Questionable NFL officials?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

So you are saying that the "man under the hood" intentionally gave the Packers a catch in spite of the visual evidence and then was relieved when he got a chance to show he couldn't blow it two times in a row when the Bryant review came up?

Haha. No. I'm saying he either intentionally blew the first call, or was blind or drunk. I can't think of any other explanation. I'm also wondering if the announcers haven't been told to quit criticizing the replay official; otherwise, they would have made a bigger deal about the first call (the Packer catch).

Yes, I do think there could be something fishy going on, and reversing the 'Bryant catch' could have helped accomplish whatever that fishy goal was.

Edited to add: it's a relief to be able to blame a huge Cowboy loss on something other than Jason Garrett's horrible play-calling and clock management, or Romo's panic-induced interceptions. Against the two of them, I thought Garrett's 4th-down call was the right one, but the wrong play, primarily because they would have scored too fast and Rodgers had driven the field the last two times, for touchdowns. I also thought he should have kept running the ball during the set where Romo was sacked twice. Garrett frequently abandons the run when it is working well, but Harbaugh did the same thing yesterday when Flaco threw the long interception - they were driving the ball well and on pace to run the clock out and win, then inexplicably threw a long pass to a short man who was double-covered. I guess these guys crack under pressure sometimes and just do stupid things. I would hate to have their job.

[Runscott]

I just googled 'Dez Bryant three steps' to see if anyone else was thinking the way I was. Here's what I found at deadspin:

Officials reversed the call because they determined Bryant was still in the process of making the catch when the ball was jarred loose by the ground. (Read that sentence again; football officiating as a demonstration in real-time casuistry is the sort of thing that could make even gamblers swear off the sport eventually.) The Cowboys lost their goal-line situation, possession, and, eventually, the game.

Watching a replay from the sideline, it's unclear when the process ends. Bryant takes three steps; Bryant has possession of the ball; Bryant stretches out for the end zone. When Bryant chooses to reach for the end zone, doesn't that complete the process? Do any of us know anymore? Is football now necessarily an exercise in epistemology?

[CMIZ5290]

The call on Bryant's catch was puzzling to me. Had it been ruled incomplete on the field like that, I could somewhat better understand it, but to over turn it, not so sure. Having said that, Dallas got all of the calls in the Detroit game, very lucky to win that game...

[jiw98]

The calls last week were also questionable in the Cowboy - Lions game. It's possible that if the correct calls were made in that game Dallas wouldn't have been playing this weekend.
I think the games should be decided by the players, not the officials. Unfortunately the officials in every sport seem to be getting calls wrong more frequently. Maybe it's more noticeable to the fans now because of all the different angles they show on the TV. Technology has changed the way we view games.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Runscott

I just googled 'Dez Bryant three steps' to see if anyone else was thinking the way I was. Here's what I found at deadspin:

Officials reversed the call because they determined Bryant was still in the process of making the catch when the ball was jarred loose by the ground. (Read that sentence again; football officiating as a demonstration in real-time casuistry is the sort of thing that could make even gamblers swear off the sport eventually.) The Cowboys lost their goal-line situation, possession, and, eventually, the game.

Watching a replay from the sideline, it's unclear when the process ends. Bryant takes three steps; Bryant has possession of the ball; Bryant stretches out for the end zone. When Bryant chooses to reach for the end zone, doesn't that complete the process? Do any of us know anymore? Is football now necessarily an exercise in epistemology?

Bryant takes two steps. He goes up, his right foot comes down slightly behind the five. He takes one step with the left, another with the right while he's lunging forward. He keeps possession clearly on the way down. If he doesn't reach out to try and score, there's no question in my mind it's a catch. But when he tried to do that, the tip of the ball hit the ground, it popped up in the air, and whatever he did from that point on didn't matter. He didn't complete the motion of the catch.

Remember, he has to establish possession before he can make a football move. Possession on a ball in the air entails establishing both feet in bounds in the NFL, not just one like in college football. So, while he made two "steps", I'm wondering if they didn't consider the first as establishing possession, and he has to make a football move after that. Who knows what the hell is going on in their minds. Welcome to the NFL in the Roger Goodell era. I sometimes think the guys in New York are throwing dice to determine the outcome of a challenge, or review.

It's a completely messed up rule. It's a rule that has completely burned Green Bay on at least three different occasions that I can think of in the last two years. And as soon as I say what happened, I posted on my Facebook that I was 100% sure that it would be overturned. There was not a doubt in my mind because I've seen it too many times before.

Cowboy fans said "the ref gave Green Bay the game" over and over.

Um, no, they didn't. The refs didn't give Green Bay an 80 and a 90 yard TD Drive, or surrender 430 yards of offense. The Cowboys had the absolute best situation they could have ever hoped for. They got the very best quarterback in the game, who relies heavily on creating outside of the pocket when the play breaks down, immobile. Rodgers only slipped out of the pocket twice all day, the second time was the game winning pass to Richard Rodgers that threaded the needle between two closing Cowboy defenders. And with Rodgers unable to run, and his best receiver double covered all day, they still couldn't stop him. The Cowboys were so worried about Jordy Nelson that Cobb and Davante Adams both went off for over 100. Eddie Lacy, too.

The Cowboys were also gifted their first touchdown. On second and eight, they got Tramon Williams for a ticky tack pass interference call when his feet tangled up with Terrance Williams. He put his right hand out, but didn't in any way impede, or grab Williams, but the line judge called him anyway. His feet got tangled up, and Williams fell down. The funny thing is that the exact same play happened in the Colts-Broncos game in the third quarter, and no penalty was called. Even Mike Pereira, the ex-head of NFL officials, said it was a ticky tack call. That gave Dallas, with the best O line and running back in the NFL, a first and goal at the 1.

Green Bay repeatedly shot themselves in the foot. On that touchdown drive I just referenced, our idiot middle linebacker Brad Jones basically mugged Demarco Murray though he completely didn't have to. There were two Packers waiting to stop the screen on third down. The Cowboys would have punted deep in their own territory. Then there was the ridiculous personal foul on T.J. Lang that gave the Boys another first down. And the one I went nuts over, when the Packers were trying to run out the clock, Andrew Quarless gets a false start on first and ten. Why the hell the tight end is getting a false start on a play that everybody in Green Bay knows is a run...is beyond me.

The Cowboy fans have nothing to hang their heads about, at least the real fans, not the bandwagon fans that jump back on the Cowboy train whenever they start doing better. They have a really good young team, and a Head Coach I really respect. Jason Garrett is a class act.

As for Tony Romo, I hope this puts an end to the ceaseless criticism of him. He played a great game. It's amazing how after nine years in the league, he finally figured it out!

Actually, he finally got some help. He got a real offensive line, and a running back that could take over the game. And, Dallas ran 15% more than they did last year. That kind of patience should pay dividends next year.

Good luck to the Cowboy fans. Great season, and I fully expect to meet you in the playoffs again next year. I must admit, though, that this win helped to soften the disappointment of all those losses at Dallas in the mid 90s. Rodgers is the man!

[nolemmings]

I was very surprised by the play call. Fourth and two and you throw the deep sideline pass, with your whole season on the line. It's a low percentage play, and although the game has changed and there are gunslingers throughout the league, I find the decision questionable. You need a near perfect pass, route and catch, plus less than great coverage for that play to work. I know he saw single coverage and the box was crowded, but call something there that gives you a safer throw and catch for the first down. Even if the Bryant pass works you score and leave Rodgers with nearly four minutes to get his team a FG to either tie or win the game, depending on whether you convert the two-point play. They ended the first half similarly, throwing on third and one when Murray had been successful running it multiple times in that situation--leading to fourth down, a missed FG and Packer points.

[Runscott]

Todd, my thoughts exactly. Flacco and the Ravens did the same thing in a similar situation, and it cost them as well.

Later last night I saw a call reversed in the Bronco game that really left me scratching my head: the punt returner 'catches' the ball, is hit as he is catching it, falls to the ground and the ball dribbles out. It was initially ruled a fumble, but was overturned.

[Jayworld]

I guess my bias is more toward the officiating, in any sport, as I grew up in an officiating family (my father was a college football official for over 20 years), so I have been exposed to hundreds of in-person games and have seen good officiating and bad officiating. Usually the bad officials are vetted out for their performance by not getting a schedule from their conference for the next year. It is always a year-to-year deal. It still irritates me to hear, see, or read someone criticizing officials without knowledge of the game rules. It's easy for all of us to be "arm-chair officials." Unfortunately, many television viewers rely on the commentary of the play-by-play and color commentators who (in most instances) have very rudimentary knowledge of the rules and thus can present a biased ignorant viewpoint of the rule or rules in question. Dan Dierdorf and Brent Musburger are two commentators that rarely knew or understood the rules. In Dierdorf's situation, it was ignorance; in Musburger's, it was ego.

Officials have to undergo rigorous training, both physical and mental, and in the case of college officials, the crew arrives 5+ hours prior to game time in the stadium to have a "pre-game," which is actually a "skull session," in which the crew goes over the rules and discusses just about every type of scenario that MAY happen in the upcoming game based upon plays run by the opposing teams, including trick plays. Plus, the Referee and Umpire visit each team dressing room prior to the game to meet with the coaches, meet the captains, and discuss with the coaching any possible trick plays to be on the alert for. This is important for two reasons:

1. The coach determines from the Referee and Umpire if the proposed trick play(s) is legal
2. The officiating crew is aware of such a play in case it occurs in the game so that the right call can be made.

Officials train themselves both individually and within the crew to be at the right place at the right time to give the best call in any scenario and also depend on their crew mates for help in cases where vision is blocked, the official is out of position (in many cases, because an official has been knocked to the ground, etc.).

Having said all this, it seems the NFL rules committee complicates things more and more each year with new rules, new interpretations of rules, etc. The officials are paid to enforce the rules that the rules committee comes up with. 30 years ago or so, the better college officials (those that continually graded out at the top in their positions) stayed in the college game and those that graded out lesser went to the pros, in many cases. In one particular case, an outstanding college official went to the NFL for a couple of seasons, did not like the experience, and returned to the college ranks.

NFL officials live all over the country; therefore, crews are made up of men that live in different geographic locations and the fellowship just does not exist in the same was as the college game. For example, Big 12 officials are generally from the same geographic region as the teams, so in many cases the officials can see each other or meet to discuss officiating much easier than an NFL crew, who often times see each other only once a week for the game. Before all the re-alignment in the conferences in college, many of the college were even more geographically located and thus the officiating crews were even closer; i.e old Southwest Conference.

Also, in many cases, those that are instant replay officials may come from the following ranks:
1. Former NFL official
2. Former college official that was not good enough to get to the NFL
3. League representative with officiating knowledge and rules knowledge
4. Former retired college official
In each case, the person has studied and has been trained on the NFL rules.

[Runscott]

Jay, I have officiated soccer, basketball and softball (adults). In all cases, during training it was emphasized that if we are doing our job right, we should barely be noticed. We are not players in the game.

Unfortunately, the NFL has focused attention on the officials through use of instant replay, to the point that we know their names.