Football Zebras.com

Week 5: Broncos at Chargers

There are grumblings in the Mile High City about the last-second desperation pass by Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow. The pass landed incomplete, however, the Mile High Report is throwing a virtual flag for defensive pass interference.

Video of the play is on NFL.com.

Even though time expires during the play, if there is a defensive penalty, the quarter is extended by an untimed down. In the case of a hypothetical defensive pass interference, the ball is placed at the 1-yard line for a single shot at the end zone.

All of the scrambling by Tebow does have an affect on the non-call. Because he is running, the play could potentially develop into a rush, and therefore downfield contact related to pass coverage comes off the board. That’s not to say that you get a free shot, as the Browns found out in 2009. Once the play becomes a definitive pass play, then pass interference comes back on the table.

It is unclear if the ball is in the air when the contact is happening, so we can’t evaluate that in our opinion.

However, the and the defender are locking up with each other mutually, so an official can hold his flag. The spirit of the pass interference rule is to avoid an advantage going to either team through contact. Therefore, if both players are guilty of grapling each other, neither player has gained an advantage. Very, very rarely is there a call of offsetting pass interference fouls.

The Chargers cornerback Dante Hughes does attain an advantage by pushing receiver Matthew Willis out of bounds. By doing so, the receiver immediately becomes ineligible to catch the ball unless it is first touched by another player. However, in this case, it was a by-product of their mutual combativeness that the receiver became overpowered and stepped out. Had the defender disengaged the block and then shoved the receiver, you have textbook DPI.

It is a judgement call, always one to be the subject of discontent on such a pivotal play, whether it is called or not called.

Week 12: Colts at Chargers

An item that flew by our desk late last week that we are getting to now: Colts head coach Jim Caldwell, quoted in Friday morning’s Indianapolis Star, said that the league admitted to a blown call in the game the previous Sunday.

An Eric Weddle interception of Colts’ quarterback Peyton Manning should not have counted according to the NFL, said Caldwell. Weddle was guilty of pass interference on Reggie Wayne, however none of the officials called it (video). Weddle returned the interception for a touchdown in a game where one score was not decisive. While pointing out the mea culpa, the league never apologized for the error, Coach Caldwell said:

Sorry is not part of their response. It’s just a declaration that, “We did indeed miss that one; it should have been called.”

Alberto Riverón’s crew was officiating.

Recently fired Vikings head coach Brad Childress revealed NFL confidential discussions of this nature in Week 7 and was fined $35,000 for the infraction. The Steelers also had a Week 9 discussion leak from an unidentified source.

Week 12: Buccaneers at Ravens

Tampa-based beat reporters witnessed an argument involving the Buccaneers cornerback Aqib Talib and field judge Boris Cheek. Talib was upset at a pass interference call against fellow cornerback Myron Lewis (Update 11/29: NFL.com has video of the penalty) and apparently confronted Cheek after the game near the locker room. According to Anwar Richardson in the Tampa Tribune and St. Petersburg Times’ Rick Stroud, the two-way critique between Talib and Cheek progressed like this:

Talib: “You made a pussy call.”

Cheek: “You played like a pussy.”

Talib: “I’ll (hit) you in your bitch ass mouth.”

Talib had to be restrained by his teammates. (Why does this remind me more of South Park?) The game supervisor would not comment since the incident did not happen on the field. A league spokesman said they will look into the issue. Carl Cheffers is the crew chief.

File photo of Boris Cheek from 2008.

Week 13: Ravens at Packers

The Ravens and Packers gave the spotlight to the officials on Monday Night Football, as both teams were assessed a combined 310 yards in penalties, tied for second all-time. The Ravens, while being penalized 175, managed to outdo the referees by 10 yards with 185 yards total offense. Several pass interference fouls lead to the high yardage totals.

The MNF team was also quick to point out that the Buccaneers–Seahawks game from 1976 was the sixth week of both teams’ inaugural season.

• 374 — Cleveland Browns (209) vs. Chicago Bears (165), Nov. 25, 1951
• 310 — Baltimore Ravens (175) vs. Green Bay Packers (135), Dec. 7, 2009
• 310 — Tampa Bay Buccaneers (190) vs. Seattle Seahawks (120), Oct. 17, 1976
• 309 — Green Bay Packers (184) vs. Boston Yanks (125), Oct. 21, 1945

Week 13: 49ers at Seahawks

As NFL head coaches are wont to do on a weekly basis, 49ers coach Mike Singletary has registered a complaint with the league office regarding some questionable calls in Sunday’s game against the Seahawks. First, Singletary does acknowledge that important caveat at the end of his remark that we frequently mention here: referees don’t decide games any more than the weather does.

Here are Singletary’s comments from his press conference:

Every week we send a letter to the league about different calls that are made or not made in a game. Just to say this week, there will be several paragraphs that will be going to the league.

[Questioned about specific plays:] There were many.

[Questioned about an uncalled 4th-and-goal pass interference:] Let me say this before I go too far down this road, obviously there were bad calls made and I think in every game there are bad calls made. Yesterday, for me, there were just a few more than I had witnessed maybe since I’ve been in the league and I just want to make sure that our players, coaching staff, our fans, everybody involved with the 49ers, everybody that cares about the 49ers, I want them to understand that this is not about the referees. They didn’t fumble the ball. They didn’t throw interceptions. They didn’t make bad plays, we did. So I don’t want to put this on the referees. I certainly feel that some of those calls were questionable, but if we had done what we were supposed to do, we overcome that and we win the football game.

The pass interference non-call came early in the first quarter (video, first highlight). The Associated Press reports that another call in the communique to the league may include a late-game reception by the Seahawks that set up the tie-breaking field goal (video). Singletary is seen complaining to line judge Ron Phares for, apparently, the lack of an illegal contact or offensive pass interference penalty.

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.

This week’s “Official Review” from the NFL head of officiating Mike Pereira has one less play under scrutiny than usual (three, rather than four). That doesn’t leave us shortchanged, as there are multiple levels of discussion on two plays (video, part 1 and part 2).

Unfortunately, for the second week in a row, Pereira admits that two additional errors were made in the administration of a replay review, upping the count to four in two weeks.

Under review this week:

• For the final play, and the subsequent quarter-extending play, in the Browns–Lions game, Pereira reaffirmed that the pass interference call was correct, as the pass was in the air, as we reported. Also, we had explained the reason why Lions quarterback Matthew Stafford was allowed to return after an injury timeout without sitting out a down.
• In the Redskins–Cowboys game, we already reported on the league’s response to a review that should not have been called. Essentially, the Redskins gained 10 yards by the incorrect review, which didn’t have an impact on the score, as the Redskins missed a field goal on the next play. Periera explains:

Since we ruled the runner out of bounds, we essentially killed the play, and the play was over. So nothing that happens after that is relevant. If the receivers catch that pass and run it in for a touchdown, or the defenders intercept it, it’s a dead ball at that point [where the quarterback is] and can’t be reviewed.

So we really reviewed and reversed a play that wasn’t even reviewable.

• In the Colts–Ravens game, a challenge flag by the Ravens was picked up by coach John Harbaugh with 2:16 remaining in the half. In the conference with the officials, Harbaugh apparently became aware that the officials ruled the receiver dragged a toe in the completion. With that information, Harbaugh changed his mind on the challenge, and the request to withdraw the challenge was granted by referee John Parry. Pereira said that he informed all of the referees this week that this is against the rules:

We want to make sure that [the officials] understand that if a coach throws the challenge flag for a play that is reviewable—a play like this that is reviewable—then we are going to go through with the challenge, even if he subsequently sees that the call on the field was going to be right. So they’ll end up, actually, getting charged with a challenge and a timeout, since they’re going to lose the challenge. Really, it’s the only fair thing to do.

Interestingly, in the conversation, NFL Network commentator Rich Eisen speculated that a defense might use a time-saving strategy from basketball to their advantage. The ubiquitous intentional foul used in basketball could be used by a defense to disrupt a quick snap by the offense on a potentially challengable play.

As we covered previously, a review can happen on the previous play until there is a legal snap. In case a pre-snap penalty administered, the ability to review the last play is not lost. However, if there is a reversal, the penalty is disregarded as if it never happened. Eisen correctly suggested that on a potentially challengeable play with the offense scrambling to snap the ball (to make a review of the previous play impossible), the defense might foul intentionally (except for a personal foul), just to delay a legal snap, and allowing the previous play to be reviewed. If the play is not overturned, the defense will still be penalized, but if it is overturned, the gamble pays off.

We will be watching carefully for an intentional foul on the defense creating a replay opportunity.

Week 11: Browns at Lions

The headline is but a part of the story, as Marla Ridenour of the Akron Beacon Journal reports: “Browns’ defensive captain takes blame for loss.” After a the Browns had a commanding 21-point lead in the first quarter, the Lions were able to take the lead, literally beyond the 60th minute of regulation.

The Browns captain is veteran linebacker David Bowens, and, as the headline suggested, he took responsibility for the loss on behalf of the entire defense:

It’s my fault. If you want to blame somebody, blame me. I have to take ownership as a captain and as the defense’s signal-caller. The offense did a great job today, they scored enough points for us to win. Totally on us. Totally on us.

The rest of the team, apparently, was out to blame the officiating for the loss.

The Lions were given a second chance at the end of the game when a Hail Mary pass was flagged for defensive pass interference. With no time remaining on the clock, the quarter was extended by one untimed down by rule, with the Lions getting the ball on the 1-yard line. The Lions scored the game-winning touchdown, snapping the ball with 0:00 showing on the clock (video of penalty and touchdown).

Pass interference penalty

Frequently with these up-for-grabs, desperation passes, penalties are not called, even though there is a fair amount of contact. The reason is that players that are playing the ball (either to catch or deflect it) are allowed reasonable incidental contact. In this play, cornerback Hank Poteat blocks a Lions receiver from playing the ball and pushes him out of bounds. Impeding the ability to play the ball is most certainly a penalty, both for the offense and the defense. Brodney Pool, whose interception was nullified by penalty, claimed ignorance of the rules:

It’s very tough, man, to have the game decided on the referee. I don’t think it’s fair to the players or the guys who went out there and fought. At the end of the game to make a call like that, it hurts.

I thought by rules once a quarterback is out of pocket, everything is live and if you have a receiver running on the end line I thought you could push him out so he can’t come back in and catch the ball. I think guys do that a lot. For the game to be decided like that, it’s not fair to this team, the coaches, the players who went out there.

If I were on the Browns’ coaching staff, I would be concerned that a fifth-year safety does not understand the rules of pass interference. It is also quite disingenuous to say it is not fair to be penalized for an obvious foul just because it happens on the last play of the game. Two officials threw flags on the play (back judge Gregory Steed and side judge Michael Banks), so it fair to say there was a consensus of the crew. Also, the Browns had one more goal-line stand to prevent the loss, which was not decided by the referees; the Browns failed to prevent the score.

Pool also accepted responsibility for allowing a 75-yard touchdown get by him earlier in the game. These types of plays, not the officials, decide games.

Poteat, a 10-year veteran himself, was quoted by Scott Petrak of the Chronicle-Telegram of Elyria, Ohio:

My understanding is, once the quarterback’s out of the pocket you can force the receiver out of bounds, and that’s what I was trying to do. That’s what I was always coached to do.

However, once the ball is released, that “free contact” ability is off the board. Poteat knows this, which is why he chose his words carefully.

No excessive celebration penalty

Some of the Browns players also took umbrage that the Lions were not penalized 15 yards for an excessive celebration following the final touchdown. At that point the game was tied, pending the extra-point conversion.

Offensive lineman Eric Steinbach, in addition to criticizing the pass interference, though the referees were further to blame:

To top it off, after they score they have a coach on the opposing side run across the field to go celebrate. If you’re going to call a shitty game, keep it consistent.

There is a mistaken belief, expressed in Ridenour’s column, that the extra-point attempt would be moved back 15 yards because of such a penalty.

The fact that there may have been an excessive celebration is irrelevant in this particular situation. Essentially, the Lions, by virtue of the end of a half, could not be penalized. Well, they could be penalized, but it would not result in enforcement.

An excessive celebration or taunting foul following a touchdown is enforced on the ensuing kickoff. In this case, there is none, so any penalty would essentially be disregarded. Had there been a delay in spotting the ball, the Lions could have been penalized five yards for delay of game, which would have been enforced on the extra-point try.

Obviously, there is safety in blaming the officials when a team blows a commanding lead.

Week 10: Seahawks at Cardinals

Seahawks coach Jim Mora is petitioning the league on 17 plays in Sunday’s loss to the Cardinals, as reported by Danny O’Neil of The Seattle Times. While it is routine that coaches submit questionable calls to the league office, Mora said it was “probably three times as many as I have in any game.”

Mora would not elaborate on all of the plays, but apparently some disputed pass interference calls are part of the mix. Mora did note, however, that quarterback Matt Hasselbeck was gasping for air after a forearm was planted on his neck after being sacked. There was no roughness penalty called on the play.

Darnell Dockett, the player administering the offending forearm, was quick to respond on his Twitter feed, which we have detwitterfied for your reading enjoyment:

Dear Coach Mora: It’s football. Shit happens, and if you ever played the game you’d understand. Really, I would [not] try to hurt Matt. He’s a good guy.

Dockett was too fast to toss the four-letter word in there, but did not realize that he forgot the critical word not (which is followed by “*wouldnt” in his next tweet). We will know by Friday if the league feels that a fine happens, too.

Update, 11/21/09: Dockett was fined $7,500 for the hit.