you did not say that, but you attempted to justify replaying the down for a simultaneous catch by the fact that offsetting penalties result in a replay of the down, when the situations simply are not comparable and thus would not justify it. all plays count unless wiped out by a penalty. that is the most basic aspect of the game of football, and to logically execute that most basic element of the game all subsequent rules actually adhere to it. there is no exception in the rules. the ball belongs to the offense unless solely taken away by the defense, that is the basic rule set that is being set forth by the simultaneous possession rule, or even the rules for fumble recoveries. in the event of a simultaneous catch, since the defense does not solely take it away, they simply share possession of the reception, and it defaults back to the offense. the defense cannot share the reception and take possession, they have to take it away 100%. failure to take it away 100% isn't a flaw in the rule, it is a failure of the defense to intercept the ball. being as close as possible to an interception, which is all a simultaneous catch is -- being close to an interception -- does not mean the interception occurs. once you start creating exceptions for certain plays to be replayed, you can logically create exceptions for similar plays. like fumbles. when a team fumbles the ball it is a free ball for either side to then recover. but when neither side recovers it and it goes out of bounds, the team that had possession retains possession, even though they technically lost the ball. the defense failing to recover the ball doesn't change the fact that the offense lost the ball as well, and yet the rules favor the offense in such a situation. why? because every play counts unless a penalty occurs and is enforced. so the team that had possession of the ball prior to fumbling retains possession of the ball for the same reason a simultaneous catch is awarded to the offense -- the other team does not have possession of the ball if the possessing team equally shares possession. that isn't stated explicitly in those words in the rules, but every rule about possession follows that premise so it is clearly the theory behind the rules. for fumbles, both teams have equal possession of the ball when it goes out of bounds, that equal possession being no possession. in turn it defaults to the team that had possession. for a simultaneous catch both teams have equal possession of the ball, that being a reception under the rules of a reception (if you eliminate the simultaneous catch rule), and thus possession remains with the team that originally had possession, which could only be the offense in the case of a forward pass. the rule for possession for a simultaneous catch is consistent with the rule for possessions of fumbles, so to make an exception for one but not the other is unreasonable. which is why there is no need for the exception to begin with.
I do understand that, and the idea of changing one could lead to the next and pretty much everything youve got up in that 2nd part of your post. Just seemed to me that since it happens pretty infrequently for the most part it wouldnt be a big deal, but for the rare occasion that a call like that was alot more significant a teams game or season would be able to be decided by the plays and players rather than to default because of the rule, seems more fair IMO.
everything defaults based on the rules. in that situation, the season isn't decided by the rule, it is decided the player's execution. all the defender has to do is react one second faster and he will catch the ball first. failure to do so is the player's fault not a fault of the rule. the rule doesn't dictate the result, the rule is simply applied to the actions of the players. the actions of the players (and the referees ability) dictates the result.
But rules like this one and the force out, have room for interpretation a gray area where as most other plays do not have that room, the play is or it isnt. Look at the 2 in the packers jets game, the one on cotchery clearly fall within the rule, but because of the gray area it was not awarded to the offensive player. Theres just too high a rate that they will get the call wrong, either because it doesnt happen often enough or more likely because its open to interpretation, BY RULE. Theres no way to make it a definitive yes or no situation apparantly.
it wasn't because of a gray area in the Jets/Packers game, it was because the official fucked up. the official did not rule a simultaneous catch, he ruled it an interception (which cannot be the outcome of a simultaneous catch so clearly that wasn't what was called), and replay cannot over turn the call of an interception. those calls had nothing to do with the simultaneous catch rule because they were not simultaneous catches. there is no gray area in the rule for a simultaneous catch. it is merely dependent on the referees ability to see the play and call it correctly, like every other play in football. same with force out. if you come down out of bounds you it is not a catch. there is no gray area in that. additionally, the rules also state if the player catches the ball and is carried out of bounds before coming down in bounds, it is a catch. these rules are all black and white and the flaw in any one of them is the same flaw in them all -- the referees ability to call it correctly, and then whether replay can conclusively confirm or overrule the referees call. the only gray area is the referees judgement when making the original call on the field.
Yea your right, fing refs. just seems like they make a messed up call in that type of situation at a higher percentage.
