• The oft-talked-about play of the week (video), where a down-by-contact ruling for the Redskins was overruled as a fumble and recovery for the Saints in overtime. Pereira points out that the ball is moving and being separated from the receiver, and therefore is a fumble. (A ball can move, as long as it remains in a hand or arm, as described in elegant prose to us.)
• Regarding the Flozell Adams hit on Justin Tuck (Cowboys–Giants) after the expiration of the first half, we have something for our offseason clip-and-save file:

It really doesn’t seems right that that play shouldn’t result in a 15-yard penalty on the opening kick of the third quarter, and I think that is something we’ll have to take a look at [in the offseason]. … It will be interesting to see how the Competition Committee addresses it. … I already promised [Giants head coach] Tom Coughlin on the Monday after the game that I would present it to the committee, and I’m sure it will be one of the things they look at early.

• An incomplete pass by the Buccaneers against the Panthers was reviewed and overturned by referee Don Carey and replay official Lloyd McPeters. Periera did not see indisputable visual evidence, andacknowledged that replay officials are graded on their performance for playoff assignments.
• In the same game, a rush by Maurice Jones-Drew of the Panthers was reviewed to see if it was a touchdown. It was ruled short by the line judge, and replay did not have indisputable visual evidence to overturn.

Pereira did not come near addressing any plays from the 49ers–Seahawks game, which the Niners organization alleges “several paragraphs” worth of disputed calls.

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.

In the closing seconds of the second quarter of the Redskins–Cowboys game, Redskins quarterback Jason Campbell was driven out of bounds for a 5-yard loss as he threw a forward pass. Replay official Bob McGrath called for a review, and referee Alberto Riverón reversed the call on the field to incomplete pass.

The play, however, was not reviewable. The league office informed Cowboys owner Jerry Jones of this.

It’s not abundantly clear in the rulebook, as we have two seemingly contradictory statements:

The Replay System will cover the following play situations only:

(a) Plays governed by Sideline, Goal Line, End Zone, and End Line: …

3. Runner/receiver in or out of bounds.

(b) Passing plays:

1. Pass ruled complete/incomplete/intercepted in the field of play.

Since the call on the field was out of bounds, any subsequent action by Campbell is disregarded, even if it actually happened in bounds. This is because the play is ruled dead at that point.

There are exceptions to the “ball is dead” edict, as in the case of a clear recovery of a fumble or interception when an incomplete pass is overturned on replay. In these cases, there is no new action after the dead ball other than the recovery. What Riverón’s ruling on the play did was establish two new actions after a dead ball, namely, that a pass was subsequently thrown and the pass was incomplete.

If we were to take a different scenario for the same play, and say that there was an on-field ruling of incomplete pass, this could be reviewed to see if Campbell stepped out prior to releasing the pass.

Further complicating the ruling was that the Redskins were assessed a delay of game penalty prior to the replay review being called. (This is legal, because the replay official can review the last play until a legal snap has occurred.) In an Emmit Brown-like paradox of the universe, it was determined that the delay of game could not have occurred because of the reversal, and the gamebook does not even reflect the fact that it was called.

One comment made by Jones, a former Competition Committee member, argued that the media were in contact with the league’s Park Avenue offices during the game. He suggests, in a very NHL-esque fashion, that “We’ve got to get going where there’s communication between [the league office in] New York and the games.” Unfortunately, the average official is correct only 98% of the time. There is only 60 seconds to review the play, and the officials who have been hired to officiate a game must do their job without outside help. Yes, there are extraordinary circumstances, such as lightning or fan interference that warrant consultation with the executive level. But other than those once-in-a-career moments, the referee’s decision, even if incorrect, is final.