NFL Refs Suspended

[mikeak]

Amazing that we are discussing the Seahawks call

It was a bad non-call. We benefited from it. There is no way around that. I don't care if it was called or not in the last 12 years -- it was a bad call

It was a bad call in the St Louis game when they didn't review the fumble. They could not have determined possession that way but they COULD most definately determine that St Louis did not recover the ball initially as it was loose and then they could determine that Seahawks walked out with the ball

Point being -- bad calls happen. Detroit was hurt by the one in our game even though Seattle would have had 1.30 left on the clock and could have done something

Just admit it was a bad call and move on we got lucky

 

[Laloosh]

How about this?

There are only two kinds of fans that actually give a shit about the Detroit call. Niner fans and Detroit fans. Let them stay up at night pacing in anger about it because it would have been the most ridiculous enforcement of a rule (a rule that allows for interpretation) that I've ever seen.

Uh, so you're saying 9ers fans care but Hawks fans don't care? Super bizarre, but okay.

The only people who actually care IMO are Hawks fans and Lions fans, and they're equally vociferous in their care.

Beyond those two groups of fans you just have a general consensus about the event among reporters, analysts, and NFL fans more broadly, but beyond "integrity of the game" stuff none of them really give a rat either.

I'm basically in that camp, although incredibly weakly so, as "integrity of the game" grandstanding and moralizing has never really moved me that much.

If anything, my (very limited) interest simply boils down to A) I happen to sometimes post on a board populated by one of the two fan groups who care and B) rationalization and justification processes are always inherently interesting to me.

FWIW only once have I substantively talked or posted about that call, and it was on this board in the Hawks forum. What I said was basically allegorical, and it was reflection on how after the Giants playoff game when the 9ers got away with a game changing non-call the majority of 9ers fans tried to talk it away any way they could, and that I always felt like 9ers fans shouldn't have bothered with those winners' sour grapes and should have just owned it and been grateful for being "fortunate", cuz hey, this stuff is unpredictable and unavoidable.

As I've said a ton of times before, I care probably too much about bad argumentation. If I just wanted to mouth breath and bash the Seahawks I wouldn't bother posting here.

EDIT: and yes, as I said to Ringless in my first post in this thread I think this is a topic best avoided as it's a thread de-railer, which has been born out. And in retrospect I shouldn't have "broken my own rule" in my second post in this thread either. I'll stop the mistake now. Happy to read your reply if you want to but this is my last post on the topic. :th2thumbs:

I really didn't give much thought to that play after the shit storm in the media. Every penalty or non-call can impact the outcome of a game. People just tend to freak out about the ones at the end.

I happened to meet a couple that recently moved from Detroit on Tuesday and their opinion was that "Calvin should have held onto the ball". Not saying that they represent a majority or that they're right. If it were Seattle, I'd be in the "You know what? The ball was on it's way out. We shouldn't have let it come to that" camp and that's the truth.

So, meh... unno:

 

[rideaducati]

^^^ My only point of contention is that what Johnson did is irrelevant. It's a what-if piled on top of a what-if to reach a desired conclusion. If we're doing that we might as well make Kam Chancellor hold out another week, or maybe he just loses his footing on the break, or we could have Michael Bennett get an offsides penalty again before the play even starts, or heck, let's give Golden Tate a personal foul on the previous play just for the heck of it or have the Lions LT hold on that play just for fun.

It's like saying that if a Steelers player hadn't run out of bounds earlier in the half those 18 seconds wouldn't have been there to begin wtih. Flipping switches to get to where you want pollutes the thought experiment into total uselessness.

I would just like to add that the clock mistake if by far worse than what happened in our game.

I'm breaking my own rule, but that's an indefensible argument. The Steelers won. The "unfortunate" clock-run off swung their ultimate win probability by 0%. The "fortunate" non-call swung the Seahawks win probability by 70%. Even if the Steelers lost there's no way those 18 seconds swing the win probability by anywhere even remotely close to 70%, or even 50%, or 30%, or 20%.

As Bill Barnwell pointed out, that call increased the Seahawks' W/L record by .7 games for the season. It's seriously nearly as much as the expected final record swing predicted for Brady being allowed to play the first month of the season this year (. 78 wins). Basically that "fortunate" non-call for the Seahawks is almost equivalent to +4 games with Brady instead of Garropolo for the Patriots.

Long story short, if you want to minimize or brush it away, I think you're going about it the wrong way. :th2thumbs:

When was the last time a flag was thrown for batting a ball in the end zone? I bet however many batted balls in the end zone that you can find is the same amount of times the flag has not been thrown. Every batted ball in the end zone for the past 40 years was not flagged, why should this last one be the only one penalized in the last 40 years?

There are officials monitoring the game in New York that have the ability to stop live play that didn't stop play because the rule is so obscure that NOBODY knew it existed until half hour AFTER the game ended.

 

[rideaducati]

One ref was moved from Pats/ Colts game to Titans/Dolphins game because of poor officiating. I wonder how that makes the Titans and Dolphins feel. They don't even rate decent officiating.

 

[Threedee]

For back to back Monday night mishaps

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... k-mistake/

@Edwerderespn Ed Werder Retweeted ProFootballTalk
Had to send message with officiating errors in consecutive MNF games on decisive plays nearly letting wrong team win

This week was the second consecutive Monday night in which an official made a significant mistake late in a close game. The week before, an illegal bat penalty that should have been called on the Seahawks was overlooked, potentially costing the Lions the game.

I would just like to add that the clock mistake if by far worse than what happened in our game. If your a lions fan CMON, you CANT blame the refs like really? Johnson just had to not fumble and you win most likely.

The main issue is that it was such a spectacle of fail. Throwing the flag, picking it up, not flagging Dez - I'm so glad it was Dez that got victimized in GB, because he's so friggin' annoying, and never more so than in that WC game.

 

[rlkats]

Im just pissed off that the refs are not helping the niners win. Them boys need all the help they can get lol

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

Your subject heading is misleading. Says the NFL suspended the side judge in the recent Steelers-Chargers game. No "Refs" have been suspended.

No one was suspended "for back to back Monday night mishaps" as you said, either. That's bogus.

By making your topic heading plural, you're insinuating that Seahawks vs. Lions MNF game back judge Greg Wilson was suspended for not making a subjective call. Retired Official Gerry Austin, who brought it up following the game, admitted to the TV crew of Lewis, Dilfer and Young that it was plausible that the back judge could have decided the play was not worth throwing the flag for various reasons. That was the case. Wilson: "Not Overt."

Key word mentioned is "potentially" - which applies to every game which has not concluded and in which either team could still win. To say it potentially cost the Lions the game is intending to inject as much drama possible. This is a non-issue.

I was just quoting a tweet and an article. The only reason this side judge was suspended was due to it sending a message because of what has occurred on back to back Monday nights correct or not. The whole point is to get one across. I understand some fans may be a little salty because the tweet and article almost insinuate that the Refs changed the outcome of the previous Mondays game.

Then, you were pretty careless in how you posted, weren't you? I said it before, but perhaps you missed it. Again, there was no quote saying "Refs" (plural) being suspended nor "due to back to back" MNF mistakes. That was how you chose to frame it in a post on a Seattle Seahawks fan board, so don't blame it on the source. You certainly grant that media headlines are usually exaggerated to get attention. Just be honest and admit that you took it as an opportunity to poke at us on this board and take it farther than the media's usual cheap tricks.

Next, while they may do it with player behavior... I don't believe the NFL "sends a message" to one official for another official's mistake in an entirely separate incident. He was suspended for what was deemed a mistake he made during that game alone. You're trying to prove guilt by association. They are separate incidents that received separate further review of individual and crew job performance... even if they happened in successive weeks.

No need for conjecture either (the "salty" business.) Isn't the intent of trolling to incite one to get "salty"? I think you have been pretty welcome on .net and not trying to build a case against you.

I'm totally fine with that play vs. the Lions. I thought KJ would just easily grab the ball and fall on it. I wondered for a moment if there was a rule about that when it happened. But, pretty much no one knew A THING until a retired ref starts making a federal case about it afterwards. That even took time to convince some knowledgeable former players doing the broadcast. I thought it was more insulting to the officials and careless of him to do that. Once the analysts asked him if their rationale was plausible and he said, "Yes" - I felt he was out of line bringing it up at that moment. Should have waited, FIRST, to hear the officiating crews explanation. That's called jumping the gun, but by then the damage was done.

Seems like most people didn't have a clue about the obscure rule until after the fact, including pretty good former players. So, now all of the sudden average fans who wouldn't otherwise know a thing... become self-professed rule geniuses - coming across as "everyone knows that" and the Lions would have "obviously" won garbage.... blah, blah, blah. Give me a break.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Im just pissed off that the refs are not helping the niners win. Them boys need all the help they can get lol

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[rideaducati]

Your subject heading is misleading. Says the NFL suspended the side judge in the recent Steelers-Chargers game. No "Refs" have been suspended.

No one was suspended "for back to back Monday night mishaps" as you said, either. That's bogus.

By making your topic heading plural, you're insinuating that Seahawks vs. Lions MNF game back judge Greg Wilson was suspended for not making a subjective call. Retired Official Gerry Austin, who brought it up following the game, admitted to the TV crew of Lewis, Dilfer and Young that it was plausible that the back judge could have decided the play was not worth throwing the flag for various reasons. That was the case. Wilson: "Not Overt."

Key word mentioned is "potentially" - which applies to every game which has not concluded and in which either team could still win. To say it potentially cost the Lions the game is intending to inject as much drama possible. This is a non-issue.

I was just quoting a tweet and an article. The only reason this side judge was suspended was due to it sending a message because of what has occurred on back to back Monday nights correct or not. The whole point is to get one across. I understand some fans may be a little salty because the tweet and article almost insinuate that the Refs changed the outcome of the previous Mondays game.

Then, you were pretty careless in how you posted, weren't you? I said it before, but perhaps you missed it. Again, there was no quote saying "Refs" (plural) being suspended nor "due to back to back" MNF mistakes. That was how you chose to frame it in a post on a Seattle Seahawks fan board, so don't blame it on the source. You certainly grant that media headlines are usually exaggerated to get attention. Just be honest and admit that you took it as an opportunity to poke at us on this board and take it farther than the media's usual cheap tricks.

Next, while they may do it with player behavior... I don't believe the NFL "sends a message" to one official for another official's mistake in an entirely separate incident. He was suspended for what was deemed a mistake he made during that game alone. You're trying to prove guilt by association. They are separate incidents that received separate further review of individual and crew job performance... even if they happened in successive weeks.

No need for conjecture either (the "salty" business.) Isn't the intent of trolling to incite one to get "salty"? I think you have been pretty welcome on .net and not trying to build a case against you.

I'm totally fine with that play vs. the Lions. I thought KJ would just easily grab the ball and fall on it. I wondered for a moment if there was a rule about that when it happened. But, pretty much no one knew A THING until a retired ref starts making a federal case about it afterwards. That even took time to convince some knowledgeable former players doing the broadcast. I thought it was more insulting to the officials and careless of him to do that. Once the analysts asked him if their rationale was plausible and he said, "Yes" - I felt he was out of line bringing it up at that moment. Should have waited, FIRST, to hear the officiating crews explanation. That's called jumping the gun, but by then the damage was done.

Seems like most people didn't have a clue about the obscure rule until after the fact, including them. So, now all of the sudden average fans who wouldn't otherwise know a thing... become self-professed rule geniuses - coming across as "everyone knows that" and the Lions would have "obviously" won garbage.... blah, blah, blah. Give me a break.

Seven guys in stripes on the field, one on the sideline, one in a booth, two monitoring in New York on a live feed, all in communication with each other and NONE OF THEM threw a flag or stopped play to change the ruling on the field. Considering that there hasn't been a flag thrown for batting a ball in the end zone in the last 40 years, I think it's safe to say that most guys in stripes didn't even know the rule existed. The very few that did know the rule only pointed it out a half hour the game had ended. Oh well.

I can't wait for illegal batting to be called on another team where it changes the likely outcome of a game. We won't hear a peep unless it happens to a "legacy team". I all but guarantee it happens IN FAVOR of a legacy team though.

 

[mikeak]

^ you are ignoring that not a refs are in a position to throw the flag and none of the people not on the field (like New York are ALLOWED to overturn that call)

This is the stuff that gives Seahawks fans a bad rep as band wagoners. Just admit it was a bad call, they happen every game and we got lucky

For all those people that say it never gets called. Remind me the last time you saw the ball fumbled into the end zone and batted away intentionally. You know for it to be called it kind of have to occur....

 

[chris98251]

Really this all comes down to a comment made by ESPN's guest referee and it making the Game officials, the league officials, the league all look like buffoons since nobody knew the rule concisely.

They needed a scapegoat and found one............................

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

Really this all comes down to a comment made by ESPN's guest referee and it making the Game officials, the league officials, the league all look like buffoons since nobody knew the rule concisely.

They needed a scapegoat and found one............................

Yup

 

[rideaducati]

^ you are ignoring that not a refs are in a position to throw the flag and none of the people not on the field (like New York are ALLOWED to overturn that call)

This is the stuff that gives Seahawks fans a bad rep as band wagoners. Just admit it was a bad call, they happen every game and we got lucky

For all those people that say it never gets called. Remind me the last time you saw the ball fumbled into the end zone and batted away intentionally. You know for it to be called it kind of have to occur....

The guys in New York ARE in the ears of the guys on the field and CAN tell them to drop the flag. Flags are dropped long after plays have ended on a lot of occasions and flags are also picked up long after plays are over. Thinking New York has nothing to do with some of those seems a bit far fetched to me.

Calling me a bandwagon fan because I pointed out that the call hasn't been made in over 40 years? Then, requesting someone else to find examples of batted balls that weren't called? I'm not going to waste my time looking for something that hasn't been called in 40 years, but I guarantee that there have been more batted balls in the endzone that have not drawn a flag. It WAS NOT a bad call, because there WAS NO CALL MADE. Had a flag been thrown, it would have been a bad call.

 

[mikeak]

I can't argue against conspiracy theories.