Let me cut to the chase

[RamTime]

removed so as to not upset anyone

[Edited by RamTime on Jul 10th, 2005 at 01:30 PM]

[Mark Dexter]

Someone just lost what little credibility he had left.

Buddy, the game was played in January of 2002. Whether you're upset because your team lost, you lost money, or both, get over it!

[Texoma_LJ]

All these people that think that the officiating was "less than fair" in SB 36... I bet their favorite colors are blue and gold.... just a hunch.

[grantsrc]

Originally posted by RamTime
Many people believe that the officiating in SB 36 was less then fair. Many believe that it was in fact corrupt. I'm not so sure of that however one can not deny the avalance of missed calls in that game. I happened upon a video that contains only the cheap shots that were not called. Most are clear, a few are arguable some may have really been missed. Combine that with the IG at the end of the game with the statement above and this video. http;//ecosustainablevillage.com/penalty.wmv Oh and please don't shoot the messenger.

RamTime, I cannot speak for all officials but I have some thoughts on many of the topics you have brought up on this forum so far.

The link you provided above shows many "cheap shots" from a Super Bowl that took place a few years back, 2001. The video shows these in slow motion, and many of clips do not provide the entire action of the play. The video also shows "cheap shots" that only happened to one team, the Rams. Although many fans, mostly Rams fans, might feel these hits were in violation of the rules, it is hard for any of us officials, fans, sportscasters or otherwise, to rule on these hits by watching a slow motion video clip. Some are close, but IMHO, many of the hits appeared to be ok. The two late hits, neither of them were malicious, the contact started inbounds or at the sidelines, and were not intended to injure the player. Many of the leading with the helmet shots appeared to be ok. None of the hits were helmet to helmet. Now, I do not officiate under NFL rules and I am not familiar with the precise wording of the rules, but from what I can tell, they appear ok.

On a separate note, many officials get a little sensitive when it comes to questioning judgment calls. It is part of the job that we all endure and it is something that we need to reflect on and learn from. Many of these judgment calls are broadcasted on TV in super slow motion, from an angle that the official isn't privy to. At times unfortunately, officials do miss calls. We are human and it is part of the game. Many times what nay-sayers forget is that we (the people watching TV or in the stands) are not on the field of play. We did not get the privilege of that camera angle. We don't know what the official is looking at or where his zone of responsibility is. We CANNOT duplicate what the covering official(s) saw or ruled on in terms of judgment calls.

To put it this way, what if everyone had a camera following them around all day? Each day, thousands of people tuned in and watch and listen to the play by play announcers comment on our lives, offering commentary and opinionated feedback to our everyday decisions. Would they agree with every decision we make? Would we in turn make the "right" decisions every time? I imagine it now, "That was a bad call RamsFan, I would have turned right back there but now you are stuck in construction and will be late for work." Next thing you know, your bad call shows up in a forum like this and we waste countless hours debating if you should have taken a right turn or not.

Now, imagine we are doing that exact same thing but the turn in question happened four years ago. You no doubt have changed as a person. You make different decisions now as opposed to four years ago. And in a situation like the one I described above, you might not have made that right hand turn. But who are we to say if that was the right or wrong decision? We weren't in your shoes. We don't know what your thought process was. We have no way in telling whether your decision was right or wrong. You see where I am going?

The last thing I will say is I appreciate you taking time to research and find out information to your questions. Many fans will not go the extra step to inform themselves on the intricacies of the rules or workings of the game. Keep in mind, none of us, at this forum or otherwise, are fully qualified to judge whether these calls were correct or not.

By the way, who claims the officiating was corrupt? Did the NFL say anything about it?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by RamTime
Many people believe that the officiating in SB 36 was less then fair. Many believe that it was in fact corrupt. I'm not so sure of that however one can not deny the avalance of missed calls in that game. I happened upon a video that contains only the cheap shots that were not called. Most are clear, a few are arguable some may have really been missed. Combine that with the IG at the end of the game with the statement above and this video. http;//ecosustainablevillage.com/penalty.wmv Oh and please don't shoot the messenger.

You're not a messenger, you're a fanboy. Here's a link to a site that fanboys are welcome to post about NFL conspiracies. Have fun!

http://refereestats.proboards22.com/index.cgi

[RamTime]

Originally posted by grantsrc

RamTime, I cannot speak for all officials but I have some thoughts on many of the topics you have brought up on this forum so far.

The link you provided above shows many "cheap shots" from a Super Bowl that took place a few years back, 2001. The video shows these in slow motion, and many of clips do not provide the entire action of the play. The video also shows "cheap shots" that only happened to one team, the Rams. Although many fans, mostly Rams fans, might feel these hits were in violation of the rules, it is hard for any of us officials, fans, sportscasters or otherwise, to rule on these hits by watching a slow motion video clip. Some are close, but IMHO, many of the hits appeared to be ok. The two late hits, neither of them were malicious, the contact started inbounds or at the sidelines, and were not intended to injure the player. Many of the leading with the helmet shots appeared to be ok. None of the hits were helmet to helmet. Now, I do not officiate under NFL rules and I am not familiar with the precise wording of the rules, but from what I can tell, they appear ok.

On a separate note, many officials get a little sensitive when it comes to questioning judgment calls. It is part of the job that we all endure and it is something that we need to reflect on and learn from. Many of these judgment calls are broadcasted on TV in super slow motion, from an angle that the official isn't privy to. At times unfortunately, officials do miss calls. We are human and it is part of the game. Many times what nay-sayers forget is that we (the people watching TV or in the stands) are not on the field of play. We did not get the privilege of that camera angle. We don't know what the official is looking at or where his zone of responsibility is. We CANNOT duplicate what the covering official(s) saw or ruled on in terms of judgment calls.

To put it this way, what if everyone had a camera following them around all day? Each day, thousands of people tuned in and watch and listen to the play by play announcers comment on our lives, offering commentary and opinionated feedback to our everyday decisions. Would they agree with every decision we make? Would we in turn make the "right" decisions every time? I imagine it now, "That was a bad call RamsFan, I would have turned right back there but now you are stuck in construction and will be late for work." Next thing you know, your bad call shows up in a forum like this and we waste countless hours debating if you should have taken a right turn or not.

Now, imagine we are doing that exact same thing but the turn in question happened four years ago. You no doubt have changed as a person. You make different decisions now as opposed to four years ago. And in a situation like the one I described above, you might not have made that right hand turn. But who are we to say if that was the right or wrong decision? We weren't in your shoes. We don't know what your thought process was. We have no way in telling whether your decision was right or wrong. You see where I am going?

The last thing I will say is I appreciate you taking time to research and find out information to your questions. Many fans will not go the extra step to inform themselves on the intricacies of the rules or workings of the game. Keep in mind, none of us, at this forum or otherwise, are fully qualified to judge whether these calls were correct or not.

By the way, who claims the officiating was corrupt? Did the NFL say anything about it?

Fair enough

[MJT]

Originally posted by RamTime
Many people believe that the officiating in SB 36 was less then fair. Many believe that it was in fact corrupt. I'm not so sure of that however one can not deny the avalance of missed calls in that game. I happened upon a video that contains only the cheap shots that were not called. Most are clear, a few are arguable some may have really been missed. Combine that with the IG at the end of the game with the statement above and this video. http;//ecosustainablevillage.com/penalty.wmv Oh and please don't shoot the messenger.

RamTime, I have been very kind to your questions so far, BUT, you are now questioning the "integrity" of the best officials in the world. You can question judgment if you want, but DON’T question our integrity. The "135 yards missed" video was obviously put together by a Rams fan. We don’t even know if all of those plays occurred without a flag? I guess we are to "trust" the Rams fan, (who IS prejudice in this case) who made this video that each of these occurred without a flag? Even if that was the case, in ½ of them, I couldn’t tell what the fan wanted called. In one the defender had his leg wrapped up before he ever got OOB’s but he didn’t fall till after OOB’s. He is really “begging” on that one, and others as well.

Do you realize these calls happen at incredible speed, and the decision of flag, or not, must be made in less than a second! If an official does not see the WHOLE play involved, he CANNOT throw a flag, so do some get missed, YES, but as stated above, by cutting off the clips when this person did, we do not even get to see the whole play. Sometimes what appears to be a “clip” is not when you see the whole play and see the block started in the front, and contact was maintained as the defender spun around. In that case what ends up “looking” like a clip, is NOT. Most fans do not understand that concept.

Your questions are welcomed, but please do not come in here saying we are corrupt. We could care less who wins or loses a game we officiate. We just call them as we see them and hopefully see them correctly most of the time. I think a prejudice fan could take individual clips of MOST games and make a video similar to “135 yards.”

One thing I KNOW fans do not understand is that in major college and NFL a foul is ONLY a foul if it is a safety issue or occurs at the point of attack, meaning it had an impact on the play. A hold by the right tackle as the ball is being run over the left tackle is NOT a flag, and the official would receive a negative mark if he did call that on cuz it was not at the point of attack. Beyond that did you know there are seven “holding exceptions” in the NFL, meaning that even if holding is occurring, it is NOT a foul in these situations. I did not until I starting working NFL rules, and am a huge NFL fan. It is hard to argue with better than 99%.

We will continue to welcome good play questions from you RamTime!


[Edited by MJT on Jul 10th, 2005 at 01:45 PM]

[Snake~eyes]

Go away.

[RamTime]

Originally posted by Texoma_LJ
All these people that think that the officiating was "less than fair" in SB 36... I bet their favorite colors are blue and gold.... just a hunch.

Actually no. Chief, steeler, panther, dolphin, colt, raider message boards have seen these videos and the majority says it was poor officiating while a close second refers to the events of 911. A small but noticeable percentage says it is BS and everyone gets bad calls. This is the only place that shuns every single one of them. However just about everyone says it was long ago and its water under the bridge.

[Edited by RamTime on Jul 10th, 2005 at 10:25 PM]

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by RamTime
Actually no. Chief, steeler, panther, dolphin, colt, raider message boards have seen these videos and the majority says it was poor officiating while a close second refers to the events of 911.

Go away fanboy.

[Texoma_LJ]

Right... every post here has shunned every point you have tried to make. You have misquoted, misinterpreted and have come misinformed on several issues. When an opinion you asked for, is not in agreement with what you want to hear, we, as you would want to put it, are trying to cover for one of our own.

Maybe with all this extra time you have to look up old film from 4 years ago, you could find something more constructive to do. Obviously you know so much about our jobs, maybe you should give it a try... lord knows it would be more constructive than what your doing at the moment.

[schmitty1973]

I'm a Rams fan, and yeah I thought the IG no-call at the end was bad. But anyone who knows anything about football in general, knows that Martz lost that game because he forgot to use his #1 weapon ... Marshall Faulk. Tell me how you can have 1st and goal inside the 5 and not at all give the ball to Faulk?
That's why they lost, not because of officiating.

[Dommer1]

RamTime,

The fact that fans on other fan boards agree with you on this one, simply does not matter.

Let me tell you something about rules in general and NFL rules in particular: Unless you have STUDIED the rule book, you simply do not know the rules. Knowing the rules is only a part of it, you must also know how to implement, to interpret, the rules. This is not personal, but there is no way you have the knowledgment necessary to do that.

The guys in the NFL are there because they have proven over and over that they are experts at reading situations and applying the rules to them. Nothing but the best is demanded of them by the league. When they screw up, because they do screw up from time to time, they are held accountable.

Several good points have been made already on why the majority of the plays in the clip are not fouls that should be called. If you want to disagree, that is fine. But at the same time, you confirm to us that you do not have enough knowledge to decide if the officials screwed up or not. If you don't know the alphabet, how can you write a book review?

But one thing should be absolutely clear: Claiming that the officials are corrupt or biased is simply ridicoulous and laughable. It tells us nothing about the officials involved, but it does tell us something about the person making such a claim. The NFL officials are competitive guys, competing not so much with colleagues as with them selves. They want to be the best officials they can be. One of the pillars of officiating is impartiality. Can you tell me why, these guys trying to be the best they can be, would want to be partial and biased? What is in it for them? What is the motivation? What would make them change their entire way of thinking?

It just tells me that you simply do not understand how an official thinks.

[RamTime]

One thing I KNOW fans do not understand is that in major college and NFL a foul is ONLY a foul if it is a safety issue or occurs at the point of attack, meaning it had an impact on the play. A hold by the right tackle as the ball is being run over the left tackle is NOT a flag, and the official would receive a negative mark if he did call that on cuz it was not at the point of attack. Beyond that did you know there are seven “holding exceptions” in the NFL, meaning that even if holding is occurring, it is NOT a foul in these situations. I did not until I starting working NFL rules, and am a huge NFL fan. It is hard to argue with better than 99%.

We will continue to welcome good play questions from you RamTime!

This is very interesting and it is why I came here. I wanted to know if there were things I was overlooking or was ignorant to. I have sense acquired an NFL official rule book. After reading through it I found something else very interesting and that is they have another book called "Official NFL Casebook" which has actual cases in it.

Now so as not to be rude I will field some of the other statements that were not as educational as the one I just quoted above.

Remember I did not start this type of trash talking.

Someone just lost what little credibility he had left.

Buddy, the game was played in January of 2002. Whether you're upset because your team lost, you lost money, or both, get over it!

Since intelligence is not required on the WWW some folks don't bother using it as in this case. What does the year the game was played have anything to do with someone that wants to understand the rules. Certainly you understand that because of that game a few rules had to start being enforced again. You must also be aware of the fact that because 7 seconds was allowed to run off the game clock 3 of which after the ball crossed the cross bar the NFL instated a rule that a FG attempt would run 5 seconds off the game clock from now on.

I'm a Rams fan, and yeah I thought the IG no-call at the end was bad. But anyone who knows anything about football in general, knows that Martz lost that game because he forgot to use his #1 weapon ... Marshall Faulk. Tell me how you can have 1st and goal inside the 5 and not at all give the ball to Faulk?
That's why they lost, not because of officiating.

Only those who get their thoughts through the media believe that it was because Martz didn't utilize Faulk. However common sense and a look at the replay of the game holds much more realistic reasons. Remember the hold against McGinest on Faulk that negated a 99 yard fumble recovery for a TD? http://stlouisrams.net/xxxvi/clips/015.wmv McGinest said:
"I'm not the referee so I don't know if it was holding or not, I played him the same way all game." If you look at that video and refresh your memory of that hold then think about the fact that he said he didn't know if it were holding and he also said "I played him the same way all game." This was confirmed by Faulk who said "It was going on all day for the most part" Now combine that with what the Patriots game plan was (Which was pretty smart) and that being they hit Faulk on every play with at least one player weather or not he had the ball made no difference. So your blanket conclusion of Martz being an idiot doesn't hold a thimble full of sense it does however echo the media's blanket conclusion. Unless of course you think Faulk was good enough to overcome holding all game and players putting hats on him all day. Probably would want to get the ball to someone else don't you think?
*Common sense rationally proven.*

Now to everyone here, I mentioned that I had acquired an NFL rule book and it specifically says
Article 8
There shall be no unnecessary roughness. This shall include, but will not be limited to:
(b) tackling the runner when he is clearly out of bounds:
http://stlouisrams.net/xxxvi/clips/018.wmv
d) running or diving into, or throwing the body against or on a ball carrier who falls or slips to the ground untouched and makes no attempt to advance, before or after the ball is dead;
http://stlouisrams.net/xxxvi/clips/010.wmv

It also says that it is up to the defensive player to know where the boundaries are.

As far as judgment calls it says, Note: If in doubt about a roughness call or potentially dangerous tactics, the official(s) should always call unnecessary roughness.

Now other rules say if in doubt there is no flag however because this is a safety issue if THERE IS DOUBT officials should ALWAYS call it.

Also relating to the helmet to helmet contact:
http://stlouisrams.net/xxxvi/clips/016.wmv
and
http://stlouisrams.net/xxxvi/clips/017.wmv
Note what the rule tells officials to look out for appears to be exactly what you see in these clips. "game officials will give special attention in administrating this rule to protecting those players who are in virtual defenseless postures (e.g. a player in the act of or just after throwing a pass + a runner already in the grasp of a tackler"

Article 8
(g) using any part of a player's helmet (including the top/crown, forehead/"hairline" parts) or face mask to violently and unnecessarily butt, spear, or ram an opponent although such violent and unnecessary use of the helmet and face mask is impermissible against any opponent , game officials will give special attention in administrating this rule to protecting those players who are in virtual defenseless postures (e.g. a player in the act of or just after throwing a pass, a receiver catching, or attempting to catch a pass, a runner already in the grasp of a tackler, a kick off or punt returner attempting to field a kick in the air, or a player on the ground at the end of a play) All players in virtually defenseless postures are protected by the same prohibitions against use of the helmet or face mask that are described in the roughing the passer rules.
Note: If in doubt about a roughness call or potentially dangerous tactics, the official(s) should always call unnecessary roughness.

Notwithstanding the recent explanation about there being exceptions to the rules such as holding

a foul is ONLY a foul if it is a safety issue or occurs at the point of attack, meaning it had an impact on the play.

So far I have found much to support the claim that the officials missed a few calls however as I have stated over and over that is not why I came here if I wanted to argue the calls there are several places on the net to do so. My purpose is to understand the calls or non calls and if that means questioning the explanation of a call or non call it does not necessarily mean I am arguing it it could mean that Gasp! your actually missing something. As much as you all would like to be right all of the time its like you all say. Your not going to see everything.

Finally; those of you who see me as a fanboy or irritating, I have an idea. Don't read what I ask then you won't get upset.

For those who actually try to explain things to me I honestly do appreciate the time you take. I have learned some things here.

[ABoselli]

So your blanket conclusion of Martz being an idiot doesn't hold a thimble full of sense

Martz is a football genius. Just ask him.