Posts Tagged ‘Buccaneers’

Week 13 “Official Review”: Free shots are concern, disputed OT call deemed right

• Calls, Follow-up, Week 13
Friday, December 11, 2009 – 12:55 am | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

The calls under “Official Review” by league vice-president of officiating Mike Pereira (video, part 1 and part 2):

  • The oft-talked-about play of the week (video), where a down-by-contact ruling for the Redskins was overruled as a fumble and recovery for the Saints in overtime. Pereira points out that the ball is moving and being separated from the receiver, and therefore is a fumble. (A ball can move, as long as it remains in a hand or arm, as described in elegant prose to us.)
  • Regarding the Flozell Adams hit on Justin Tuck (Cowboys–Giants) after the expiration of the first half, we have something for our offseason clip-and-save file:

It really doesn’t seems right that that play shouldn’t result in a 15-yard penalty on the opening kick of the third quarter, and I think that is something we’ll have to take a look at [in the offseason]. … It will be interesting to see how the Competition Committee addresses it. … I already promised [Giants head coach] Tom Coughlin on the Monday after the game that I would present it to the committee, and I’m sure it will be one of the things they look at early.

  • An incomplete pass by the Buccaneers against the Panthers was reviewed and overturned by referee Don Carey and replay official Lloyd McPeters. Periera did not see indisputable visual evidence, andacknowledged that replay officials are graded on their performance for playoff assignments.
  • In the same game, a rush by Maurice Jones-Drew of the Panthers was reviewed to see if it was a touchdown. It was ruled short by the line judge, and replay did not have indisputable visual evidence to overturn.

Pereira did not come near addressing any plays from the 49ers–Seahawks game, which the Niners organization alleges “several paragraphs” worth of disputed calls.

Week 12 “Official Review”: ‘Chaos,’ DPI, Pereira’s Xbox 360 video controller

• Calls, Week 12
Thursday, December 3, 2009 – 11:14 am | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

This week’s segment of “Official Review” by NFL vice-president of officiating Mike Pereira (video, part 1 and part 2) provides a fascinating insight into the behind-the-scenes work of his department and the grading of officials.

We commented a few weeks ago about Pereira’s modded Xbox 360 controller making its on-air debut and wondered why the change from his simple clicker device he used previously. Turns out that is his everyday equipment for reviewing plays. Pereira said that he was hesitant to try the new equipment, but the controller provides the ability to switch camera angles, as each play is reviewed from a minimum of three angles (the first two are nonbroadcast camera angles, the third is the live shot of the play, and additional angles come from television replays).

Pereira demonstrated the grading process for the officials using an ordinary incomplete pass play from the Giants–Broncos game on Thanksgiving. I counted him shuttling the tape more than 25 times to evaluate every player’s actions on the play. We here, and the rest of the Internet critics, focus on the controversial calls, while the officiating department evaluates some 150 plays per game.  Multiply those 150 plays by 256 games for a total of 38,400 plays. If Pereira used an average play for his demonstration—each of those plays getting reviewed 25 times—that means that in a season, his office does 1 million quality checks on its product a year. And, 98% of the time, the call is correct.

It is a very interesting look at the evaluation process, which also includes periodic written tests and other intangibles. You can see the demonstration on the part 2 video. On to the calls on the field:

  • Pereira reviewed the “chaos to the nth degree,” as he aptly put it, of the final seconds of regulation in the Steelers–Ravens game. He backed up all of our points, but noted something that we did not realize. The crew, amazingly, had the foresight to place the specialized kicking ball for a field-goal kick. Pereira said that in rushed circumstances, the crew should not worry about spotting a “K” ball. He also acknowledged that referee Ed Hochuli forgot to mark the spot of the fumble with his beanbag, which might have jogged his memory of the correct spot when he went to retrieve it. Pereira did acknowledge that stopping the clock to conference about the spot would have been an unacceptable advantage to the Ravens.
  • An early-third-quarter play in the Colts–Texans game gave the Colts 43 yards on a pass-interference penalty against the Texans. Pereira’s assessment was that “it was not a good call.”
  • In the Buccaneers–Falcons game, the down-by-contact rule was reviewed that a player cannot be down if the contact preceeded the receiver catching the ball.

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.

NFL quickly suspends Panthers’ Wesley 1 game for flagrant hit on punt returner

• Discipline, Follow-up, Week 6
Monday, October 19, 2009 – 10:30 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Justice came swift for the Panthers Dante Wesley for his hit on Clifton Smith of the Buccaneers that we described as being like a runaway locomotive. (He was ejected for the hit with 10 seconds remaining in the second quarter.) We expected an announcement either today or tomorrow, but the NFL wasted no time in handing down judgment. He will be suspended without pay for next week’s game. The announcement from the NFL:

Defensive back Dante Wesley of the Carolina Panthers has been suspended without pay for one game by NFL Executive Vice President of Football Operations Ray Anderson for a flagrant violation of player safety rules.  Specifically, on a punt coverage play on Sunday, Wesley left his feet, launched himself and made shoulder and forearm contact with the neck and head area of Tampa Bay punt returner Clifton Smith, who had not caught or touched the ball and was in a defenseless posture.

The suspension will sideline Wesley for the Panthers’ game against the Buffalo Bills on Sunday, October 25.

In a letter to Wesley, Anderson wrote: “The playing rules (Rule 10, Section 1, Article 1) specifically provide that a member of the kicking team is prohibited from interfering with a receiver attempting to catch an airborne kick.  The prohibited contact in this case went well beyond simply interfering with the receiver.  Instead, by striking your defenseless opponent in the head and neck area, you committed an unnecessary and unnecessarily dangerous act that is specifically prohibited by the rules.”

Anderson added: “Your actions are of particular concern in light of the emphasis that our office has placed on developing and enforcing rules designed to protect players from injury, including head and neck injuries.  The safety of our players is paramount to all of us in the NFL.”

Runaway locomotive hit on fair catch spawns ejection, brawl, maybe suspension

• Discipline, Week 6
Monday, October 19, 2009 – 12:07 am | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Week 6: Panthers at Buccaneers

Dante Wesley of the Panthers was ejected for a flagrant hit on kick returner Clifton Smith of the Buccaneers. Smith called for a fair catch, and Wesley flattened him to the turf long before the ball even got there. It was penalized as both fair-catch interference and a personal foul, however the fair-catch signal is irrelevant in the fact that this was a malicious hit on a defenseless receiver. (video) Smith appeared to be knocked unconscious by the hit.

The ball immediately bounced out of bounds, allowing for a bench-clearing conference to develop around Wesley. The officials indicated multiple post-play penalties by throwing hats (to indicate a second penalty after his flag had been thrown), however all of these penalties were picked up.

Wesley will certainly be fined heavily for the hit, and we think that a suspension is likely. The last suspension for an on-field incident was Elbert Mack of the Buccaneers, who laid a helmet-to-helmet hit on Falcons quarterback Matt Ryan. A suspension announcement would be likely on Tuesday.

As for the others involved in the brawl after the play, the league will be examining the videotape for those—particularly those who came off the sideline—to mete out fines later in the week.

Will Flozell Adams’ 3rd trip in 3 weeks mean 3rd consecutive fine this season?

• Discipline
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 – 8:54 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Cowboys offensive tackle in a 2007 file photo. (Credit: texas_mustang, Flickr)

Cowboys offensive tackle Flozell Adams in a 2007 file photo. (Credit: texas_mustang, Flickr)

Cowboys offensive tackle Flozell Adams may be fined for a third consecutive week in the three-week-old 2009 season—which, we believe, would be unprecedented. To date, Adams was fined $5,000 in the season opener for helmet contact against the Buccaneers. In the Week 2 Sunday Night Football game, Adams administered two leg whips, one of which knocked the Giants’ Justin Tuck to the ground, injuring Tuck’s shoulder. Adams was fined $12,500 for the flagrant personal fouls (the second one, which caused no injury, was not flagged).

Big Blue Interactive (on their message board, bonus: with video) points to a third instance where Adams tripped a Carolina Panthers defensive lineman, which was again not flagged by the crew. It is very subtle and away from the play, which is why it did not attract a yellow handkerchief.

Will the league garnish Adams’ pay for a third consecutive week? It should not the fact that the trip wound up being harmless, but that this is a repeat of a fined behavior from the previous week. But, for flagrant personal fouls, the league fine schedule merely states, “suspension or fine; severity to be determined by degree of violation; the fine may be $10,000 or higher for first offense.” So the league, using the injury to Tuck as reason to fine more, may have trouble assessing a fine under the criteria of “degree of violation.”

Update 9/30/09: The league dropped the fine hammer today, according to Todd Archer at The Dallas Morning News, to the tune of $7,500. That is $25,000 for three weeks—which is less than 10% of his weekly gross.