Think so, yeah. - Edit 1
Before modification by Joel at 26/09/2012 05:00:44 AM
It was not a strip IF possession was simultaneous, obviously (because Tate always had possession, so there was no need for a strip.) However, even IF Jennings had indisputable sole possession, THEN we would be forced to consider whether he was ever down before Tate got the ball away, and I am not sure he was.
Between the two it is impossible to call that an unambiguous interception, and we are also speaking with the benefit of slow-mo replays the refs on the field did not have. In their place, based on what I saw in real time on the field, I would have made the same call, and this is one of those cases where a call—ANY call, be it Int or TD—is impossible to overturn once made, because no replay provides the necessary incontrovertible evidence. Many people (and I am not saying you are among them) have the mistaken idea bad calls do not matter as much now because they can be fixed on replay, but since replay reversal requires incontrovertible evidence, that is simply not the case.
once again, tate never had full possession of the ball. there is one angle where you can see him change his grip as they are falling together. there is no way it is a simultaneous catch.
Changing his grip does not prove he NEVER had full possession. For one thing, full possession is possible with one hand, and for another he could have previously and/or subsequently had full possession with either hand or both (which is the problem with using stills for a play like that.)
but IF it was a strip, then jennings has possession the whole way. even in the pic posted above, jennings CLEARLY has possession of the ball on the ground AS THE REFS ARE LOOKING AT HIM. how you could possibly call that for the seahawks is beyond my understanding of football.
In the pics above, no part of Jennings' body except his feet can ever be seen on the ground rather than on Tate, and players are only down by contact when any part of their body except their feet or hands touch the ground. Thus the pics do not show Jennings down at any point, and play should have continued, allowing Tate to strip the ball and GAIN possession even IF (and I cannot stress that "if" enough) he did not already have it (for which a strong case can be and has been made.)
also, both refs made opposing calls but never conferred with each other. the head ref never conferred with either ref on the spot. the only conference was between the head ref and the upstairs official, and we all know how that turned out. again, everyone but you, cannoli, tate and pete carroll knows the call was incorrect.
I hardly think that an exhaustive list of people who think the call correct, and saying, "everyone except those who disagree with me agrees with me," says nothing. That the head ref never conferred with either ref on the scene yet conferred with the upstairs ref on whether the play resulted in a TD makes clear which ruling he thought correct on the scene.