett, though, because the receiver did not go down. Both of these today were tricky calls.

blank

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

14 years ago

#25

I don't think they are that tricky. If you look at the possession rule about controlling the ball if you go to the ground in the process of making the catch.

They went to the ground and the receivers didn't control the ball. The play isn't dead when they are down because it was still the process of catching the ball.

That is the rule. If you go by that rule, it is an interception.

Both times.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

zombieslayer
Registered

14 years ago

#26

Agreed. And even if it was close, to overturn the ruling on the field, it has to be definite.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

porky88
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#27

The replays shown on TV weren't that good.

If Keller was bobbling the ball or failed to maintain possession, then the right call was made. Remember, you have to maintain possession going to the ground. Not sure if he did that. The ball may or may not of been moving around. Obviously, he didn't have a great grip on it for Woodson to just take it away like he did.

Again, the replay angles were terrible though. Not sure what to make of the call.

http://www.row12.com/

Greg C.
Registered

14 years ago

#28

"Dexter_Sinister" wrote:

If that's the rule, then the plays were probably called correctly, but I still think it was tricky because it was hard to tell exactly what happened. If the offensive player has possession of the ball for even a split second, and he's down, then the play should be over. I would not characterize either of these calls as easy, and I'm very happy that they went our way.

blank

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

wpr (6h) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately

Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.

dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.

Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb

wpr (9-Apr) : yay

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland

Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'

Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you

Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22