Posts Tagged ‘coach’s challenge’

Head of refs announces new mechanics in wake of administrative errors

• News
Thursday, November 19, 2009 – 11:55 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

This point from the weekly “Official Review” segment deserved a post as a newsworthy item in its own right. Mike Pereira, the league’s vice-president of officiating, addressed three critical administrative errors in Week 10, which we discussed in length. (video, discussion of new mechanics at 6:10)

One of the errors has lead to a change in operation. When a coach has exhausted his coach’s challenges, he will be informed by the referee, much like when all three timeouts have been used. Quoting Pereira:

We are going to initiate a change in …  these situations. When a team uses all of their timeouts, [the current practice is that] the referee has to go over and tell the head coach. We are going to same thing when he has used his challenges. We are going to go inform the coach face-to-face that he’s used all of his challenges.

Usually, this is done by announcement, but the new rule will require the referee to inform the coach, consistent with Rule 15, Section 2, Article 4:

The Referee must notify the coach and field captain when his team has used its three charged time outs, signal both coaches when two minutes remain in a half, and positively inform the coach of any disqualified player. He may not delegate any such notifications to any other person. He will announce on the microphone when each period is ended.

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.

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.

Incomplete pass not called on key catch of Steelers opening drive

• Calls, Week 4
Monday, October 5, 2009 – 9:50 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Week 4: Chargers at Steelers

Pro Football Talk noticed a missed call on the Steelers opening drive during Sunday Night Football. (video)

On the third offensive play of the game, Ben Roethlisberger (who just completed two passes on the first two plays) connected with Mike Wallace for 35 yards, taking the ball down to the Chargers 14-yard line. Head coach Norv Turner could have had an easy reversal, though, had he thrown the red challenge flag.

Wallace was only able to get one foot in bounds before being driven out by Steve Gregory. Since the “force-out” rule has been rescinded, this should have been ruled an incomplete pass.

This was under the jurisdiction primarily of the field judge, Boris Cheek. The line judge, Michael Spanier, comes in to spot the ball. Both missed an obvious non-catch call.

How is forward progress not stopped when player lands 3 yards back?

• Controversy, Week 4
Monday, October 5, 2009 – 12:12 am | 1 Comment

by Ben Austro

Week 4: Chargers at Steelers

In the Sunday Night Football game, the Chargers special teams player Jacob Hester is credited with a heads-up, 41-yard fumble-return touchdown. However, it is confusing how the Steelers punt returner Steve Logan was driven back three yards in control of the ball without being ruled down by forward progress.

The video of the play shows clearly that Logan achieved the 44-yard line, with the fumble occurring at the 41.

The covering official was back judge Steve Freeman, who marked the point of recovery with his beanbag. The field judge, Boris Cheek, was covering the sideline at the 25 (you will see his hat marking that a player stepped out of bounds), so he was in no position to judge forward progress.

Update: As stated in the comments, the side judge, indeed has coverage on kicks to determine forward progress. I was unable to see his positioning from the video. The side judge in this game was 19-year veteran David Wyant.

There was a coach’s challenge, but forward progress could not have been overturned on replay.

Week 3 “Official Review”: Taunting, OPI, pleas for PylonCam

• Calls, Follow-up, Week 3
Saturday, October 3, 2009 – 12:08 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

As done in previous weeks, there is a two-part “Official Review,” one for NFL Network and one for NFL.com. The topics were not nearly controversial this week for the league’s vice president of officiating, Mike Pereira:

  • 49ers defensive back Shawntae Spencer signaled incomplete on a pass that he broke up in the game against the Vikings. However, since he was over the prone receiver, it was deemed a 15-yard taunting foul.
  • Texans receiver Kevin Walter, running a tight end-zone route, collided with a Jaguars defender. It appeared inadvertent, but it drew an offensive-pass-interference call. Pereira gave his wavering support for the call on the field, but in the subtext, it is probably going to be scored against the covering official’s grade. In this case, the covering official was field judge Jim Howey.
  • Other noncontroversial offensive-pass-interference calls from the Falcons–Patriots (which nullified a Falcons touchdown) and Steelers–Bengals.

The bulk of the conversation between Pereira and NFL Net talking head Rich Eisen focused on a call for plane-of-goal cameras in every stadium to supplement the broadcast cameras. This started when a Texans go-ahead-touchdown attempt was thwarted by a goal-line fumble. Replay was inconclusive as to when the player was down, so the field call stood. (Bonus: Pereira showed the videotape of the replay assistant’s efforts from the referee’s field monitor perspective.)

When we watched Super Bowl XLIII, there were fixed camera positions on the goal line, as was evident from the coast-to-coast interception return by James Harrison (video). Primetime games and playoff games (and, to a lesser extent, the key afternoon matchups) have more camera angles than other standard regular season games. It’s just a built-in flaw in the system, just as much as a network television director making a choice of replay angles is. Replay is not supposed to be the fix-all. (Eisen went on to suggest a camera mounted on the pylon.)

Technology is always explored for improving the mechanics, such as using laser-sighting or GPS technology for measuring first downs. The gain, though, must be a part of the equation. Do you place a camera on the pylon for a goal-line play that happens once in a few weeks? There are eight pylons on the field and do you add cameras to similarly patrol the sideline and end line? And it would not have solved this situation, because the play was not the breaking of the plane of the goal, but the knee that is a yard or so back.

Inconclusive video is a perfectly acceptable call, especially since the coach had the discretion to throw the challenge flag in this instance.