(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({ google_ad_client: "ca-pub-3070301786099382", enable_page_level_ads: true });
Football Zebras
CallsQuick calls: Week 17

Quick calls: Week 17

week17Check back here for a rundown of the calls we saw and video highlights of the officiating. If you see something, let us know in the comments section of this post or reach us on Twitter @footballzebras. Be sure to let us know time and quarter.

(Officiating assignments)

[liveblog]

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Ben Austro
Ben Austro is the editor and founder of Football Zebras and the author of So You Think You Know Football?: The Armchair Ref's Guide to the Official Rules (on sale now)

9 thoughts on “Quick calls: Week 17

  1. In GB-Minn game, why does Mike Carey keep signaling unsportsmanlike fouls as offsides/encroachment? Did it at least 2x in 3Q, most recently at 2:04 left in 3rd. Also interesting call on GB fumble into end zone, with GB coach throwing red flag on a play that was already under review.

  2. Explanation of last comment. McCarthy threw challenge flag on GB fumble at MIN goal line; was flagged, but play was reviewed and reversed to a touchdown, penalty enforced on kickoff. Did the rule change?

  3. Re: GB-MIN (I typed this up before James Burke’s GB-MIN comment)

    Officials allowed GB challenge on a fumble (which should have been automatically reviewed) but penalized them 15 yards on the ensuing kickoff. If the rule that had been in play during the first 12 weeks was in play, the play would not have been reviewed. Looks like they changed the rule after all.

    (If the challenge overrides the auto review, this was GB’s second challenge, but both were successful. As such, GB would have one challenge remaining regardless of which counts.)

  4. Correction: review was already in progress. Call on field was correct, as the foul would not delay a snap.

    @Brendan: If you typed it before my comment, why was it posted 3 minutes later?

  5. @James

    This site auto-refreshes the comments section. I thought you knew that already, but you clearly don’t.

  6. I thought this was a clear intentional grounding late in the STL/SEA game (4th qtr, 4:02) but it wasn’t even discussed:

    http://imgur.com/AuUnC

    Wilson is in the pocket, under pressure, and I don’t think over the head of the Rams’ bench has a realistic chance of completion. Was everyone fooled because the offensive line pulls left? The RT appears to line up on the hash mark and Wilson throws from within the hash marks. Wilson only moves about a yard horizontally from where he takes the snap.

  7. Catchable is not a criteria. Only that there is a receiver in the area (when the QB is in the pocket). Even if it goes over the receiver’s head by a mile, it went in the direction of the receiver.

  8. Is that spelled out elsewhere in the rule book or case book? The rule itself uses the phrase “realistic chance of completion” and “A realistic chance of completion is defined as a pass that lands in the direction and the vicinity of an originally eligible receiver.”

    You seem to be saying that landing in the vicinity is not a requirement for a realistic chance of completion.

  9. Guessing you missed Texans-Colts game, don’t worry so did Clete Blakeman

    Luck fumbled when hit, but according to referee Blakeman was not a fumble but a backwards forward pass attempt

    Texans set, Colts player runs across..offsides NO referee Blakeman sayswas a false start on a player at other end of line of scrimmage opposite of where Colts played committed infraction

Comments are closed.

Top