Posts Tagged ‘Eagles’

Forecast for near-blizzard in Philadelphia invokes Rule 17 to postpone ‘SNF’ game

• Rules School, Week 16
Sunday, December 26, 2010 – 3:32 pm | Comments Off

by Ben Austro

Week 16: Vikings at Eagles

Tonight’s game in Philadelphia had to be postponed due to a coastal winter storm that is forecasted to bring blizzard conditions to the area. It is the first Tuesday game since Oct. 1, 1946, according to the Elias Sports Bureau, when the Giants played the now-defunct Boston Yanks.

Oddly, this game was originally scheduled to kick off at 1 p.m., when conditions were not bad for Philadelphia, but the game had already been moved to primetime under the flexible scheduling provision for Sunday Night Football. By 8:00, the conditions are expected to be far too dangerous for the public.

Philadelphia hosted the 1948 NFL Championship game at Shibe Park between the Eagles and the Chicago Cardinals in a heavy snowstorm. Despite the league office considering a postponement, commissioner Bert Bell allowed the game to be played (video from E-footage.com).

The decision to postpone the 2010 game is the right one from a public-safety standpoint. As incredibly awesome as the sight might have been of a heavy snowstorm, it is not worth jeopardizing the safety of the fans, game personnel and emergency services. In the end, it is just a football game.

Rule 17 of the NFL rulebook outlines the procedures that the NFL took in making a decision today:

Article 4. The NFL affirms the position that in most circumstances all regular-season and postseason games should be played to their conclusion. If, in the opinion of appropriate League authorities, it is impossible to begin or continue a game due to an emergency, or a game is deemed to be imminently threatened by any such emergency (e.g., severely inclement weather, lightning, flooding, power failure), the following procedures (Articles 5 through 11) will serve as guidelines for the Commissioner and/or his duly appointed representatives. The Commissioner has the authority to review the circumstances of each emergency and to adjust the following procedures in whatever manner he deems appropriate. If, in the Commissioner’s opinion, it is reasonable to project that the resumption of an interrupted game would not change its ultimate result or adversely affect any other inter-team competitive issue, he is empowered to terminate the game.

Article 5. The League employees vested with the authority to define emergencies under these procedures are the Commissioner, designated representatives from his League office staff, and the game Referee. In those instances where neither the Commissioner nor his designated representative is in attendance at a game, the Referee will have sole authority; provided, however, that if a Referee delays the beginning of or interrupts a game for a significant period of time due to an emergency, he must make every effort to contact the Commissioner or the Commissioner’s designated representative for consultation. In all cases of significant delay, the League authorities will consult with the management of the participating clubs and will attempt to obtain appropriate information from outside sources, if applicable (e.g., weather bureau, police).

Article 6. If, because of an emergency, a regular-season or postseason game is not started at its scheduled time and cannot be played at any later time that same day, the game nevertheless must be played on a subsequent date to be determined by the Commissioner.

Week 12 open forum, assignments

• Assignments, Open Forum, Week 12
Sunday, November 28, 2010 – 1:19 pm | Comments Off

by Ben Austro

Updated 11/29 for new feature, below

If you see a call that is a turkey, let us know in the comments section of this post. Referee assignments are after the jump.

Update: Starting this week, we will update the open forum with any calls we read about that aren’t worthy of (or if we don’t have time for) a full, standalone post. If we miss one, send us a link in the comments. Some of these may expand to full posts later in the week, as well.

  • Steelers at Bills. Steelers linebacker James Harrison believes that he shouldn’t have been flagged for roughing the passer (for helmet-to-helmet contact) in the third quarter (via Scott Brown, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review).
  • Jaguars at Giants. Jaguars coach Jack Del Rio questioned the offensive pass interference call against Kassim Osgood in the fourth quarter (via Vito Stellino, The Florida Times-Union). Also in that game, there was no penalty called on Jaguars defensive back Tyron Brackenridge for contact after a fair catch on Darius Reynaud. While Giants coach Tom Coughlin didn’t question the call, the game supervisor, former veteran referee Johnny Grier, phoned the league office in Manhattan about the non-call according to Mike Garafolo of The Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J.
  • Eagles at Bears. A question was raised in a discussion board about a player who does not try to advance an onside kick. When a player “gives himself up” he does not have to be touched down by an opponent to have the play declared dead. This happens more often on kicks (because it prevents the clock from running), but the same applies when a quarterback takes a knee to run out the clock.

 

read more »

Helmet-to-helmet hit may result in butt-to-bench, increased fines

• News
Sunday, October 24, 2010 – 9:46 am | Comments Off

by Ben Austro

After some nasty helmet-to-helmet collisions on the football field, it was comments made in the broadcast studio that attracted the attention of the NFL. On Sunday Night Football, former Chargers and Patriots safety Rodney Harrison—who was voted twice by his peers as the dirtiest player in the game—said that fines had no impact on his on-field behavior:

Fining me five- or ten-grand really didn’t affect me. But I got to a point where when they suspended me, I knew the effect on my teammates. [It was] the disappointment, me not being out there, not the $100,000 that got taken away from me. … That’s what they’re going to have to do to if they’re going to change the nature of these hits: you have to suspend guys.


Much different than the Harrison who declared in 2006 after his second dirtiest player crown: “All I can say is as many guys as say I’m a dirty player, just as many come up and tell me they admire how I play, the hard work, the commitment, the toughness. That’s the pride you’re looking for. I take pride in that. But dirty? I don’t think you guys can look in my eyes and say I’m a dirty player.”

The league took a hard-line stance, handing out major fines (compared with other helmet-to-helmet hits as recent as last week) for the hits that started this conversation:

  • Falcons cornerback Dunta Robinson hit Eagles receiver DeSean Jackson in the head so hard, Jackson does not remember the hit. Robinson was fined $50,000.
  • Patriots safety Brandon Meriweather was also docked $50,000 for a hit that had Ravens tight end Todd Heap out for the remainder of the game.
  • Steelers linebacker James Harrison knocked two Browns players out of the game and was fined $75,000.

Recently, fines of $5,000 to $10,000 were the standard. In one case of these three cases, a player essentially played for free, as the fine exceeded his game check.

After these fines were assessed, the NFL released a DVD (video) to all teams and this statement on Wednesday:

TO NFL PLAYERS AND COACHES:

One of our highest priorities is player safety.  We all know that football is a tough game that includes hard contact.  But that carries with it an obligation to do all that we can to protect all players from unnecessary injury caused by dangerous techniques from those who play outside the rules.

The video shown today shows what kind of hits are against the rules, but also makes clear that you can play a hard, physical game within the rules.

Violations of the playing rules that unreasonably put the safety of another player in jeopardy have no place in the game, and that is especially true in the case of hits to the head and neck.  Accordingly, from this point forward, you should be clear on the following points:

1.         Players are expected to play within the rules.  Those who do not will face increased discipline, including suspensions, starting with the first offense.

2.         Coaches are expected to teach playing within the rules.  Failure to do so will subject both the coach and the employing club to discipline.

3.         Game officials have been directed to emphasize protecting players from illegal and dangerous hits, and particularly from hits to the head and neck.  In appropriate cases, they have the authority to eject players from a game.

ROGER GOODELL, Commissioner

We will have a round-up of the reaction from players and coaches to the NFL’s increased enforcement for these hits.

Advertising

Columnists

Our network sites

seattletimes.com | Advanced

Originally published October 23, 2010 at 10:01 PM | Page modified October 23, 2010 at 10:11 PM

Comments (4) E-mail E-mail article Print Print view Share Share

Steve Kelley

Stiff penalties on headhunters is important in protecting NFL players

Hard hits, violent hits, are part of football. And injuries, even serious injuries, are inevitable. The league can’t legislate the violence out of the game, nor should it. But it has to protect the unprotected and it has to punish the players who launch themselves head-first into receivers and running backs and quarterbacks.

Seattle Times staff columnist

For many years, when sportswriters stayed at the same hotel with the team, I watched the Seahawks players climb onto their buses before riding to the stadium for their Sunday road games.

That afternoon they would play their most dangerous game and I couldn’t help wondering which players would finish the day healthy or hurt, or even hospitalized.

Every game, they put their lives and livelihoods on the line the way athletes in most other sports never do, and I’ve always admired their grace under that enormous pressure.

Football is a violent game, and the players of the NFL accept that fact every day when they run onto the practice field, every Sunday when they board their buses and every game day when they collide at high speeds and with intimidating intent.

In the past few years, groundbreaking research has led to an increased awareness of the dangers and the long-term physical costs for the players who play this game.

We now know that the effects of the thunderous hits we see on Sunday might not fully be realized by the players absorbing those hits until later decades. The hits they take in their 20s can lead to serious health issues in their 40s and 50s.

NFL players are dying young. They are suffering from ALS, Parkinson’s disease and dementia. Some former players’ suicides have been linked to head trauma they suffered while playing in the NFL.

To its credit, the league has begun paying serious attention to the damage that can be done from head trauma. Finally, the seriousness of concussions is being addressed. We no longer hear jokes on the air about a player “getting his bell rung.”

But now the league is struggling to find the answer to a complicated riddle.

The NFL, which has celebrated the violence in its game because that violence is so much a part of football’s attraction, is trying to find a way to legislate against the most violent helmet-to-helmet hits. A 15-yard penalty, or a five-figure fine, aren’t enough.

Last weekend, Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison knocked two Cleveland Browns out of the game.

Atlanta’s Dunta Robinson hit Philadelphia receiver DeSean Jackson and both were on the ground after the play. Jackson has no memory of the hit.

advertising

The most dangerous strike came from New England safety Brandon Meriweather, who knocked out Baltimore tight end Todd Heap, after the front of Meriweather’s helmet crashed into the left side of Heap’s.

“Official Review” returns with new ref VP: helmets and dead balls, celebrations

• Calls, Week 5
Sunday, October 17, 2010 – 3:32 pm | Comments Off

by Ben Austro

The NFL Network welcomed the new vice-president of officiating, Carl Johnson, in the return of its “Official Review” segment. A spokesperson for the network explained that the transition of Johnson in the new position caused the segment to be placed on hold until he could put the “Official Review” on his list of weekly chores.

Johnson offers up a double-dip format — one cablecast and one online-only version,  much like his predecessor, Mike Pereira — however the calls under review are limited to three, instead of the usual four. We should see the normal weekly output soon. (The “Competition Committee” segment that aired in replacement of “Official Review” may return on an occasional basis.)

The calls under review (video 1 | video 2):

  • In the Saints–Cardinals game, Cardinals quarterback Max Hall fumbled the ball near the goal line, which was returned for the touchdown by teammate Levi Brown. Since Hall’s helmet came off during the play, there was a question as to whether the play is dead under the new rule that  play ends when the ball carrier loses his helmet. Johnson pointed out that since Hall was not the ball carrier when his helmet came off, the play remains live.
  • On an Eagles punt, a special teams player for the 49ers was blocked into a loose ball by an Eagles player. Ordinarily, a player from the receiving team that first touches a ball renders that a live ball for either team to recover. Johnson explained that a receiving team player who is not making a play on the ball or actively engaged in blocking with another player is considered “passive” and therefore the fact that he is blocked into the ball doesn’t suddenly make the ball live. This is rarely called this way but is correct. This prevents a kicking team player from driving  an opponent into the ball when the opposing player is not part of the play. Two exceptions: this does not protect a player who inadvertently brushes into a wildly bouncing ball, nor does it protect an actively blocking player who is overpowered and “shoved” into the path of the ball. The standard is the same for determining fair-catch interference, which was discussed in a 2009 “Official Review” segment, oddly, in Week 5.
  • A costly celebration penalty was levied against the Cowboys, as the penalty set up good field position for the game-winning touchdown drive by the Titans.

Johnson’s analysis is good, however I found some of his explanation of the Cardinals fumble to be too wordy. For example, Johnson said there were many things to consider on the play, such as the restrictions on fourth down fumbles and fumbles after the two-minute warning. Since neither of them applied, these would not have been under consideration, but, rather, served as a primer for unrelated fumble rules.

Johnson’s presentation skills were generally above average for a television “rookie,” as he made it seem a lot easier than it looks, and considering this segment is not his primary duty. I think with a few segments under his belt, he will develop a little more personality to add some of the flavor Pereira added to the presentation.

Reid implies crew error on delay after TO

• Controversy, Week 4
Sunday, October 10, 2010 – 11:36 am | Comments Off

by Ben Austro

Week 4:Redskins at Eagles

Eagles coach Andy Reid assumed responsibility for a critical delay of game call, but ultimately feels that an error in crew mechanics was to blame. Well, he didn’t come right out and say that; he just said that if he spoke his mind in answer to a reporter’s question, “that would be an expensive answer.”

Reid called a timeout after a replay review to confirm the spot. Since the timeout occurred after an administrative stoppage (the replay) the timeout granted was the 30-second variety. Presumably referee Alberto Riverón announced that at the start of the timeout, but Reid missed that. As quarterback Kevin Kolb entered the huddle, there was 10 seconds on the play clock, with the expiration of the timeout catching the Eagles by surprise (video).

The league backed up the call by the officials:

The instant replay review was to determine if the ball broke the plane of the goal line. Replay confirmed the ruling on the field, so the original spot — just inside the one yard-line — stood.

In terms of the delay of game and the mechanics of re-starting play after a timeout, the referee blows his whistle, makes a physical and verbal signal to the bench area, and then gives the signal for the play clock to begin. This is what took place in Sunday’s game.

3 confusing calls in Sunday night game

• Calls, Week 14
Tuesday, December 15, 2009 – 1:43 am | 3 Comments

by Ben Austro

Week 14: Eagles at Giants

We have three calls for analysis—all three called correctly—from the Eagles–Giants game that will likely end up on this week’s “Official Review.” View the highlights of the game in addition to our analysis:

McNabb incomplete or fumble?

On a second-and-10 from the Eagles 42, Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb is hit with the ball going forward. The ball was nearly caught out of the air by the Giants and rolled dead (1:24 into highlight reel). Confusion reigned, as the ball was spotted 10 yards back following the play. Here is what each official ruled on the play:

  • Credit: NFL/NBC Sports

    Credit: NFL/NBC Sports

    Referee John Parry considered it a forward fumble by (A) tossing a beanbag marker to show the spot of the fumble.

  • After the ball hit the ground and as it rolled to a stop, umpire Dan Ferrell assumed a “hovering” position (B) anticipating a recovery and a possible pileup on the loose ball.
  • The line judge, Ron Marinucci, covering a possible interception, ruled it incomplete (C). However, since McNabb’s hand was empty as it was coming forward, it should not have been ruled incomplete. But, once an incomplete pass is called, the play is dead at that point—although if there was an immediate recovery by the Giants after the incomplete call, it would have been Giants possession at the dead-ball spot.
  • The replay official could not call for a review because no player picked up the loose ball as the play was killed.

In this case, two rules come into play, with the applicable rule/section/article:

7–4–2. If a loose ball comes to rest anywhere in field and no player attempts to recover, official covering the play should pause momentarily before signaling dead ball (official’s time out).

8–7–6. If a fumble by either team occurs after the two-minute warning … (b) The player who fumbled is the only player of his team who is permitted to recover and advance the ball. (c) If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead, and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble.

With no one recovering the ball, loosely this translated to an Eagles recovery, as they retain possession. Therefore, they were given the ball at the spot of the fumble, 10 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

Fumble recovery at 2 seconds?

On a kickoff return, the Giants fumbled with a recovery by Moise Fokou of the Eagles as the first half expired, but with the aid of the television replay, approximately two seconds remained in the second quarter (no video available).  So why were the Eagles denied the possibility of a field goal to end the half?

  • The replay official cannot intervene in a solely clock-based call or for a fumble recovery in the field of play.
  • A fumble recovery does not immediately kill the clock. There has to be evidence of a recovery or a significant pileup of players to blow the play dead. By examining the replay, we are able to get the snapshot, but an official would be irresponsible to immediately blow the whistle. What if the ball were to somehow squirt out after the official called it dead?
  • When the play is ruled dead, the line judge (primarily) is responsible for seeing that the clock is stopped in a reasonable manner. This could cause a delay, and, as is often noted, may go in the favor of the home team on occasion. (We cannot back that assertion up with anything statistical, but prove us wrong if you can point us to evidence.) This delay also is seen when the play clock runs to zero: there is usually a “beat” before officials throw a flag, because their eyes can’t observe both at the same time.

Manning’s fumble not down by contact

Giants quarterback Eli Manning, while scrambling for a 15-yard gain, went into a forward dive and lost the ball as he contacted the turf (video is at 2:50). This was ruled a fumble, as Manning was not contacted as he dove forward. The ground cannot cause a fumble when a player goes down by contact (which can be as little as a defensive player’s finger).

The replay review could have made a compelling case for the fact that Manning had his jersey grabbed, which caused him to go down. Counting the number of steps is not entirely relevant; if a player stumbles ten steps down the field after contact, it is still down by contact.

But, “could” is not good enough, as Parry was looking for “indisputable visual evidence,” and so the play, correctly, stands. But in an alternate universe, this play has two different outcomes:

  • I think, had the play been called down by contact by virtue of the jersey tug, that there would not have been indisputable visual evidence to dispute that call.
  • Had Manning slid feet first, he would have taken advantage of a dead-ball ruling, which would have not resulted in a fumble had he dropped the ball upon hitting the ground:

7–4–1. An official shall declare dead ball and the down ended: … (c) whenever a runner declares himself down by sliding feet first on the ground. The ball is dead at the spot of the ball at the instant the runner so touches the ground.

Also notable

Trent Cole was ejected with five seconds remaining in the game for throwing a punch. While there were offsetting personal fouls, a disqualification is never withdrawn because of offsetting penalties.

If a fumble by either team occurs after
the two-minute warning:
(a) The ball may be advanced by any opponent.
(b) The player who fumbled is the only player of his team who is permitted to recover
and advance the ball.
(c) If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead,
and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble, or the spot of the recovery
if the spot of the recovery is behind the spot of the fumble.If a fumble by either team occurs after
the two-minute warning:
(a) The ball may be advanced by any opponent.
(b) The player who fumbled is the only player of his team who is permitted to recover
and advance the ball.
(c) If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead,
and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble, or the spot of the recovery
if the spot of the recovery is behind the spot of the fumble.

Week 9 “Official Review”: Follow the bouncing ball, spiking out of bounds

• Calls, Week 9
Wednesday, November 11, 2009 – 11:29 pm | 1 Comment

by Ben Austro

The “Official Review” segment returns for week 9 action, with the league’s vice-president of officiating, Mike Pereira, disecting some of the more complicated calls. This week, there were certainly some complex calls (video: part 1 and part 2), which we will leave the most complex one for last:

  • In question was the spotting of the ball in the Cowboys–Eagles game on two different plays. In one case, a player going back for the ball is not awarded forward progress (correctly called), because he was not in contact with the defender, therefore not being pushed back. The second one regarded the fourth-down quarterback sneak by Donovan McNabb. Pereira notes that the center-field logo could be used as a demarcation point, and might have given the Eagles a few extra inches. Typically those few extra inches aren’t given during replay, but in this case, there was a clear placement with relation to an on-field mark. Pereira said the ball should have been moved.
  • On a play in the game with the Steelers,  Brandon Marshall of the Broncos spikes the ball at the end of the play, and somehow avoids being penalized. Since he was out of bounds, he is not causing a delay in spotting the ball, therefore no delay of game penalty is administered.

The most complex play, perhaps of the entire season, involved a down-by-contact ruling at the 1-yard line in the Colts–Texans game (video). So complicating are the circumstances, that it becomes a list onto itself.

  • Ryan Moats of the Texans clearly fumbled the ball prior to going to the ground.
  • With the play dead at 2:25, the Texans opted to run the clock to the two-minute warning, giving the Colts’ coaching staff the entire break to review the play. The coach may challenge the final play prior to the two-minute warning up until the first legal snap after the two-minute warning.
  • It is reasonably clear that Moats did not touch the ball after dropping it. Since his tackler was out of bounds while holding Moats, if Moats touched the ball, the ball would be out of bounds at that spot.
  • Jerraud Powers of the Colts jumps back in bounds to retrieve the ball, but since he does not establish two feet in bounds, he makes the ball dead, and it is still Texans’ ball.
  • However, since the ball is ruled out of bounds on the goal line by an offensive fumble, this becomes a touchback, and in this case, is awarded to the Colts’ at the 20-yard line.

Referee Jeff Triplette goes through a Hochulian effort to explain the call, taking about 40 seconds to describe:

After reviewing the play, the runner does fumble the football prior to being down by contact. The ball stays in bounds. The Indianapolis defender is out of bounds when the ball is laying the goal line, comes back in and, with one foot down, touches the football. Therefore, it is a fumble out of bounds in the end zone. It is a touchback. First and 10, Indianapolis, from the 20-yard line.

A lot of things to watch on that play, but one thing missing from Triplette’s description.

Please reset the game clock to 2:24.

Because the play was ruled dead at that point, the time had to be restored to the clock, even though the two-minute warning had already transpired. It is understandable with so much involved in that play, however once a decision is made, the replay official (in this case, Bob Boylston) and the referee must communicate the down, distance, yard line, and time remaining on all reversals. The time taken to determine the spot and the time remaining consistent with the reversal decision is outside of the referee’s 60-second replay review time.

This is the second time this season that Triplette and Boylston failed to relay this information correctly. We noted in Week 5, that a replay reversal failed to account for the correct spotting of the ball, one of several failure points on the same play. In addition, there are six other officials, one of whom should have confered with Triplette to restore the time consumed.

Tough call on the refs there, especially when they made a difficult decision correctly. But the sloppy bookkeeping on replay reversals must be fixed with this crew.

Raider coach not fined for bumping ref

• Calls, Week 6
Monday, October 26, 2009 – 12:12 am | Comments Off

by Ben Austro

Week 6: Eagles at Raiders

Some late news from Week 6, as Jay Glazer of Fox Sports.com reports that Raiders coach Tom Cable avoided being fined for bumping an official in the game against the Eagles.

Following a interception return for a touchdown that was nullified by a pass interference penalty, Cable was flagged for 15 yards for bumping line judge Darryll Lewis. It must have not been viewed as flagrant, as Cable could have been the first head coach ever to be ejected from the game.

Usually, this carries a $25,000 fine, however Glazer reports that the league office could not find anything on video conclusive enough for the fine. (This does not mean that the penalty was incorrect, as the coach still made contact with the official.)