This week, Bill Leavy’s crew is off. Bill Vinovich, who is a rotating 18th referee, will head Jerome Boger’s crew and Boger has the week off.
Tom Stephan, the line judge injured during the Monday night game last week is scheduled for Cincinnati this week. We are trying to confirm the reason why, but Walt Anderson’s side judge, Michael Banks, is off for the second consecutive week.
The officiating assignments have been compiled with the assistance of Football-refs.com.
Thursday, Dec. 6
- Broncos at Raiders: Clete Blakeman
Sunday, Dec. 9
- Rams at Bills: Gene Steratore
- Cowboys at Bengals: Bill Vinovich
- Chiefs at Browns: Walt Anderson
- Eagles at Buccaneers: Ron Winter
- Ravens at Redskins: John Parry
- Falcons at Panthers: Ed Hochuli
- Jets at Jaguars: Alberto Riveron
- Titans at Colts: Pete Morelli
- Bears at Vikings: Walt Coleman
- Chargers at Steelers: Scott Green
- Dolphins at 49ers: Mike Carey
- Cardinals at Seahawks: Carl Cheffers
- Saints at Giants: Jeff Triplette
- Lions at Packers: Tony Corrente
Monday, Dec. 10
- Texans at Patriots: Terry McAulay
5 thoughts on “Week 14 referee assignments”
I was watching the Green Bay Detroit game with some buddies. Towards the end, when Stafford threw a fourth down interception to Green Bay (which replays showed actually hit the ground) I said Detroit should challenge the play so that it would negate the otherwise mandatory review, a review which in the end would benefit the Packers from a field position standpoint (giving them the ball where the play began). Someone pointed out that if the the lack of a review would benefit the Lions, the review could still go forward even if they challenged, and I think he’s correct in that. Then we got to talking about it further. What if the intercepting player had run around the field, but failed to gain any yardage before being ruled down? Then you’re looking at a situation where from a field position standpoint it’s better for the Lions to have the play to stand as called, but from a time standpoint it’s better for the play to be overturned. If the Lions throw the challenge flag in this scenario, does the referee just make his best judgement whether or not the review “benefits” the Lion before going through with it? And what if there are two turnovers, someone may have stepped out of bounds, or who knows what other elements, and the referee doesn’t know which team the replay will benefit until he’s looked at the whole thing? If someone throws the challenge flag there, do they go through with the review and disregard it if it benefits the team that threw the flag? And how about the worst case scenario: all this happens and Ed Hochuli is the referee? Does the NFL permit him to give a powerpoint presentation on the big screen with charts and graphs showing “benefit/detriment” estimates for each scenario, and how he ultimately arrived at his decision? And are we still, here on Tuesday, listening to him explain a play that ended last night?
I’ll hang up and listen to your response. Love the show.
Week 14, Pats vs. Texans
Second Quarter 8:45
Pat’s Mankins #70 pushes Texan’s Quin #29
No ref calls the offensive foul, wtf the ref does show up just in time to blow the whistle looking dumbfounded but still not flag thrown down. I see this as obvious neglect in doing their job. Did anybody even see this play watching the game?
Without defending the “who benefits” rule (because it can’t be), I believe I can answer your hypothetical this way. Even though time was bled off the clock, that is not a ruling. Replay, in a matter of speaking, does not review the play, it confirms/reverses calls when there is indisputable evidence. Under the multiple-turnover scenario, if a ruling benefits a team that threw the red challenge flag, then it is not considered. If that ruling would have shut down the play, and thus avoiding a subsequent event for the other team, I would say that must be considered as advantageous for the non-challenging team.
If there is a clear result that a coach is trying to “block” by throwing the flag, a referee/replay official can use discretion and pull out the obvious element that the coach is seeking to avoid. The referee/replay official can make a logical determination of what a coach would have challenged if it was not automatically subject to review. If, after reviewing the play, the ruling would benefit the team making the challenge, the referee could simply state “the ruling on the field stands.”
Of course, Jim Schwartz would be the last person to throw that challenge flag, even though there might be a tactical advantage. It would just look foolish. I’m sure Greg Schianno has worked on a few scenarios where he might throw an illegal challenge flag to shut down a replay.
Comments are closed.