When it comes to football, there have been many controversial calls, both past and present. What I saw during the Monday night football game between the Seattle Seahawks and Green Bay Packers made me sick, and it wasn't the officials as much as it was the horrible and sensationalistic coverage of ESPN, looking to create it's own story line.
 |
| SEATTLE, WA - SEPTEMBER 24: Wide receiver Golden Tate #81 of the Seattle Seahawks makes a catch in the end zone to defeat the Green Bay Packers on a controversial call by the officials at CenturyLink Field on September 24, 2012 in Seattle, Washington. (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife) |
"The games final play is a Wilson loft to the end zone, which is...fought for by Tate and Jennings, simultaneously, who has it? Who do they give it too?
TOUCHDOWN!!!
One guy goes up touchdown, the other said no time..."
The announcers go on to claim the play is not reviewable, throwing the blame on the replacement officials.
You can watch that call right here, on NFL.com
The NFL released a statement backing the officials, including the following:
"Replay Official Howard Slavin stopped the game for an instant replay review. The aspects of the play that were reviewable included if the ball hit the ground and who had possession of the ball. In the end zone, a ruling of a simultaneous catch is reviewable. That is not the case in the field of play, only in the end zone."
Now, we don't hear any talk about an interception until after the announcers get a view of the replay, then John Gruden is the first to mention interception. No announcers say anything at full speed while the play happens, the announcers actually made the exact same call as the officials on the field.
True story.
Why all the hype then?
Well, if the regular officials had made that call, and not replacements, we wouldn't be still talking about it today. ESPN and other mainstream media outlets have been making the replacement official issue a story line to generate interest in their content, whether that content be television, video, radio broadcast, or internet. There is huge money to be had from advertising dollars out there, people, believe it.
Not only did the replacement officials on the field make the right call on the field at full speed during live action, the replay officials upheld that call.
Yes, the replay officials DO have the power to overturn the call on the field, and they are veterans, not replacements.
Despite this, around the media and internet world, the replacement officials are still being blamed for a call they should have made.
Why do I keep saying that was the correct call?
Well, if that play is not called a touchdown, it can't be reviewed, as only scoring plays at the end of a game can be reviewed. If there was any question about the play as it happened live at full speed on the field, those officials should have it looked at by replay, and that means calling that play a touchdown.
A perfect example of this occurred during the Green Bay Packers - Detroit Lions week 17 game in the second quarter, a game the Packers would go on to win by a final score of 45-41.
To set the stage, Jim Schwartz has no challenges left. At the time, the Lions trailed by one point to the Packers, 17-16.
Click here to go to the full story:
In the second quarter at Green Bay, Detroit's Titus Young appeared to make a beautiful touchdown catch in the back corner of the end zone, hanging onto the ball and just getting his feet down before sailing out of bounds. The back judge ruled Young was out of bounds.
Although replays clearly showed the play was a touchdown, the Lions could not contest the incomplete call because they were out of challenges.
Had the play been ruled a touchdown, it would have been reviewed, as all scores are.
Detroit Coach Jim Schwartz was irate, flung his headset and had to be calmed by Lions center Dominic Raiola. Schwartz called a timeout, hoping the play would be reviewed, which it wasn't.
On the next play, Matthew Stafford's pass fell incomplete, and the Lions had to settle for a 30-yard field goal and a 19-17 lead.
Fox's Mike Pereira, former head of NFL officials, said there have been discussions over the years about changing the rules on doling out challenges.
"They changed the rule to say if you won two challenges you'd get a third," Pereira said. "But this is what I didn't like about the new rule. You can only review it from upstairs if it's ruled a touchdown. But it's in the envelope of the end zone. It ought to be reviewable both ways so you don't have to deal with this situation."
Well, there you go. I can probably also state that if the Tate touchdown catch was ruled an interception instead of a touchdown, it would not have been reviewable. The Media would still have created a huge firestorm controversy, and in that case, they would be more correct, because when in doubt, review it.
Yet all the blame continues to get thrown wrongly onto the replacement officials.
The latest slant?
The replacement officials are susceptible to outside influence.
That means Vegas bookies, if you read between the lines. Well, I've got news for you, not only was the replay official that upheld that call a veteran, under the old agreement between the NFLRA and the NFL, crews could not be broken up. If an official had a history of bad or controversial calls, he could not be replaced on a crew. If that crew as a whole was one of the better ones, they got the prime-time and playoff games.
Think about the opportunity for Vegas bookies there.
The NFL wants to be able to replace officials that make bad or controversial calls on crews, and the NFLRA does not want that to happen.
From what I understand, some compromise has been reached in this and other areas, and the NFLRA and NFL are close to an agreement. The details of this agreement probably will not be made public until it is official.
Will the NFL have the power to bench bad officials? They should have, and I'll be looking into that after the deal is done.
Please stop talking about outside influences on the replacement officials when in fact, the old officials were much more prone to that happening.
Yeah, I am aware that the officials missed a pass interference penalty that would have ended the game, but I also am aware of many missed plays from past years with the NFLRA officials running the show.
It's one of my favorite sites, you might want a look.
NFLRefsSuck.com
For your educational benefit, I have linked to the articles from the 2011 season, under the old officials.
What I would like to see is this much media scrutiny of the regular officials when they return to action, but I don't think that's going to happen. In the meantime, you can believe that the media will continue to make the replacement officials more of a story than what they really are.
Edit and add on:
The following covers a catch under the going to the ground rule, indicating Golden Tate clearly had first possession of the football in the end zone:
 |
| A player can't establish possession in the air, they must be on the ground. |
M.D. Jennings, Tate both had possession of the ball
