Issue with NFL officiating

[TheRealDTM]

Referees with glasses should not be on the field.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Why is no one mentioning that call when criticizing the refs yesterday?

It has been mentioned multiple times whenever this topic comes up...read more threads, and don't assume before asking about that call. That's the one call that went against the Colts that is worth mentioning in the same conversation as the PIs & 12 men on the field.

So no, the refs were not part of the reason we lost yesterday. It was maybe 60/40 to the Colts advantage vs. our advantage for bad calls.

I would've guessed only visiting trolls would claim something so illogical. Your two sentences conflict with each other. Here is the logic -

1. (General truth) When officials' bad calls favor one team, that gives that team a non-zero advantage.
2. (Your truth) "It was maybe 60/40 to the Colts advantage vs. our advantage for bad calls."
3. (Specific truth) The officials' bad calls overall gave the Colts an advantage.

Also, your usage of the word "So" is a logical word that means the previous statement proves the next. In other words, you are saying that one bad call in favor of the Seahawks proves that the Colts did not have an advantage. That doesn't make sense either - I challenge you to come up with any general truth that enables that logical leap.

You'll probably ignore this, meh. But that is how I read your post, and it is nonsensical.

1. There are now at least two threads on this front page about poor officiating. I have looked back through the past four weeks of threads after victories and see no one starting threads about poor officiating. Hmmm, funny how that works. Win, no one complains. Lose, all of a sudden we must take up arms about the awful officiating.

2. Just because the calls were 60/40 in the Colts favor doesn't mean I personally think that 10% difference contributed to us losing.

Btw, Barwell's point was not that Seattle got screwed. His point was the officiating for yesterday's game was just poor all the way around. Which is why he ended with;

The Colts weren't lucky to win, by any means — both teams played well, and somebody had to get these calls one way or another — but it was a truly dismal officiating effort.

 

[rm1369]

I was going to wait until later in the week to give my thoughts on Sundays officiating and all NFL officiating as in relates to what I've saw from the Seattle secondary, so as to not appear to be trolling after a win.

First - the Tate OPI was a BS call. I said it when it happened and wasn't happy with the call. The blocked punt safety / touchdown call was correct IMO - control was not completely established (again IMO). The luck sack, fumble was a clear personal foul that should have gave the Colts 15 yards and kept possession. I can't say I like the rule, but there are plenty of "player safety" rules I don't like. It was, IMO, undisputeably a "forceful blow".

Now to the meat of the issue - DPI and uncalled OPI. I have saw several other Seattle games, but I'm not going to pretend to be an expert. My opinion prior to the game (and reinforced during the game) is the the Seattle coaching staff and secondary have made a conscious decision to force the refs into tough decisions with the idea they will come out ahead more times than not. Basically I think they hold nearly every play and know the refs won't call it consistently. Please don't take that as a "they're cheaters" type accusation. It's, IMO, smart football. Its a tactic that has been used against the Colts succucefully in the past by the Patriots. It makes perfect sense for the big physical DBs Seattle has. In the games I've seen, I rarely see an opposing receiver make their break without a Seattle DB having a hand on them of having a handful of jersey. The refs aren't going to call it every play so you can often reset the norm to your advantage.

Again, I want to reiterate that I think it is good, smart football strategy by Seattle. One that I'd like to see the Colts employ more - more on that in a second. So, you play overly physical on nearly every play and force the refs to make decisions. And they are tough decisions - on one hand you have the "by the book" rules about downfield contact and in another the ref has to throw a flag on something he let go a minute ago. That obviously leads to a lack of consistency. You have to have a little something etra to get the call as a WR. The DPI flags that were called were influenced by the receiver "selling" the contact or the crowd letting them have it. IMO, they were 100% legitimate DPI calls "by the book". However they were out of the norm for the game and influenced by that "extra" that convinced the ref to make the call.

Does that make them right? I'd guess most Seattle fans would say no - call the game the same throughout. I'd say that's a fair statement. Most Colts fans would say they shouldn't need he "extra" to get the call and that the game should be called by the rule book and not influenced by a teams tactics. I'd say that a fair statement as well. I also believe it woul have been to the Colts advantage to have a relatively "tight" game be called in the secondary. Colts are much more of a passing team.

Earlier I mentioned how Id like the Colts to play that way more often. As a colts fan, one of my favorite things about the win was seeing the Colts respond to physical play from a tough, bullying type opponent by upping their physicality and responding in kind. The Manning era Colts folded to that type of tactic (I'm not blaming manning specifically) many times. And they never tried (or couldnt) repond in kind. They were always the "nice" (read soft) guys that didnt resort tothat type of play. And they have only one ring to show for having (IMO) the GOAT under center. NE employed that tatic (often against the Colts) and have three rings. So, did the Colts DBs hold and become overly aggressive? Yes. Did the Colts receivers push off to get open? Definitely. And it was great to see!!! I can tell you that is not typical Colts MO. Should it be? Maybe. But at a minimum they have to have the ability to adapt to the way the game was being called. It appears this version of the Colts does.

The obvious question is why weren't the colts called for the push offs and similar defensive tactics? I've already admitted the Tate OPI was a bad call. The Colts weren't flagged for OPI because they were always preceded by excessive contact by a Seattle DB. I've heard a lot about the Wayne 2 point conversion. He definetly pushed off, but I'm 99% sure there is a handful of jersey by the DB before the push (I admittedly haven't re watched the game again, but I remember the play and saw it on the replays then). You can't expect the DB to be able to get away with contact and not allow the WR to respond. Why when the Colts DBs got physical were they not called? There were no "extras" to force the refs to make the right call - no selling of the play like Hilton did and no crowd to shame the ref.

Does all that mean Seattle got screwed? I don't think so. I think it's an expected result of their chosen style of play. They benefit from it more often than not. And a game called tight would have been to the Colts advantage.

Now all of this was my opinion from watching games - no stat analysis. I looked at the stats before I posted. Do they back up my theory? This year definetly yes - tied for 2nd in the league with 5 DPI flags against, all on the road. Last year not really - only 5 total against, 3 at home. What does that mean? I'm not sure. But for this year (and this game in particular) I believe in my theory. Obviously Just my opinion.

 

[jdblack]

2. Just because the calls were 60/40 in the Colts favor doesn't mean I personally think that 10% difference contributed to us losing.

I don't think you understand and/or mean the words you are saying. You probably mean that you don't think the Seahawks would have won if the officiating was fair. A contribution does not necessarily mean the outcome of the game would have switched from a loss to a win. It means that, on average, the score would be better than -6 in favor of the Colts.

It feels like I'm talking to my wife. She was just complaining that our son didn't get an A on a test even though we studied together, so our studying must not have helped.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

2. Just because the calls were 60/40 in the Colts favor doesn't mean I personally think that 10% difference contributed to us losing.

You probably mean that you don't think the Seahawks would have won if the officiating was fair.

You remind me of that kid in class that everyone hates cause he's always correcting the other students over minutia, then gets taped to the goalpost.

YES.I'M.SAYING.THAT.I.DON'T.THINK.THE.OFFICIATING.WAS.A.BIG.REASON.WE.LOST.YESTERDAY.

 

[NFSeahawks]

Bad calls are part of football. Sorry, but there's no way to remove an arbitrary judgement call from the game. The hope is over the course of a season the good calls equal or outweigh the bad.

We did not, and I repeat DID NOT lose yesterday because of poor officiating. We lost because we settled for FG's, made stupid mistakes like not having enough (or too many) players on the field, couldn't protect Russell, poor defensive back play and couldn't stop the Colts on 3rd down the ENTIRE 2nd half.

The bold convinces me you didn't watch the game.

You do realize that there were 11 men in the huddle and they made up a penalty because they wanted to. (Thats literally what happened)

OK ok ok ok ok ok ok ok , lets be real guys to deny that this game was the most horribly officiated game in a long time is silly. There were so many blatant horrid calls and I mean calls that weren't even penalties, id even know, I mean you can't defend something like this.

 

[jdblack]

You remind me of that kid in class that everyone hates cause he's always correcting the other students over minutia, then gets taped to the goalpost.

YES.I'M.SAYING.THAT.I.DON'T.THINK.THE.OFFICIATING.WAS.A.BIG.REASON.WE.LOST.YESTERDAY.

It was not minutiae, it was a gross exaggeration at best at a time when you were busting posters' chops. Write coherently and I won't need to correct you. Or, quit dogging people and I won't care enough to.

 

[Hawkpower]

Bad calls are part of football. Sorry, but there's no way to remove an arbitrary judgement call from the game. The hope is over the course of a season the good calls equal or outweigh the bad.

We did not, and I repeat DID NOT lose yesterday because of poor officiating. We lost because we settled for FG's, made stupid mistakes like not having enough (or too many) players on the field, couldn't protect Russell, poor defensive back play and couldn't stop the Colts on 3rd down the ENTIRE 2nd half.

Actually, we got off the field TWICE and I repeat TWICE on 3rd down yesterday only to have the refs keep the Colts drive alive with phantom PI calls.