Week 10

Week 10 “Official Review”: ‘Should never happen, we accept responsibility for that’

• Calls, Follow-up, Week 10
Thursday, November 19, 2009 – 11:40 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Tough job this week for the NFL vice-president of officiating, Mike Pereira. Frequently, he will give in his weekly “Official Review” segment what we feel is the “clean-laundry” version of some of the disputable calls—sometimes under the cover of “it could go either way.” However, there was no hiding from the fact that his crews made significant administrative errors, and, in this week’s installment (video, part 1 and part 2), it is Pereira, and not the laundry, that comes clean.

The topics under discussion (not in the same order):

  • We discussed earlier in the week how the crew of Jeff Triplette had a major breakdown in administering replay challenges. First, Triplette was willing to review a challenge that the Cowboys recovered a fumble, when the rulebook clearly states this is a nonreviewable play. Pereira said, “I was shocked that we started to even go toward the monitor to review it.”
  • Later in the same game, the Packers attempted to call for a challenge when it had exhausted all of its challenges. Triplette should have known immediately, but (according to Pereira) it was replay assistant Bob Boyleston who informed Triplette of the discrepancy. We noted that the officials then should have penalized the Packers bench for an excess challenge. Pereira backed up our assessment by saying, “We should have thrown the flag right then for unsportsmanlike conduct. It’s a 15-yard penalty … He should have been penalized right at that point. We were wrong in not doing that.”
  • In the Ravens–Browns Monday Night Football game, the Browns were granted a fourth timeout erroneously in the second half. Pereira did not hide the fact that it was a major error:

It happened because we, as a crew, failed to record on our cards the [timeout] at the 3:24 mark of the third quarter. … Everybody on the field basically forgot to record the timeout. And the scoreboard did, too. So, we didn’t have it on our cards [and] it showed on the scoreboard that we had one left. Therefore, we granted the first play after the two-minute warning a fourth timeout. All our fault.”

To sum up all of the operational errors, Periera added this:

These type of administrative things should never happen and we accept responsibility for that.

  • Also under “Official Review” was the oft-talked-about 4th-and-2 play where the Patriots attempted to get the first down to run out the clock, rather than punt to the Colts (video). Because the ball was juggled (and clearly indicated by headlinesman Tom Stabile), forward progress cannot be granted until the player gets control. It was a good call by Stabile in real-time, and a tough call to make on such a pivotal play. With the benefit of replay, it would appear that the Patriots were further back even. When Kevin Faulk maintains control, he is in the air and going to the ground. Even though he has caught the ball, he has not by rule caught the ball until he plants two solid feet, or has gone completely to the ground. (For spotting purposes, forward progress would be given at the point of any body part other than a hand or foot hitting the ground, provided the receiver subsequently completes the process of a catch.) Pereira should have stopped talking at that point, because he said that if the original call was first down, and if the Colts challenged the call, that the original call would have stood. This is a wishy-washy answer, as Faulk is clearly bobbling the ball and not touching the ground until clearly behind the first-down marker.
  • In the Buccaneers–Dolphins game, an incomplete pass was correctly overturned as an interception (video). OK, I know there is dispute at to whether it was correctly overturned. Much like in Week 2, an incomplete pass which is overruled as an interception gives the intercepting team the ball where it was caught, nullifying any return.

All that said, I was very distracted with Pereira’s new video control device, which seems to be a modded wireless Xbox 360 controller. Seemed to me that the rewind/slow/pause switch that Pereira had up to this point, albeit wired, simply and unobtrusely did its job. Or, perhaps Pereira was playing Madden NFL ‘10: Referee Edition off camera.

Seahawks protest 17 calls

• Controversy, Discipline, Week 10
Tuesday, November 17, 2009 – 12:27 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Week 10: Seahawks at Cardinals

Seahawks coach Jim Mora is petitioning the league on 17 plays in Sunday’s loss to the Cardinals, as reported by Danny O’Neil of The Seattle Times. While it is routine that coaches submit questionable calls to the league office, Mora said it was “probably three times as many as I have in any game.”

Mora would not elaborate on all of the plays, but apparently some disputed pass interference calls are part of the mix. Mora did note, however, that quarterback Matt Hasselbeck was gasping for air after a forearm was planted on his neck after being sacked. There was no roughness penalty called on the play.

Darnell Dockett, the player administering the offending forearm, was quick to respond on his Twitter feed, which we have detwitterfied for your reading enjoyment:

Dear Coach Mora: It’s football. Shit happens, and if you ever played the game you’d understand. Really, I would [not] try to hurt Matt. He’s a good guy.

Dockett was too fast to toss the four-letter word in there, but did not realize that he forgot the critical word not (which is followed by “*wouldnt” in his next tweet). We will know by Friday if the league feels that a fine happens, too.

Update, 11/21/09: Dockett was fined $7,500 for the hit.

Oops, Browns get 4th timeout in 2nd half

• Controversy, Week 10
Tuesday, November 17, 2009 – 11:47 am | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Week 10: Ravens at Browns

The fine folks over at Pro Football Talk have noted—and confirmed by a league source, the gamebook, and the game tape—that the Browns were awarded a fourth timeout in the second half of their Monday Night Football game with the Ravens.

According to the gamebook:

  • “Timeout #1 by CLV at 03:24 [3rd quarter].”
  • “Timeout #2 by CLV at 03:35 [4th quarter].”
  • “Timeout #3 by CLV at 03:29 [4th quarter].”

The evidence of the fourth timeout is somewhat obscured in the gamebook, but is obviously apparent:

Two-Minute Warning
1-10-CLV 39 (2:00) W.McGahee right guard to CLV 37 for 2 yards (D.Bowens).
2-8-CLV 37 (1:55) W.McGahee right guard to CLV 35 for 2 yards (K.Maiava).

With a run by the Ravens after the two-minute warning—and without the ball going out of bounds, a penalty administered, an injury, or a Ravens’ timeout—only five seconds were run off the clock.

Obviously, Carl Cheffers and his crew mistakenly allowed the Browns to call a fourth timeout. Going by PFT’s analysis that the three previous timeouts were correctly credited to the Browns in the gamebook (and not an official’s timeout or Ravens’ timeout), this is a major breakdown in the basic record-keeping duties required of all seven officials.

Still, the Browns were unable to avoid the shutout even with the extra timeout.

Cutler fined $20K for arguing with ref; Titans owner gives $¼M, 1-finger salute

• Discipline, Week 10, Week 9
Tuesday, November 17, 2009 – 11:23 am | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Couple of stories of the NFL handing out fines for conduct:

  • Backtracking to Week 9, Bears quarterback Jay Cutler was fined $20,000 for arguing a call with referee Ed Hochuli. Cutler was flagged for a 15-yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Much like Chad Ochocinco’s $1 facetious bribe the same day, this is the standard first-offense fine for “verbal or other non-physical offense against [an] official.”
  • Also in the Bears–Cardinals game, the Bears defensive lineman Tommie Harris, who was ejected on the third play of the game for what Hochuli described as “slugging” another player, was fined $7,500 (video at 0:19).  Because the Bears played a Thursday night game, the fines were not announced until after their Week 10 game.
  • Finally, in a case of swift justice, Titans owner Bud Adams was fined $250,000 for obscene gestures launched from his luxury box towards the Bills sideline—or $125,000 for each finger. The incident happened at the end of Sunday’s game, with the fine being announced Monday morning. There was little dispute in the matter, as his double-barrelled salute was uploaded to YouTube.

Why is replay so hard for Triplette crew?

• Calls, Week 10
Sunday, November 15, 2009 – 7:54 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

We have reported on two instances where Jeff Triplette’s crew had difficulty in getting basic information correct on replay reversals. First, in Week 5, Triplette and his crew spotted the ball 4½ yards behind where it was supposed to be. Then, last week, an overturned call should have created a dead-ball situation,  and 24 seconds should have been added back on to the clock.

We noted that this is a failure of Triplette and his replay official, Bob Boylston, to convey down, distance, yard line, and time remaining on all replay reversals. In addition, the rulebook says that the remaining six officials have the responsibility to correct errors before a play is run. A mistake by one is a mistake by all.

Their field-booth communication has improved, however, it brings a third and fourth indictment against Triplette. The crew was officiating the Packers–Cowboys game on Sunday.

First, Triplette was willing to grant a coach’s challenge by the Cowboys regarding the recovery of a fumble. Rule 15, Section 9 covers all of the reviewable plays, but specifically says:

Note: Non-reviewable plays include but are not limited to … recovery of loose ball in the field of play.

Since it was not a scoring play, Triplette should have known to waive off the challenge. Instead, he went to the replay equipment where he was told it was not a challengable play.

Second, Triplette was about to grant a challenge to the Packers, who had already exhausted both challenges earlier in the game. Each official has a card that tracks pertinent information, such as the score, time outs and challenges. This is the basic bookkeeping required to run an efficient game. However, Triplette was under the hood again when he was informed that the Packers did not have a challenge to use.

In addition, he forgot Rule 15, Section 9 also says:

Penalty: For initiating a challenge when all of a team’s time outs have been exhausted or when all of its available challenges have been used: Loss of 15 yards.

So, while the correct calls were made this week (other than the penalty enforcement), it is hard to believe that a crew of seven has to rely on the booth for basic information on when a challenge can be issued.