Did the refs purposefully keep the game close? Your opinion.

[byau]

Something else I noticed ... not one to complain about penalties much, and I want to give refs the benefit of the doubt so curious what the thinking is here

The 4th quarter TD pass to Harvin called back because of a hit of a downed man by Carpenter. Seeing the replay, okay I could see it, though Trico and Gruden both commented that they've seen that all the time and not get called.

Re-watching it, I just noticed the very play before is the play where Baldwin dropped a pass on a shallow screen (SO MANY DROPS OF CATCHABLE PASSES!) however a holding penalty was called on the Redskin d-back as he held Baldwin as Baldwin turned the corner

However, at the end of the play, Baldwin dived to catch the ball, it dropped, Baldwn is on the ground, and the Redskin D-Back drops himself on Baldwin. Clearly incomplete pass, clearly dead play, and the guy drops on Baldwin.

At the time I saw it I didn't think anything of it, like commentators said, you see it a lot and don't think anything of it and I was on to the next play

I think about it now because Carpenter was called for the same thing on the next play, only difference was it was still a live play when Carpenter "finished the block". The play was already over when Baldwin missed the pass.

Just something I noticed

 

[TCHawkfan]

Newby here. I've been following this site from it's inception and the other Hawks site prior to that.

Hope I don't make any enemies with this but I've been reading a bit lately on this subject. I read that the NFL in it's anti-trust exemption IS NOT considered a sport but rather entertainment so that fixing games or cheating is not against the law!

Then recently, I've heard several players and network announcers say things like "it's entertainment, we're entertainers" or in the words of my boy ET III, "it's a business"! Evidence suggests that some form of control is being exerted by someone to influence competiveness if not outcomes.

 

[Cartire]

Newby here. I've been following this site from it's inception and the other Hawks site prior to that.

Hope I don't make any enemies with this but I've been reading a bit lately on this subject. I read that the NFL in it's anti-trust exemption IS NOT considered a sport but rather entertainment so that fixing games or cheating is not against the law!

Then recently, I've heard several players and network announcers say things like "it's entertainment, we're entertainers" or in the words of my boy ET III, "it's a business"! Evidence suggests that some form of control is being exerted by someone to influence competiveness if not outcomes.

I like this guy already.

 

[HHawk121]

You know, the last time the officiating was THIS bad, a few years later we got a public apology from the ref in question. I'm not going to say it was jobbing, but it was egregious and it WAS favored. When referees starting chucking flags and then later amending them based on the results on the field, it is up for question. (false start) (unnecessary roughness) (head bob)

 

[Basis4day]

Newby here. I've been following this site from it's inception and the other Hawks site prior to that.

Hope I don't make any enemies with this but I've been reading a bit lately on this subject. I read that the NFL in it's anti-trust exemption IS NOT considered a sport but rather entertainment so that fixing games or cheating is not against the law!

Then recently, I've heard several players and network announcers say things like "it's entertainment, we're entertainers" or in the words of my boy ET III, "it's a business"! Evidence suggests that some form of control is being exerted by someone to influence competiveness if not outcomes.

Where are you seeing this in the text of the NFL's anti-trust exemption? (15 U.S. Code § 1291)

 

[Rainger]

It did kind of feel that way. Enough to joke about it.

But given Triplette's long history of incredible officiating incompetence, I think it's just more likely that Seattle suffered at the hands of a terrible officiating crew.

Agreed. Conspiracy might be the fun explanation, but incompetence is the true reason, especially with that particular crew.

Don't agree. I am amazed that everyone would most likely admit that at least 20% of all humans are dishonest. The number may be higher. The bigger the riches the greater propensity to be dishonest, yet so many naïve people (not accusing you) want to believe that refs are 100% honest.

If you can have a crooked ref in Basketball why can't you have one in Football? They may not bet directly on the game but it would be so easy to have some distant family member or friend putting down big money and then make calls to alter or stay within a spread. It doesn't have to be a Ref. It can be ay one of them making phantom calls in a game to shift momentum to get the money.

The Colts game last year was a prime example of a back judge with money on the game and calling PIs and non PIs to alter the game. There are crooked refs it is a mathematical certainty.

 

[TCHawkfan]

I think it was a link from this board to a Donkeys website a couple weeks ago, maybe when we played them. Quite a long write-up about all this instances in league history where games were shall we say effected.

 

[Popeyejones]

Regarding the original question: no.

No more or no less than they tried to keep the chargers game close when they gave Percy a TD after he had his whole left foot out of bounds with a ref three feet away and staring at it.

Officiating is imperfect. It evens out over time. The 9ers got called for 19 penalties against the Bears and some of them were ludicrous. Then they got called for two last week and got gifted a first down that somehow even held up in review.

That NFL refs are colluding to keep one team from scoring too much neither makes sense, nor is it supportable even if you look over two or three weeks let alone not just a handful of plays or half of a game.