1st Quarter | 13:00 remaining | Lions 7-0 | Lions kickoff | video

Updated below to include similar play from Chargers–Raiders.

Tough break for the Packers, as Patrick Lee muffs the Lions kickoff in the end zone. Lee remained in the end zone, but the ball rolled out to the 1-yard line. Lee pulled the ball back into the end zone for an apparent touchback.

Referee Walt Anderson had a lengthy conference with line judge Mike Spanier and headlinesman Ed Camp. Camp can be seen very clearly articulating the case for a safety, which is how it was ultimately ruled on the field.

On any play involving a touchback or safety, the ruling pivots on how the ball enters the end zone. If the kicking team puts the ball into the end zone, it is a touchback. When the ball is muffed, even though the direction of the ball changed, the force behind the ball still came from the kick. Once Lee pulled the ball backwards, it was Lee that forced the ball into the end zone, regardless of the fact that Lee was standing in the end zone.

Had Lee left the ball on the 1-yard line and kneeled, the ball would have been dead at the 1-yard line. It was close, but the kneel came after the ball returned to the end zone.

Also a consideration on the play (and confirmed by replay) is if the entire ball exited the end zone. If a point of the ball was still touching the goal line, Lee would have had a touchback.

Good, tough call in real time by the three officials on the play.

Week 17: Chargers at Raiders

4th Quarter | 9:32 remaining | Chargers 31-26 | Raiders kickoff @ 50

Chargers kick returner Richard Goodman allowed a kickoff to hit the ground and roll towards the end zone. He needed to get the loose ball, as either team could recover. Goodman scooped up the ball at the 1-yard line, retreated into his end zone, and barely got the entire ball out of the end zone.

Referee Clete Blakeman announced the ball was out of the end zone and down at the ½-yard line.

• As pointed out in our comments, there was a bizarre fair-catch play in the Redskins–Panthers game. Basically, the Panthers, while punting, had blocked Brian Westbrook of the Redskins into his recevier Antwaan Randle El. Not only did the block interfere with Randle El’s opportunity to make a fair catch, but the ball deflected off of Westbrook, creating a live ball. This was not called fair-catch interference, because Westbrook and the Panthers special-teamer (Quinton Teal) were actively engaged in blocking each other. According to Rule 10, Section 1, Article 1, Item 1 of the NFL Rule Book:

It is interference if a player of the kicking team contacts the receiver, or causes a passive player of either team to contact the receiver, before or simultaneous to his touching the ball.

• A taunting call that was assessed in the Patriots–Broncos game was, on replay, showing the side judge Jeff Lamberth throwing his flag prior to the taunting incident. Pereira knowledged this “looks fishy,” but, it turns out there were originally multiple fouls on the play. Lamberth was flagging an illegal helmet hit, while back judge Dino Paganelli flagged for the taunt. Headlinesman Kent Payne came in afterward to say that it wasn’t a helmet-to-helmet hit, and that flag (the one seen in the video) was picked up. This left the taunting foul, which came in off screen, as the only penalty called on the play. However, referee Carl Cheffers should have stated in the announcement that the flag for helmet-to-helmet contact was picked up (even though there actually was helmet-to-helmet contact).
• An apparent fumble in the Raiders–Giants game was ruled down by contact, which the Giants challenged. Then referee John Parry explained the dead-ball ruling was not down by contact, but due to forward progress being stopped. The challenge flag was picked up, since forward progress is not reviewable on fumble plays.
• An apparent fumble in the Bengals–Ravens game lead to a rarely seen improper spotting of the ball. This play had a major breakdown in officiating mechanics, where the redundancy in the system failed terribly.
• First, Line judge Michael Spanier (seen in the replay) ruled a fumble and recovery by the Bengals.
  • Failure point #1: Playing this as a fumble, he should have marked the spot of recovery with his beanbag.
• Then, the field judge Boris Cheek came in to declare down by contact. This was challenged by the Bengals, and upheld as down by contact.
  • Failure point #2: Upon declaring a replay decision, the referee (Jeff Triplette)  and the replay assistant (Bob Boyleston) must determine down, distance, yard line, and the game time. This is not part of the referee’s 60-second window to make a decision on the play call itself. The yard line, at least, was not discussed or was miscommunicated.
  • Failure point #3: Upon spotting the ball ready for play, all seven officials did not realize the ball was placed 4½ yards behind the dead-ball spot. This should have been readily apparent to the headlinesman (Steve Stelljes) since the play, with the bad spot, was a –1 yard net, when the reception was clearly past the line of scrimmage.

Incorrect spots (as opposed to disputed judgment calls) happen very infrequently, but when they do, they are major errors that affect one’s playoff eligibility as an official. While the official game records show a –1 yard play, the officials can expect a –3 on their season scorecards.

In passing, there were two comments by the NFL Network’s Rich Eisen that should have been corrected by Periera. First, Eisen referred to giving the kick receiver that signals fair catch a “halo” area to allow him to catch the ball. The halo rule on a fair catch is an old college rule which did not permit a member of the kicking team within a certain distance of the fair-catch-signalling player. This is not a rule employed above the high school level. Secondly, Eisen remarked that if one official saw two fouls, that he should have marked the second one with his hat. In a case were there are two fouls at one enforcement point, the flag is suffice. (The flag is primarily an enforcement marker by the official, so dropping a hat to mark the same spot is unneccessary.)