A couple weeks back, I wrote a post about the NFL's ongoing replacement ref saga. The League has taken a hardline stance in their ongoing negotiations with the Referee Union and is using replacements to try and hammer the point home that part-time referees can be replaced and should be happy with the package management offers them.
Is the League right? Are the zebras really replaceable?
Well, we're now three games through the 2012 NFL season, and the replacement refs are an unmitigated disaster.
Before we dive into the explanation, here's a quick refresher on why the NFL is locking out the refs. From my previous blog:
...the NFL is locking out the referees due to a labor dispute with the NFLRA. The heart of the dispute comes down to, you guessed it, money.The NFL generates over $9 billion of revenue a year, with that number expected to grow over the next several years thanks in part to lucrative television deals. The referee union contends that the League is stiffing them on pay relative to the growth and profitability of the league.
League officials claim to have offered referees a pay increase of 5 - 11%, whereas NFLRA officials say that the actual effective increase is only 2.8%.
Now, the reaction to my post was mixed. Those of you who seemed to be die-hard football fans sided pretty firmly with the refs, while others took the position that management has to take the hardline stance with labor (the old "if you give a mouse a cookie" mode of thinking.) I argued that the League could not justify sacrificing the integrity of the game over penny pinching with the refs. The refs may not be as important as the players, but reliable, legitimate officiating is fundamental to maintaining a level playing field for everyone involved.
Now, one of the main arguments against caving to the NFLRA is that no matter how bad the replacement refs are, the League won't experience any loss of revenue. After week one, I might've bought this argument. In fact, my counter-argument was that, at some point, $9 billion is enough money and a few extra million bucks of profit isn't worth ruining the product. Even if I bought that the League wouldn't be hurt financially by the replacements, I didn't think it was worth it.
After last night's debacle in Seattle, I'm not sure I buy that argument anymore.
For those who didn't see it live, the game was filled with massively botched calls. But none as brutally embarrassing as the last call of the game:
The Seahawks were down by five with the ball with eight seconds left on fourth down. Rookie QB Russell Wilson rolled out and launched a 40+ yard hail mary jump ball into the end zone. Seahawks receiver Golden Tate (yes, that's his actual name) pushed off a Packers defender (no call), leaps into the air where the ball was seemingly intercepted by Packer M.D. Jennings. Only, he and Golden Tate fell to the ground together, with Tate fighting to steal the ball from Jennings. Two replacement refs run over, one signals an interception, the other signals a game winning touchdown. The refs talk it over, award the TD to Tate, and hand the win to the Seahawks via a brutally botched call. (For a more detailed explanation of what happened, click here.)
The Packers were apoplectic. Twitter absolutely blew up. Steve Young lost his mind on ESPN.
I think this will be the straw that broke the camel's back. I think the League has no choice but to come to a compromise with the NFLRA and get a deal done. The replacement refs are in over their heads and the integrity of the product on the field has taken a huge hit. In a sport with 16 game seasons, every game counts. If calls like this continue to happen, it could absolutely have an effect on revenue. Who wants to support a league if their team gets screwed up due to penny pinching on the part of Roger Goodell? How do you feel if you're a Green Bay Packers fan today?
What do you think? Does the League cave? Or does Roger Goodell continue to hold strong and send the scab refs out to make calls like chickens with their heads cut off?
Some opinions of mine, most of which I will be on my own with- which is fine, lol. 1.) All refs make mistakes. It's the old saying "if you look hard enough for something, you will find it". Everyone has been complaining about the refs, so they've become a sort of self fulfilling prophecy (insert inevitable comment about last play of Packer game). 2.) I'm not disagreeing that these refs aren't as good. But it is an undeniable fact that with time they would get up to par with the former refs. 3.) I was one of the "if you give a mouse a cookie" advocates you mentioned. If the refs do end up winning (more on this later) there will be a ref lock-out at least every 3 years because they will remember the time they won. Mark that.
P.S.- after last night's game, there is a -5% chance the old refs don't come back. My opinions, however, remain.
To rebut:
Points 1 and 2.) These refs aren't just botching some calls here and there, they are disrupting the flow of the game and making major mistakes. Last night's finish is just one example. Even if you argue that the catch was legit, the push-off prior to the catch was an egregious Pass Interference penalty. You can spend 3 hours a day, everyday, shooting free throws, doesn't mean you'll ever make 90% a season in the NBA. There is no reason to believe that these clowns will match the talent of the real refs. Also, why should we have to watch them learn on the job and simultaneously fuck up games?
Point 3.) The League locked out the refs, the refs did not go on strike. So, that's up to Goodell & co. Also, there's no real reason to believe this point other than you've asserted it. Complete hearsay.
I was waiting for this to pop up on here. I say that the league wont cave b/c it hasnt harmed their revenue yet. While the credibility of the game has been tarnished, the NFL has seen no slide in revenue. Once that slide takes place, the deal will be settled within a day but IMO I do not think that this issue will be resolved until week 6/7. The only other thing that would cause this type of rushed action by the NFL would be if a player got hurt. Barring these two actions, I see no quick solution
If it is not solved and we enter the playoffs with these refs then I will officially stop betting on football and will instead watch as a team like the Seahawks win the league based on ignorance by the refs.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000066164/article/nfl-supports-dec…
According to this link, the play was confirmed by the refs on the field, the refs in the booth, the NFL Officiating Department after the fact, and, umm, the rule book. There was a lot of misinformation going out last night. The fact is, that last play of the game was a textbook case of simultaneous possession. You'll actually see this call occur on a regular basis throughout NFL games--a clear tie, even a partial win for the defender, gets called for the offensive player. I've lost my mind for years over this rule--I hate this rule; I DETEST this rule, but it's the rule.
The refs got it right, despite what everyone else is saying. The rules are clear.
I also disagree with the view that this will hurt the bottom line. The NFL has recorded record ratings this year and the NFL isn't even close to backing down, hence the above link where the NFL is confirming the call on the field.
"According to this link" - followed by a link from the League's official website. Not like the NFL has any reason to say the scab refs got it wrong! Jennings caught the ball, went down with it, and had it wrestled away from him on the ground. The League has no incentive whatsoever to say the scab refs got it wrong. There wasn't a single person who thought the call was correct.
Beyond that, the missed Pass Interference call against Golden Tate on the final drive was egregious. As was the botched PI call during the final drive when Percy Harvin blatantly committed offensive PI (that helped keep it alive for the Seahawks). Mistakes all over the field. Games are taking much longer than they ought to with no real rhythm. These aren't isolated incidents, it's every single game.
Look folks, the League is handling this situation like they're some rust belt car parts manufacturer that's about to go bust. We're talking about a League that brings in $9 billion of revenue a year and is greatly compromising the product over pennies (relatively speaking.) Let's all take our Gordon Gekko MOTU hats off for a second and realize that money isn't the end-all, be-all - integrity counts, too.
LOL. So the rule book is wrong, too? The rules are the rules. There were 3 hands on the ball as the players came down with it. The link has a copy and paste of the rule book of what constitutes a catch--Jennings did not meet the definition of a catch with sole possession, hence simultaneous possession. That's the rule. The rule itself is horsesh*t but you can't look at the rule and the YEARS of passed plays called in an identical fashion and say they go this call wrong. The rule itself needs to change.
As to the pass interference, PI is missed all the time. On almost every single Hail Mary you'll see a PI not called. Refs f up the PI call on a consistent basis. Again, the rule is that it can't be challenged. That rule should change.
Jennings couldn't have possession of the ball until he met the definition of possession. The NFL posted the rules for possession, which Jennings clearly didn't meet. Again, this is a textbook definition of simultaneous possession--neither receiver met the NFL rule of possession, hence it is simultaneous, hence it goes to the offensive player. Again, the rule sucks, not the call.
As an aside, the ref didn't call a touchback, he signaled for the clock to stop. Again, more misinformation that was spread last night on the interweb.
No, the Refs didn't. Simultaneous possession means that both players have a firm grasp on the ball and neither is giving yield. Watch the play in slow motion and tell me what you see.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/ltNXLFmxYJI
First off, the refs failed to call the Offensive Pass Interference call on Tate. That would have killed the play and given Green Bay the game in the first place. Second, Jennings had the ball in his possession when he caught it. Tate did not have possession (if you look, he had a free arm in the replay and didn't have a grasp on the ball for possession) nor did he have enough grasp on the ball to have an argument for joint possession even being made. Having one hand on the ball doesn't make it a catch. Tate didn't have possession. Tate also committed pass interference. The Seahawks should have lost that game and the refs blew it.
Nobody seems to understand what "possession" or sole possession means. It means, straight up, that you have to have 2 feet on the ground first of all. Jennings clearly didn't have 2 feet on the ground. Thanks for posting a video CONFIRMING the call on the field. The video CLEARLY shows 2 feet weren't on the ground before Tate got his own arms around the ball. THAT'S the definition of simultaneous possession!
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3 of the NFL Rule Book defines a catch:
A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
Despite all the threats, I don't think people will stop watching NFL games. Most fans probably don't care as long as it's not their team that's getting screwed.
Of course, if it IS their team, all bets are off. It's how people are.
First... Just because it's funny...
http://www.youtube.com/embed/AzPBcCF9yKc
Now, I want the league to cave. I want the original refs to be brought back in. The replacements don't know the NFL rules inside and out and that's a huge problem. If I'm a Green Bay fan, I'd want the refs to die and I'd be wondering why the coach didn't take a page out of Billicheck's playbook to allow Rodgers to get sacked for a Safety and then try and march down field for a field goal to win. If I'm a Seattle Fan, I pray that I get refs like this every week who give the home team the game. In all honesty King, Godell will do whatever he can not to cave just to prove his point that the Refs are replaceable. My gut says that if Godell can make it to Week 8 with the replacement refs, he's going to be able to make it the entire season. If the Replacements ref the Superbowl, it's game over for the NFL. Godell's not going to cave unless he has to. The only way that will happen is a huge superstar (ie a Brady, Brees, Rodgers, RGIII, Ray Rice, Larry Fitzgerald, Julio Jones, LeSean McCoy, Andre Johnson types) has a season ending/career ending because of something the replacement refs allow to happen, then the NFLPA may have grounds to sue the league and take a stand on the grounds that the replacement refs are creating an unsafe working condition. If that happens, it will mean an NFLPA strike and series of lawsuits that will break Godell's back for certain.
The replacement refs also handed Aaron Rodgers a K-ball for use in the two-point conversion attempt. K-balls are meant to be used ONLY for FGs and Extra Points. Not the end of the world, but another mistake.
Beyond that, the end of the game was such a debacle. The refs not knowing you have to attempt an extra point at the end of the game (in regular season games), botching calls left and right, having no control over the players whatsoever. Again, it isn't even just this one game. It's every single game this season.
First, your interpretation of the rule is ridiculous and wrong. Player A goes to intercept a ball and clearly has it with two hands but as he is falling, but Player B comes and puts a finger on the ball as A falls to the ground. Under your interpretation, you would call this simultaneous possession?
I have watched the NFL a long time and you are dead wrong that there are YEARS of identical plays. Simultaneous possession rarely occurs and when it does it is blatant that both players have equal possession and maintain that through the finish of the play. Its indefensible here.
On top of that there was a clear missed push off, a phantom defensive hold on Woodson that extended the drive, and an awful roughing the passer that extended a drive and gave them an extra 15 yards. The Packers played poorly but I've never seen a Win so clearly taken from a team by referees.
I'll post it again. The rules speak for themselves. Jennings met (a), not (b) or (c):
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3 of the NFL Rule Book defines a catch:
A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
I don't understand what your watching. He clearly meets (b) and (c). An act common to the game is also maintaining possession through the catch which is what he did, a diving catch for example.
The rules could not be any clearer. Neither player met the definition of possession and the ball wasn't on the ground, hence simultaneous possession, hence the ball goes to the passer's team. IT'S THE RULES, CLEAR AS DAY!
This is the most laughable logic I've ever read. Neither met the definition of possession, therefore they must both have possession.
i'm all for paying up the real refs, and am pretty livid about some of these bad calls.
that said, the poor play-calling is not enough for me to stop watching NFL games. honestly, bad calls can go both ways, so no particular team is at a disadvantage because of them. the only thing that would stop me from watching NFL games is if i found out that the games were rigged in some way...
On its face, it's easy for non-sports fans to side with the owners. Getting paid six digits for 17 weeks' work? But think about it. It's a supply and demand dynamic. There are multiple quarterbacks in this league getting paid ~$20MM per year for throwing around a leather ball. Most who don't follow sports (I personally don't consider them real people) would think that downright criminal. But guess what? There aren't 50 people in entire fucking world that can throw like Aaron Rodgers or slash holes like Ray Rice, or do what these freak of nature athletes (in every sport) do (see: Lebron James. One of a kind). Apparently, there also aren't 15 people in the entire world that can ref games like the union refs. That is becoming more and more clear by the day.
Guess what else? The NFL is a $50+ billion organization because privileged people like us are willing to shell out $300 for a single top level seat at a Broncos / Steelers game. It's a $50 billion+ organization because America loves football. Plain and simple. We love watching finely tuned athletic machines perform. And this season, there is has been no accountability, no integrity in the game.
Much in the same way the NFL wouldn't exist without its top level athletes, it wouldn't exist without the enforceable rules that govern the game itself. The refs are in as little supply and high demand as the players. I've resisted going on this tirade multiple times, and in certain cases even sympathized with the owners. But last night was the final straw: Goodell needs to get his head out of the ground and bring back refs. Give them the marginal pay increase that won't have any net affect on you or your sycophantic henchmen, and give America back the game it loves.
First of all, here are the rest of the rules from the Rulebook.
When a player (or players) is going to the ground in the attempt to catch a pass, Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1 states:
Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:
Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
So, going back to that Simultaneous Catch, Tate hand is on Jennings right forearm, not the ball, when Jennings first gains control of the ball. Even while falling to the ground, you can see Tate's right arm coming around to grab the ball. Jennings gains control first, never loses control, unlike Tate, and comes down with control. It's not a simultaneous catch.
How can you possibly read the rules and come to that conclusion? First of all, Jennings doesn't possess the ball legally until he has 2 feet, a knee or an elbow on the ground. By the time his feet were on the ground Tate had his arms all over the ball--we know this because you posted the slow motion video. Thank you for that!
Second, part (c) requires that the player be able to make some form of football move after gaining possession on the ground. Of course he couldn't because Tate had his arms all over the ball as well. Neither player had LEGAL possession of the ball because neither player could meet (a), (b), AND (c) of what constitutes a legal catch. In that case, we have simultaneous possession since the ball is not on the ground.
You're literally arguing with the rule book here. The rules are clear as day.
Pardon me here, but are you an idiot? Seriously, are you a fucking idiot? Did you not read what I wrote originally? First off, the rule you quoted me isn't important here because there was no further forward motion. This is a case of Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1 which states
Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
Jennings, Tate and everyone else involved in the last play were all going to the ground at the time of the catch. Therefore R8S1A3I1 takes precedence for the catch since all of the players were going to the ground in the act of the catch. Jennings had control of the ball and maintained it throughout control. Tate had no control at the time of the catch. He grabbed onto Jennings forearm and not the ball. Tate didn't catch it.
Next, there's the Simultaneous Catch rule.
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:
Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
So, Jennings had control of the falling catch first. Tate did not even have an ounce of control until he was able to get his arm in there after the fact. Tate's possession came after Jennings had control of the falling pass, which Jennings never lost control of. By that very simple analysis, it's pretty easy to see that this should have been an interception.
How can you possibly read the rules and come to that conclusion? First of all, Jennings doesn't possess the ball legally until he has 2 feet, a knee or an elbow on the ground. By the time his feet were on the ground Tate had his arms all over the ball--we know this because you posted the slow motion video. Thank you for that!
Second, part (c) requires that the player be able to make some form of football move after gaining possession on the ground. Of course he couldn't because Tate had his arms all over the ball as well. Neither player had LEGAL possession of the ball because neither player could meet (a), (b), AND (c) of what constitutes a legal catch. In that case, we have simultaneous possession since the ball is not on the ground.
You're literally arguing with the rule book here. The rules are clear as day.[/quote]
What you're saying doesn't make sense either..
If neither player has "legal" possession of the ball, how can you assume that it's simultaneous possession?
WaitForSlutSet, First off, genious troll. I mean.. you got Frieds to lose his shit. Well done sir.
But in all seriousness, you are missing the fact that as they landed Tate's arm flys free... he has no possession of the ball and therefore cannot be considered a simultaneous catch. Also, as mentioned above, the "must make a football move" line does not pertain to an airborne/ diving/ falling catch. The player need only maintain possession through the landing and be in bounds.
You can repost the rules all you want, you continually miss the point of combining the rules to apply to the situation and your analysis is faulty at best.
Good day
i dont have time to read through all this, can someone just pm me when it's decided if jennings had possession or not?
First off, I'm a Green Bay fan and I'm fucking livid. I won't watch anymore NFL games until the ref situation is handled.
Second, why arguing about simultaneous catches, just look what the receiver had to say...which would imply it was actually an interception. We won't even bring up the horrendous calls that allowed the Seahawks to be in that position in the first place.
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/75896/chaos-confusion-and-a-1…
Regards
i completely flipped out last night when i saw this live....money down that nfl never fucks with refs for another 5 years at least after this bullshit season
Where's VT4ever to tell us we're all wrong?
lol, you mean to tell us that "no one cares about the replacement refs" and then go on and on about how MLB Umpires are infallible? Or to go on some rant about teacher unions?
I also believe that the NFL put it's best replacement crew on for the Monday night game. This is the best they could possibly do with replacement refs. If you watch some of the less popular teams play on sunday, you will see non-stop skirmishing, calls that get made and corrected by coaching staffs or the NFL dude that runs out into the ref huddle to tell them that they are wrong.
There was a kickoff last week that went over the back of the endzone for a touchback which was followed with a 22 player fight on the field.
Everyone pees and moans about soccer not having instant replay technology for calls....don't you guys have that in the NFL? How can a bad call be made with play back technology enabled?
The NFL does have instant replay, but there are certain restrictions regarding what action can be taken by the refs after watching the replay.
For example, penalties can't be called from replays. That's why Tate got away with the most flagrant O pass interference I've ever seen in the endzone before--everyone saw it clear as day in the replay, but rules say you can't throw a flag after the whistle.
Another big part of it is that once a call is made on the field, the replay has to show substantial evidence to overturn the call. So, whatever the first call is always the most advantaged in a replay situation. If a pass is ruled a catch and first down by the refs on the field, the subsequent replay has to very, very clearly show that it was not, by rule, a catch. If it's at all ambiguous then the call won't be overturned. If that same exact pass was ruled incomplete, then the replay would have to unambiguously show that it was a catch. So it's pretty heavily biased toward whatever the initial ruling was. There's a good chance that if Tate's horse shit PI and catch was initially ruled an interception then the call would have stayed that way and the better team would have won the game.
Laudantium iusto quas facilis. Aut quis doloribus sint sunt ad doloremque. Facere rem et rem occaecati numquam omnis voluptas. Rerum consequatur adipisci veniam reprehenderit. Alias aut ipsam aut et non et. Consectetur aut eum omnis in.
Animi quo amet et eos quasi. Molestiae ratione eius sapiente omnis ducimus deleniti. Officiis non magnam quo omnis.
Magnam earum eligendi voluptates illo. Natus provident quos quod sed doloribus nam facilis. Recusandae aut et voluptatem esse eos harum eaque. Voluptatem repellat sed et suscipit.
Corrupti dolor repellendus velit eveniet ex commodi soluta. Neque aut velit occaecati quisquam. Dolor iusto repellendus nihil eveniet in.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Sunt minima quod ut id quidem suscipit quam. Provident accusamus aliquid non enim. Quidem neque facere autem aliquid tenetur.
Animi consequuntur voluptatum vel cupiditate reprehenderit et aut. Autem non voluptate quasi aut dolore quia ab sint. Magni eveniet et vero quia et quibusdam ipsum. Repellendus occaecati non totam odit omnis id enim vitae. Officia delectus harum voluptas quod architecto quos impedit.
Ab ut id quibusdam accusantium nemo. Error natus et ratione culpa veritatis. Distinctio cum dolore id ipsum ut. Et pariatur inventore numquam aut ex provident omnis.
Fugit accusamus et iusto magnam repudiandae eius delectus. Vero quae excepturi qui sunt omnis. Ex corporis quia neque molestiae perferendis sequi ea quia. Ut et est odit eaque perferendis.