Posts Tagged ‘Ed Hochuli’

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.

Incorrect spot in end-of-regulation scramble could’ve impacted playoff race

• Controversy, Week 12
Monday, November 30, 2009 – 3:23 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Week 12: Steelers at Ravens

With only moments to think, officials can make decisions based on digesting a 115-page rulebook. On average, 98% of the time they get it right. When there is an error it could have an impact on the game. When divisional foes meet, it could have an impact on the playoffs.

In all fairness, though, even if a bad call occurs, there usually are several opportunities that the affected team did not take advantage of. Much like the weather, the officiating is an element of the game mostly out of the team’s control, but something good teams adapt to.

While most errors are inexcusable, this one has some mitigating circumstances. However, the call is still wrong, and mitigating circumstances do not help officials in their evaluations which determine playoff assignments.

fgspot

Video of fumble and field goal attempt at NFL.com

In a hard-fought divisional game between the Ravens were within long field-goal range against the Steelers near the end of regulation. On third and 9 from the Steelers 34, Ravens quarterback Joe Flacco fumbled the ball at the 42, which was recovered by the Ravens at the 37 with 18 seconds remaining. Out of timeouts, the clock was running while a fire-drill substitution of the field-goal personnel ensued.

Headlinesman Mark Hittner came in to mark the dead ball spot at the 37. While that was the correct dead-ball spot, the Ravens should have gotten the ball at the 42, the spot of the fumble. (The responsibility for the spot goes to the head referee, officially.) Sunday Night Football announcer Al Michaels, after the fact, did call attention to this.

NFL Rulebook 8–7–6: 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.

Fortunately for Ed Hochuli’s crew, the field goal attempt was two yards short.

I do seem to remember a game in the last five years or so where the ball was spotted incorrectly before a field goal. (I’m looking for it; if you remember, put it in the comments.) Having realized the mistake, the officials wiped out the down, respotted the ball, and the field goal was taken five yards closer. Had there been a field goal from 56 yards, you can imagine the uproar if the officials salted the down to respot for a 61-yard field goal.

So while there was a major error, there are other circumstances that need to be considered:

  • If there was a conference regarding the spot of the ball, Hochuli would have had to call an official’s timeout. This would have given the Ravens time to line up a field goal, which (we’ll never know) could have been an advantage on a 61-yard field-goal attempt.
  • During the mass substitution, officials had to count that there were 11 players on the field. (Offense is counted by the umpire, line judge and headlinesman; defense by the side judge, field judge and back judge.)
  • The field judge and back judge had to position themselves under the uprights for the kick.
  • The line judge and headlinesman were watching for the offense to be set for a full second prior to a snap.
  • The headlinesman was on the Steelers sideline, so it was possible that the coach could have signaled a timeout prior to the kick.

However, as the vice-president of officiating will probably tell us in his weekly “Official Review” video, having too much to think about is not an acceptable excuse. Fortunately, the spot of the ball did not have a determination on the final score or playoff seedings.

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.

Hochuli description leaves no ambiguity

• Calls, Week 6
Monday, October 19, 2009 – 1:59 am | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Week 6: Giants at Saints

We have a fair bit of space here dedicated to when a referee announces a call and, in his economy for words, creates more dispute. Contrast that with Ed Hochuli’s call (video) on a booth-initiated challenge of a Saints fumble return that was being reviewed for a second fumble reverting possession back to the Giants:

We reviewed whether the ball was fumbled down near the goal line and ultimately recovered by New York in the end zone. The ruling is, though, that the ball, although it had become loose from a hand, it was still pinned between the player’s arm and his shoulder pad. Therefore, he still had possession when his knee hit the ground. The ruling stands as called; it’s New Orleans’ ball, first down.

Great call; no question what was under review, what the decision was, or how it was reached.

El árbitro habló español en Fútbol de la Noche de Lunes

• Calls, Week 5
Monday, October 12, 2009 – 11:23 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Week 5: Jets at Dolphins

futbol_logo2In the first quarter of the Jets–Dolphins Monday Night Football game, referee Alberto Riverón paid tribute to Hispanic Heritage Month with the first penalty call of the game.

We asked the public relations staff at Land Shark Stadium for the text of the call, but they were unable to get that for us. We reconstructed the call, by our best guess, based on the rule book at NFLatino.com: Update, 10/13/09: Jared Cooper of the NFL communication department came through for us and provided us with the call:

Salida falsa, ofensiva. Numero ochenta y uno. Falta de cinco yardas, repite el segundo down.

[False start, offense. Number 81. Five-yard penalty, repeat second down.]

Ed Hochuli also gave a call in Spanish during the October 2005 game played in Mexico City.

Week 2 “Official Review” with the usual suspects (and answers you read here first)

• Calls, Follow-up, Week 2
Wednesday, September 23, 2009 – 10:34 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Without getting into tremendous detail, the Week 2 edition of “Official Review” (two-part video that aired on NFL Net and NFL.com) covered the same topics we covered this week. The assessments we gave on the calls were entirely backed up by the league’s vice president of officiating, Mike Pereira. The calls under Official Review:

The segment also covered the noncontroversial call on the last play of the Bengals–Packers game. With the clock about to expire, referee Ed Hochuli ruled that the game was over prior to the snap. He then corrected the call that there was one second left on the clock, but since the Packers were not set in their stance at the snap, it was a false-start penalty. Of course, a false start with the clock running under two minutes also includes a 10-second runoff, which then consumed the one second. It was only a matter of clean bookkeeping, as the game ended without a play being run under both circumstances.

Pereira did express regret that the catch/ground issue has been so misconstrued and misunderstood only two weeks into the season. Whether this results in a Competition Committee review (as he alluded to with the Titans interference play) remains to be seen.

Giants interception correctly goes to the spot of recovery, not spot of whistle

• Calls, Week 2
Monday, September 21, 2009 – 2:29 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Week 2: Giants at Cowboys

The amazing interception by the Giants’ Kenny Phillips off of the foot of Cowboys’ Jason Witten (video) could be the first use of what might be referred to as the “Ed Hochuli rule.”

You may remember last year’s botched call in the Chargers–Broncos game where an incomplete pass ruling could not be overruled as a turnover.

In this weekend’s Sunday Night Football game, the ruling was incomplete. However, in a Rockette-worthy display, it actually caromed of the shoe of Witten into the waiting hands of Phillips. Phillips then trotted to the end zone untouched, although whistles did not blow until he was at the 5-yard line.

Mike Carey overturned the incomplete ruling on replay, but the ball in these situations, even if there is a delayed whistle, will go back to the spot of recovery. Even in the absence of the whistle, the covering official signaled incomplete, which is equivalent to a whistle.

And, yet, I find that this was not the most discussed pick in the game, but this was.

On a side note, there was to be no doubt if a punted ball banged off of the video screen with NBC’s cameras making sure that they showed the 600-ton hovering HDTV on all punts. Annoyingly, I might add.

Stripes may tweet whistle, not on Twitter

• News
Monday, August 31, 2009 – 9:15 pm | leave a comment

by Ben Austro

Don’t expect to read Ed Hochuli defend his calls online. He and the rest of the officials have a social networking ban imposed on them.

In rules just released—which is a reaction to number eight-five of the Bengals, Chad Ochocinco, and his claim that he would connect with fans via Twitter midgame—the NFL mainly placed restrictions on players and credentialed media for tweeting during games. However, a full-out ban was added for referees, even midweek.

The NFL’s muzzling of the officiating crew is not surprising, after Hochuli apologized for a blown call that could not be overturned during a Chargers–Broncos game last year. The call allowed the Broncos to keep possession and score the winning touchdown.

After the game, Hochuli was besieged by e-mails at the law firm where he serves as an attorney during the work week. Remarkably, Hochuli responded to his critics, regretting he made the bad call. The NFL stepped in immediately and ordered Hochuli to not respond to e-mails about his gridiron work.

As a result of the ban, we are missing a crucial element of the game: the perspective of the third team on the field. While we are seeking clarification on the rules, it would appear sites such as this are off limits as well, depriving the fans of unique insight.