Landon Collins: Simultaneous possession call was “crazy”

Getty Images

The Seahawks were up 10-7 on the Giants in the second half of Sunday’s game when Eli Manning lost a fumble to give them the ball on the Giants’ 38-yard-line.

It would be 17-7 Seahawks after one play, but sorting out exactly what happened on that play took some time. Russell Wilson ran a flea flicker and threw the ball to Paul Richardson, who went up to get it with Giants safety Landon Collins in close pursuit. The two men wrestled for the ball on the way down before officials ruled it was a touchdown for Seattle. The call stood after a review that found the two players had simultaneous possession of the ball and ties go to the offense.

Collins was not thrilled with that interpretation.

“It was an interception,” Collins said, via the New York Post. “I came down with the ball. … Once I rolled over, he’s trying to fight back into position for it. Once that happened, he had no possession of the ball anymore. It’s crazy.”

In a pool report, referee Tony Corrente explained why Collins didn’t get his way.

“The receiver went into the air, had control of the ball, lost control, re-grasped the ball and at the same time he did, the defender grabbed the ball, also,” Corrente said. “They went to the ground simultaneously with the football. Then they started a little wrestling match. It’s over now. That catch is established because if the defender was to pull the ball out of his hands now, it’s still a catch because the defender has a second action. So at that point when they were on the ground together, and they’re tussling to begin with, the catch is over, that’s the touchdown. Now, after that is when he rolled over and we don’t have any clear view of, quote unquote, anything happening after that. So that’s where it stands.”

The Seahawks would add another touchdown for a 24-7 win and the Giants added another frustrating moment to a season overflowing with them.

34 responses to “Landon Collins: Simultaneous possession call was “crazy”

  1. Just like the play Packer fans call the “Fail Mary” – the receiver had simultaneous possession when his feet touched the ground. That’s a TD. It doesn’t matter what happens after the moment in time.

    It not that hard to understand.

  2. It’s hard to understand for a generation that was raised with all the cheat-codes…they don’t like it when they can’t change the results.

  3. It not that hard to understand.

    Except the part where he has to keep possession all the way to the ground, which he clearly did not do. Doesn’t matter Giants weren’t winning that game.

  4. so possession all the way to the ground doesn’t matter if the defender is making a play, but matters when youre alone in the endzone?
    just making up the rules as we go along again

  5. You mean the receiver retook possession of the ball with a foot clearly out of bounds? Not that it matters because the Giants are dreadful but what good is replay when they can’t get the calls right anyway?

  6. So we still don’t know what the hell constitutes a catch in the NFL! How many players have had possession in the endzone after initial contact with the ground and have had the pass called incomplete?

  7. It was an interception.

    Richardson did not possess the ball going to the ground. Collins secured the ball and was lying down in the endzone before Richardson even stared fighting for the ball which in of itself demonstrates he lost possession.. It’s clear as day.

  8. For me, it is not the anthem distraction, or the incessant commercial breaks, or the crass corporatism that is turning me away from the game I have enjoyed since my childhood; it is the hollow and laughable propaganda put out there to explain away what I can clearly see for myself. It is the mind blowing interpretations and up is down, black is white explanation of what the rules are. It is increasingly adding an air of illegitimacy to the game’s outcome.

  9. “…he had no possession of the ball anymore. It’s crazy”

    No, it’s the end zone. Two feet down with possession is the end of the play. The play was already over before “he had no possession of the ball anymore.”

  10. jjackwagon says:
    October 23, 2017 at 8:47 am
    It not that hard to understand.

    Except the part where he has to keep possession all the way to the ground, which he clearly did not do.
    ________
    Actually, he did. Richardson clearly caught the ball while in the air, then when he fell, when his back was clearly on the ground is when Collins pulled it from him. But even when Collins tried to rip it from him, Richardson still had the ball in one of his hands. It was a clear catch.

  11. Look like a simultaneous catch to about anyone. The rules clearly say where the tie goes.

    If 160 lb Paul Richardson out muscled me for the ball I wouldn’t talk to the media but head straight to the gym.

  12. Catch. But obviously these simultaneous catches between players comes down to which way it’s called on the field. Fail Mary couldn’t be overturned nor could this one even if they had been called differently on the field. Judgement calls. Football. Part of the game. Get used to it.

  13. bleedingfacemask says:
    October 23, 2017 at 10:40 am
    “…he had no possession of the ball anymore. It’s crazy”

    No, it’s the end zone. Two feet down with possession is the end of the play. The play was already over before “he had no possession of the ball anymore.”
    ——————————————

    3 weeks ago, OBJ caught a pass in the EZ with full control. He took 3 steps before falling out of the end zone, the whole time maintaining full control. When he hit the ground the ball came out. Ruled no TD because he “did not complete the process of the catch.”

    As a Giants fan, that infuriated me. I was ok with the ruling yesterday. Leave it as it was called because there wasn’t enough to overturn. But the rule of what is and what isn’t a catch changes from week to week, game to game, and crew to crew.

  14. Don’t see how that was a TD. You have to have control all the way through to the ground. When he hit the ground, he lost control to Collins. By the time it became “simultaneous”, both of Richardson’s feet were out of bounds. How is that a catch?

  15. The receiver cannot create a simultaneous possession by placing his hands on the ball AFTER the interception. The one against Green Bay a few years was ridiculous. This is why fans think the games are rigged. Terribly bad call.

  16. As a Seahawks fan, I’m “glad…” (said with much trepidation) the calls went the way that they did. As a Hawks fan, over the years, I know what it’s like to be on the loosing side of questionable calls. For me, either way doesn’t leave a great taste in my mouth.

    I think it’d be really helpful if the RULES could be simplified (remember kids, “The use of common sense is authorized.”). Therefore, more clearly defined & recognizable to even a novice viewer. How long does it take to explain, “What is a catch?”, to a new viewer? I sometimes feel like the league just does things for the purpose of, doing something. “Damn the consequences, we had a meeting & we did something!”

    There seems to be no recognition that; changing (confusing) this, trickles its way into that… & that, & that….

  17. gtodriver says:
    October 23, 2017 at 8:38 am
    Just like the play Packer fans call the “Fail Mary” – the receiver had simultaneous possession when his feet touched the ground. That’s a TD. It doesn’t matter what happens after the moment in time.

    It not that hard to understand.

    ——-

    You’re saying that the Fail Mary was not a legitimate interception? Just stop. You’re making all football fans, especially Viking fans, look stupid.

  18. The receiver cannot create a simultaneous possession by placing his hands on the ball AFTER the interception.

    ——

    You should watch it again before speaking. Paul Richardson clearly had the ball first and high-pointed it. You saying the Defender had the ball first tells me that you either didn’t watch it or you are so emotional you don’t even know what you’re looking at.

    As far as what I saw as a Seahawks fan. I thought I saw a simultaneous possession coming down, but then I also noticed their feet out of bounds while they were wrestling for it. So I was not going to be surprised if it got called an incompletion.

    That’s the worst that could have been for the Seahawks.. an incompletion because they were touching the sidelines… never an interception.

    It was either going to be a touchdown or an incompletion.

  19. You’re saying that the Fail Mary was not a legitimate interception? Just stop. You’re making all football fans, especially Viking fans, look stupid

    ——

    Oh, the irony. The problem here is there’s two things in play here…one of them is what you THINK the rules should be… and the other is what the rules ACTUALLY ARE.

    Argue the former all you want, that’s kind of a philosophical discussion… but the latter isn’t really up for debate.

  20. I have no dog in this fight except in New Orleans, when the Saints played Carolina, a similar play occurred where the receiver jumped and caught the ball, fell to the ground where his knee hit the ground first, and a tussle for the ball occurred once the defender and receiver landed on the ground. The refs let them fight for the ball. The defender finally pulled the ball away and the refs ruled interception. I thought once the receiver was down the play ended. Their ruling was the receiver had to make the catch all the way through the leap and subsequent fall. Maybe this was not the case in New York since it happened in the end zone. It’s a tough ruling no matter which side you support.

  21. The photo used by PFT here clearly shows the WR with the ball in both hands, on to ground and in contact with defender, who isn’t in contact with the ball. Should have used one where there was simultaneous control, if you could find one. Or better yet, use the one taken after the scrum and call had been made where Richardson released the ball to celebrate and Collins remains holding the ball.

  22. Except it wasn’t a tie until Richardson jumped on top of Collins, with his feet out of bounds. The NFL can’t even get their own rules right.

  23. gtodriver says:
    October 23, 2017 at 8:38 am
    Just like the play Packer fans call the “Fail Mary” – the receiver had simultaneous possession when his feet touched the ground. That’s a TD. It doesn’t matter what happens after the moment in time.
    —————————————————————-
    He did not. That was not simultaneous possession. The defender had possession of the ball first and should have been given a INT.

  24. When the players hit the ground in the endzone, best case for Giants was simultaneous possession.

    Tie to the offensive player.

    There’s no question it was ruled correctly.


  25. jetsmmt says:
    October 23, 2017 at 10:14 am

    It was an interception.

    Richardson did not possess the ball going to the ground. Collins secured the ball and was lying down in the endzone before Richardson even stared fighting for the ball which in of itself demonstrates he lost possession.. It’s clear as day.

    Collins didn’t even get the ball until they hit the ground.

    Sorry.

    TD – Proper call.

  26. First of all…the Fail Mary. Prior to any catch, Golden Tate pushed off on one of the defenders. Offensive pass interference, end of game, no TD. I love the Hawks, but that was one bad call.

    HOWEVER, the call on Sunday was absolutely correct. Richardson had possession in the end zone, Collins then got his hands on the ball. Simultaneous possession, TD Seahawks! It didn’t make any difference in the long run. The Giants weren’t winning the game either way.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!