Quantcast

Comments about ‘Vai's View: Golden Tate not so golden in moment of truth’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Sept. 28 2012 5:10 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Aloha Saint George
Saint George, Utah

Well Said, AS John Wooden put it, " Sports don't develop character, it reveals it." I'm sure he'll learn from it though, I hope.

gdog3finally
West Jordan, Utah

Come on Vai, Golden Tate was fighting for the ball, and the ref makes a call. Who's to say Golden Tate knew the who had the right to it, or knew the rule. In fact, although the league suddenly resolved the first string ref issue, they still didn't admit the call was wrong.

I don't know the rule here, but sometimes rules need resolving. Think tuck rule (Tom Brady). Was Brady supposed to say I fumbled? Oakland still won't acknowledge that call. It saw their demise and rise of the Patriot dynasty.

How about Calvin Johnson's TD two years ago (ruled no TD based on a silly rule by most of the league's account)?

How about Utah vs. BYU a few weeks back? Was Bronco supposed to say: yeah the call is technically right, but it didn't effect the outcome, so we won't accept the call on the field (fan rushing)? We will take the loss and not the re-kick. Seriously Vai? I am a Ute fan all the way. But Bronco would be wrong not accepting the kick to try and force overtime.

gdog3finally
West Jordan, Utah

Also that public service announcement thing. Corny and not realistic even from a moral view. Refs make mistakes countless times in a game. One player speaking up does not correct bad calls. It's part of the game and not a player's call. It's the refs job and call. It's what they are paid to do. This isn't high school tennis were players ump their own games. This is big business and Golden Tate isn't about to threaten is ability to pay for his families needs because he was supposed to correct the ref on a call he probably doesn't even understand himself.

Calls (good and bad) are part of the game. Let the refs be accountable for that and not a player (i.e. Tate) who you are now criticizing Vai.

eagle
Provo, UT

I love ya Vai but I'm sure some time in your life you bent a rule in your football career, maybe like holding a blitzing linebacker or pushing off a defender to get open. It is part of the game. It was up to the NFL to do the right thing which would have been having the best officials in the game in the first place and overruling the play and giving the Packers the victory. Instead they took the easy way out...

61Cougar
Seattle, Wa

Vai - you picked the dumbest example to make that point. And Yes, I'm a Seattle homer, but this column didn't involve any intellectual thought. You simply jumped on the national pundit bandwagon and accused Golden Tate and Seattle of "robbing" Green Bay of a victory in what was a national "fiasco." You clearly didn't watch the whole game; only the last play replay shown again and again ad nauseam on every network and sports channel.

Worse, you grant the referee absolution and place all the blame squarely on Golden Tate--while getting in a little jab at Pete Carroll as well.

Stick to Philly and Utah Sports and quit booing Golden Tate and Seattle like Philly fans did Santa Clause so many years ago. Trust me, nobody wants to win the way Seattle did and nobody wants to lose the way Green Bay did.

But instead of grabbing your pitchforks and torches and going after the true source of the blame--a lingerie league referee and a commissioner and owners group that put him there--your boogie man is Golden Tate.

Wow!

Aggielove
Cache county, USA

Via. Your coming across holier then thou.
You've jumped the shark this time.

NightOwlAmerica
SALEM, OR

So it also must be Golden Tate's fault that:

Aaron Rodgers was sacked 8 times.

Green Bay only scored 12 points.

Bad calls also went against Seattle.

No let's just focus on the final play. Not the lack of offense and lousy play by Green Bay. In addition to being shut down by Seattle.

AZRods
Maricopa, AZ

Nice how many of you can just sorta look the other way, but you conveniently avoid the blatant interference your man Tate conveniently committed which if called would have ended the game.
But let's not muddy the already merky waters right?
I suppose you can justify that as well by saying boys will be boys.
It's that mentality that cheapens all sports when dirty or dishonest play occurs and the players and fans justify it all in the name of winning.
Well too bad the poor officiating didn't help Seattle when they played my Cardinals.
Cant' wait to play them again to see how well they do without the help of poor officiating.

Shame on those who wink and smile and say it was a fair game.
It was the worst most of us has ever seen. And that's saying a lot.

Good call Vai

BarkforSark
PROVO, UT

The best part about all this outrage is that the call was actually correct. There are multiple screen caps that show Tate clearly reaching up with his left hand and controlling the ball BEFORE Jennings snatches it with both hands. But at no point from the time Tate originally controlled the ball to both him and Jennings going to the ground did he lose control. It matters not that Jennings had both hands on it, or that he had it closer to his chest. All that matters is Tate never lost control with his left hand, therefore the call was correct. And if the non-P.I. call is that upsetting, maybe you should take a look at the completely bogus P.I. that was called on Chancellor to continue GB's lone scoring drive. That call had the biggest impact on the game up until the final play.

gdog3finally
West Jordan, Utah

@AZRods

Tate isn't my boy. All I know is he plays WR for Seattle, a team I don't follow outside of fantasy nerd stuff. But seriously AZRods, have you read your comments?

The officiating was bad all night that game (MNF). I recall Seattle holding a 7-6 lead early in the fourth quarter when on 3rd down the Seahawks defense forced 4th down but a poor pass interference call was made from the 3rd down, resulting in a first down, and later a TD on that possession. The Packers took the lead 12-7 (2 point conversion failed). There is often woulda coulda shoulda stuff. Officiating calls are part of the game. Some are good and others bad. Just like players who throw TDs and INTs, sacks and offsides, great coverage and pass interference, pass protection and holding calls, tackles and facemasks, TDs and fumbles ect...

Players play and refs ref. Let each do their job. When mistakes are made, let each be accountable for their post. Tate is not an official. Tate did nothing wrong. He fought for the ball.

The league still hasn't admitted their mistake. What is the rule anyway?

timpClimber
Provo, UT

After reading the comments look's like Wooden's observation is true for fans too.

The Rock
Federal Way, WA

I was raised to follow the rules. I was shocked, while attending BYU, to hear people say:

"Well the receiver had our guy beat. The penalty for pass interference was far less severe than allowing the guy to make a touchdown and losing the game."

Given the choice of intentionally violating the rules and preserving a win, vs, following the rules and losing most athletes break the rules. I'll bet they are even coached to do so. To me that is cheating. And a victory obtained by cheating is no victory at all.

casual observer
Salt Lake City, UT

Thanks Via for reminding us that character is more important than the W-L column, a priority that some don't buy into. When 'Holier then thou' is used to derogate being honest, we are in worse trouble than just having substitute officials.

nomo
Draper, UT

Vai you are missing the whole point, when all was said and done the guys in the booth reviewed the play. What did you want Tate to do, run up to the booth and tell them they were wrong. No matter what happened on the field the guys in the booth could have overturned it. Go after them not the refs or players on the field.Also the guys in the booth are verterian refs not replacements!!!!!

gdog3finally
West Jordan, Utah

@BarkforSark

I think you are right. I wasn't sure enough to mention it directly in my comments above, but I think what you are seeing is the league saying quickly on Tuesday morning that the call was correct, and then resolving the ref dispute (making it look like they despised the call).

This fiasco could have happened with the regular refs, and the league would have had to accept it like they did the Brady tuck rule and Calvin Johnson no TD call. Those two examples clearly were the deciding factor in the outcome of games as well (one a playoff game).

So if the call is right even if the Packer DB brought the ball into his chest, then Vai looks silly lambasting Tate for doing his job.

@casual observer

Tate was not dishonest. Don't you see that? I respect Vai to a considerable degree, but are you letting him form your opinions? He is not always right. Despite being a Ute fan, I know more than a few BYU fans that disagree with Vai from time to time. It's healthy to think and not induce your opinions from a set conclusion as your base.

gdog3finally
West Jordan, Utah

@The Rock

Following the rules? Choosing being penalized over accepting another outcome is not cheating. It's a choice. Sometimes refs fail at their job. The players job is not to be coached to run around telling the refs they made a mistake.

There's no moral letter of the law here. College rules are different regarding pass interference from the NFL. Arguments go both ways on the better rule. But if PI is a 15 yard penalty, why give up a TD if you get beat when PI can stop it?

Am I reaching you here? I guess you could argue intentional PI is cheating, it's just most people don't see it that way, including BYU coaches who will tell their DBs all of their options in defending the pass (rather a deep ball or down and distance issue).

Anyway, you gave no mention of Tate here. Your take was about generally being honest in competition. I can respect that. I will say that Tate did not cheat though. Infact, the league might be embarrassed by their rule, but the call was the right one even if it doesn't make visual sense.

gdog3finally
West Jordan, Utah

@The Rock

One more addition.

Do you consider it cheating when BYU or any other football team takes a delay of game penalty on purpose to give more field room for a punt? What about when that penalty is produced purposefully to back up a short extra point length FG when the hash mark is to the opposite side of favoring a kicker?

Again I respect honest play. I just don't think you understand the game enough to realize that accepting punishment for penalty in football for your benefit is not cheating. It's part of the game in a strategic way. I don't care if it's BYU, a military school, Notre Dame, or whoever, nobody as an institution or coaching staff views these examples as being some form of cheating or dishonesty. Nobody Rock. You guys jumping on Vai's train here are rewriting rules on you own accord.

Vai is extremely intelligent but sometimes gets overly dogmatic in his inductive opinions to where he finds fault where there is none. There is no need to always have a villian.

teleste
Austin, TX

Maradona's goal was in the Azteca stadium in Mexico city while he was playing for Argentina in the 1986 World Cup.

It did NOT happen in the San Paolo stadium in Naples...it didn't even happen while Maradona was playing for Napoli.

"Football" deserves better from American Sportswriters...

Fred T
PHOENIX, AZ

Interesting comments I must say.

However, Tate brought the focus on himself when he lied to the sideline reporter after the game about pushing the GB defensive back out of the way. Actually that push cleared three GB players out of the way. Pushes aren't usually called, even with the real pro refs. But Tate lied about it. He could have, should have, just deflected the question.

xert
Santa Monica, CA

I can't for the life of me see how one could look at that play and assume that one player (or the other) could be expected to do much of anything other that assume they had just made a play to win the ballgame. Asking Tate to report to the official in this particular case, makes about as much sense as Coach Wooden running out to tell a ref that his point guard travelled and the call was missed (I saw him coach and don't remember him ever doing anything like this).

There are times for calling ones own foul--but this is not a good example. There are certain calls and situations that simply must be left to the refs to decipher. Also--and maybe most importantly, does the author of this article realize how quick he has been to rush to judgment on Mr. Tate and to put him in the "doesn't measure up, character wise," category? I don't know Golden Tate---he's probably a great guy and as good of a person as many of those who are tearing down his character in this article and thread.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments