You can follow our coverage on Twitter, but we will post some of the more notable calls from the weekend here in our liveblog.
Did you see something in Sunday’s games that you thought was not called correctly? Did you want to give props to an official who made a great call? (I know, this isn’t likely, even though it happens all the time.) Let’s us know by giving us the quarter and time (if known) and what happened in the comments section below or tweet us.
18 thoughts on “Quick calls: Week 6”
I see the pink flags are gone – one too many towels confused for flags?
What’s up with Carey’s uniform? He’s been wearing the “old font” shirt, this week I’m sure the numbers are on with black tape.
The pink flags are gone due to confusion with the towels.
Packers at Ravens, Gene Steratore did a good job of explaining the injury timeout and after the play penalty against Green Bay inside 2 minutes. On the subsequent Ravens possession Flacco was sacked, lost the ball and Green Bay recovered and advanced. Why were 2 seconds put back on the clock allowing Green Bay another FG attempt when the runner was tackled in bounds? Shouldn’t the clock have continued to run and the half expired?
Not sure why 2 seconds were put back on the clock, but obviously the line judge determined that the clock ran after the ball was dead. The clock stops on changes of possession.
It definitely looks like the crew got that right. 2 seconds were left when the runner was down.
In the 4th quarter of the Saints-Patriots matchup, the Saints had a 2nd & 6. They showed jimmy graham being led to the locker room and stated that New England called a timeout. After the commercial break the timeout counter jumped from 1 to 2 during the play with no explanation. Where did the extra timeout come from as it was obviously the difference maker in the game.
TV made a mistake and they corrected. They docked NE a timeout earlier, when they shouldn’t have.
Ravens-Packers, ~0:25 left in the 2nd quarter. Pack has no time outs left. Running play ends with the runner (a Packer) injured and the clock stops for the injury. During the injury timeout, a different Packer commits a personal foul. The ruling is that the Pack is charged with its fourth timeout; although a runoff should occur after such an injury and then the clock should start to roll, because there was a deadball foul that stopped the clock, it would not be runoff and would remain stopped. Was this the right call? It seems odd that a team can save the 10sec injury extra timeout in the half runoff and the subsequent clock rolling by deliberately committing a foul.
What about the false start call on Jahri Evans with 3 NE defenders in the neutral zone, the no timeout/delay of game no call with Brees clearly signaling timeout with the play clock at zero & the no call on the near choke slam of Junior Galette. The refs blew too many calls in this game which all went NE’s way.
Disclosure: I am a Browns fan. Problem: Two (2) interference calls on Joe Haden and the roughing call on Quentin Groves were wrong and should be addressed with this crew. The flags should not have been thrown and once they were, the other members of the crew should have questioned them.
I SAW A LITTLE OF THE PATS GAME AND SAW BULLSHIT THAT CAUSED THE GAME
MNF, that chargers pass in the second quarter that looked like it might be a catch and fumble but was ruled incomplete — isn’t tucking the football away to protect it a football move? He wasn’t going to the ground, he landed with both feet with control of the ball, and after tucking it closer to his body to try to protect it, it was ripped out.
I know if it had been challenged, they’d have let it “stand” because it was ruled incomplete on the field, but unless I’m missing some really immediately obvious thing that put it cleanly in the “incomplete” column, I really thought the right move there would have been to rule a fumble on the field, to trigger an automatic review. I thought it was at least close enough to merit a closer look.
Thanks for clearing up that MNF incomplete situation, I knew I must have been missing something!
I’m interested to see how you break down that SNF non-muffed punt ruling. The Dallas player looks like he’s waiting to block a Redskins gunner who’s just out of bounds, and he engages the gunner in a block just as he comes back in bounds. The ball hits the Dallas player somewhere in that transition from waiting to engaging, so I’m guessing the question would be where exactly the player starts being considered “engaged” rather than “passive”.
I feel like the rule is meant to prevent receiving teams from just shoving opposing players into the ball for a cheap turnover, and in that spirit, I’d argue that the Dallas player wasn’t just minding his own business when he was unexpectedly pushed into the ball. But it’s probably the letter and not the spirit of the rule that matters, and I’m really curious to know where “engaging” begins in this case.
Steelers vs. Jets. End of 1st half. Polamalu crushes Stephen Hill near the sideline who after replay is ruled down in bounds and a completed catch. So if he is ruled down “IN BOUNDS”, then why is the clock not running as soon as the ball is spotted and the refs blow the whistle to resume play? Instead, the kicker gets his time to square up and kick the field goal. Like the Jets got an extra timeout there…
Because Hill landed out of bounds, which killed the clock. The official made the signal out of frame. Hill wasn’t moved backwards, so there wasn’t forward progress ruling that would have kept the clock running.
Had Hill landed in bounds, and he is hurt on the play, the quarter would have ended on a 10-second runoff (4th timeout due to injury on the offense with a running clock). Another alternate scenario: If he landed in bounds with the “4th timeout” at 16 seconds, the Jets would have had 6 seconds remaining, but the clock would start on the ready-for-play.
Hello there, simply turned into alert to your blog via Google, and found that it is truly informative. I am going to be careful for brussels. I will be grateful for those who proceed this in future. A lot of folks will likely be benefited out of your writing. Please see me story there http://noviy-dom.zp.ua/ Cheers!
Comments are closed.