Okay, those three plays from the Super Bowl....

[Franknbeans]

Originally posted by JRutledge

The NFL did not say "nothing" was wrong. The NFL said that the game was officiating properly. The reason that distinction needs to be made, is because things we have no idea about things that were not fouls or not fouls. For all we know there might have been a problem with a mechanic, a spot or positioning. There might have even been a problem with who threw a flag and who did not throw a flag. NFL officials can get downgraded for things we never see or understand or hear about.

Peace

Granted, I should have said nothing wrong with the calls in question. I still don't see how they could have said it was properly officiated given the Hasslebeck call. I think the other calls, while mostly judgement calls, were documented fouls according to the rules. Jackson clearly got an advantage (separation) by pushing Townsend away and I don't know how anyone can fault the referee for making that call considering it happened right in front of him.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Franknbeans

Granted, I should have said nothing wrong with the calls in question. I still don't see how they could have said it was properly officiated given the Hasslebeck call.

One call does not change how an entire game is officiating. It really is that simple. If that is the case every game would not be properly officiated if we use that standard.

Originally posted by Franknbeans
I think the other calls, while mostly judgement calls, were documented fouls according to the rules. Jackson clearly got an advantage (separation) by pushing Townsend away and I don't know how anyone can fault the referee for making that call considering it happened right in front of him.

When people do not understand the rules, they do not understand the logic behind why things are called.

Peace

[doogs]

Originally posted by JRutledge
How did the defender impede the progress of the receiver? The receiver ran toward the defender. The receiver got away with no problem.

The rule does not state anything about impeding progress. Only contact.

Originally posted by JRutledge
Also to be technical, the officials are taught things that are interpreted outside the "words" of the rulebook.

Does that mean the word contact has a different meaning for this rule than it does for the down by contact rule?

[carolinaRRREF]

When people do not understand the rules, they do not understand the logic behind why things are called.

Peace

I understand the rules. I understand the logic behind why it was called.

My only problem was the consistency. If a play is called consistently, then nobody can complain. Complaints are valid when the call is never made, then made at the most crucial of times.

Officials unfortunately forget that the game is about the players and the fans, not about them. Let the players play. A properly officiated game should leave the officials virtually invisible. This was not the case in the Super Bowl.

If you look for proof to support the calls, you can find it. If you look for proof to refute the calls, you can find it. What people SHOULD be looking for, is what is correct.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by doogs


The rule does not state anything about impeding progress. Only contact.

There is a term that many call a "rulebook official." That is when an official only looks for justification in the rules and does not use any training or common sense. In order to hold someone, you have to impede, restrict or change the actions of a player. The rules do not have to say that, but all the training and interpretations do not suggest a hold as "touching." If I have freedom of movement, not sure how I can be held on a play like this?

Originally posted by doogs

Does that mean the word contact has a different meaning for this rule than it does for the down by contact rule?

No, there is just such thing as incidental contact. No where are you going to find in any football rulebook where contact is not expected. Illegal contact in the NFL code I am sure is defined and there are further interpretations that say exactly what that is. BTW, there are not special restrictions for defense over the offense. Both offense and defense have an equal right to the ball or to a spot. Either you do not understand the entire pass restrictions or you are just looking for one line in a rulebook to support something you otherwise cannot support. Even the media is not focusing on that aspect of this foul.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
I understand the rules. I understand the logic behind why it was called.

I am not so sure you do.

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
My only problem was the consistency. If a play is called consistently, then nobody can complain. Complaints are valid when the call is never made, then made at the most crucial of times.

Consistency based on what? I have seen that called all year. The NFL for the past several years has cracked down on OPI and this was one of many calls made all year. One of our jobs is to call the obvious. When you extend your arms and make the defender move backwards, that is pretty obvious. If he was slicker and did not have the same arm extention, he might have got away with it.

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
Officials unfortunately forget that the game is about the players and the fans, not about them. Let the players play. A properly officiated game should leave the officials virtually invisible. This was not the case in the Super Bowl.

What do you mean it is about the players and fans? If it was about the fans then betting would be legal across the country BTW. If the players only want it to be about them, why do they spend so much time trying to tell the officials what should be called? There were 10 fouls total in the game. If you look over the entire season you might be lucky if you find one game that has less than 10 fouls in en entire game. I have seen games where 10 fouls were called in a half or a quarter. Not sure what the officials did that changed the game. There were about 160 plays in this game and only 10 the officials had anything to do with. That is less than 10% of the plays involved a penalty. When players stop making mistakes, officials will stop making mistakes and this call you are complaining about was not a mistake.

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
If you look for proof to support the calls, you can find it. If you look for proof to refute the calls, you can find it. What people SHOULD be looking for, is what is correct.

I do not think anyone is looking for anything to prove the situation. You are the one trying to convince us that the calls were wrong. Some media guy that thinks fouls is supposed to be even to have a properly called game is not a good reference point.

If you would spend more time here during the season and off season, you would see that we talk about things like this all the time. We do not just pick the Super Bowl to debate calls or consistency. You are just a Johnny come lately complaining about something you have proven you know nothing about.

Peace

[carolinaRRREF]

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
My only problem was the consistency. If a play is called consistently, then nobody can complain. Complaints are valid when the call is never made, then made at the most crucial of times.

Consistency based on what? I have seen that called all year. The NFL for the past several years has cracked down on OPI and this was one of many calls made all year. One of our jobs is to call the obvious. When you extend your arms and make the defender move backwards, that is pretty obvious. If he was slicker and did not have the same arm extention, he might have got away with it.
256 regular season games, <20 OPI calls, yet that same amount of contact happens on 90% of all pass plays. Watch the video. The defender puts both hands on the receiver, and the receiver swats his arms off him. Ticky tack at best. Bad call (unless it's called all the time, which it isn't).

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
Officials unfortunately forget that the game is about the players and the fans, not about them. Let the players play. A properly officiated game should leave the officials virtually invisible. This was not the case in the Super Bowl.

What do you mean it is about the players and fans? If it was about the fans then betting would be legal across the country BTW. If the players only want it to be about them, why do they spend so much time trying to tell the officials what should be called? There were 10 fouls total in the game. If you look over the entire season you might be lucky if you find one game that has less than 10 fouls in en entire game. I have seen games where 10 fouls were called in a half or a quarter. Not sure what the officials did that changed the game. There were about 160 plays in this game and only 10 the officials had anything to do with. That is less than 10% of the plays involved a penalty. When players stop making mistakes, officials will stop making mistakes and this call you are complaining about was not a mistake.
this proves my point. You're an official that has a power trip and wants to be bigger than the game. You're wrong. There were 10 fouls called. 1 of those was on Pittsburgh, aside from the 2 illegal procedures. 5 of the 7 against Seattle were controversial and on key plays, which greatly hurt their chances of scoring, thereby affecting the outcome of the game. Scandal? No... but still not an even playing field.

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
If you look for proof to support the calls, you can find it. If you look for proof to refute the calls, you can find it. What people SHOULD be looking for, is what is correct.

I do not think anyone is looking for anything to prove the situation. You are the one trying to convince us that the calls were wrong. Some media guy that thinks fouls is supposed to be even to have a properly called game is not a good reference point.

If you would spend more time here during the season and off season, you would see that we talk about things like this all the time. We do not just pick the Super Bowl to debate calls or consistency. You are just a Johnny come lately complaining about something you have proven you know nothing about.

Peace [/B][/QUOTE]
Look at the original post of this thread. It's trying to prove the situation. My opinion is this "proof" is slanted because of bias of the officials in this forum.

I haven't tried to prove anything. I'm stating my opinions. Just because I'm new to the forum doesn't make my opinions invalid. Neither does my having an opinion different than yours.

This is why you are a poor excuse for an official. You have an idea and are unwilling to hear any other sides. You defend another official's work because everybody else in the world is coming down on them, and you get defensive.

The Super Bowl was officiated poorly. You think it wasn't because you're a poor excuse for an official.

[OverAndBack]

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
256 regular season games, <20 OPI calls, yet that same amount of contact happens on 90% of all pass plays.

Are those from the Department of Statistics I Just Made Up? Do you see 90% of all pass plays in the NFL?

How many plays with that contact happen right in front of the back judge in the end zone, with an unobstructed view, and separation after the contact, followed within a second by the catching of a touchdown pass?

Watch the video. The defender puts both hands on the receiver, and the receiver swats his arms off him.

You watch the video. Where's the receiver swat? I don't see a swat. I see a receiver cutting back and changing his pattern, and I don't see him swatting.

this proves my point. You're an official that has a power trip and wants to be bigger than the game.

See, here's where I know your point isn't being proven. Do you know Jeff Rutledge? I do. He's a lot of things, but someone who thinks he's bigger than the game? No way. If anything, he knows precisely how much bigger the game is than he, than me, than you, than all of us.

You're wrong. There were 10 fouls called. 1 of those was on Pittsburgh, aside from the 2 illegal procedures. 5 of the 7 against Seattle were controversial and on key plays, which greatly hurt their chances of scoring, thereby affecting the outcome of the game. Scandal? No... but still not an even playing field.

So....what are you saying? A conspiracy? Controversial doesn't mean conspiracy, and one man's controversy is not another one's. The OPI call, to me, is an OPI. No controversy. No controversy on the holding call. Roethlisberger, yes, there's a controversy and reasonable people can agree to disagree despite seeing the same things.

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
If you look for proof to support the calls, you can find it. If you look for proof to refute the calls, you can find it. What people SHOULD be looking for, is what is correct.

You mean what they SHOULD be looking for, is what agrees with YOUR opinion, right?

This is why you are a poor excuse for an official. You have an idea and are unwilling to hear any other sides. You defend another official's work because everybody else in the world is coming down on them, and you get defensive.

The Super Bowl was officiated poorly. You think it wasn't because you're a poor excuse for an official.

Actually, Jeff's a very good official. But you wouldn't know that. And "everbody else in the world is coming down on them?" REALLY? Here I thought there was some difference of opinion - not everybody in the world on one side and one or two of us on the other side.

It's your OPINION that the Super Bowl was officiated poorly. How can you rip on someone for ripping you for having an opinion contrary to his, while at the same time ripping someone for having an opinion contrary to yours?

[mikesears]

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF
I haven't tried to prove anything. I'm stating my opinions. Just because I'm new to the forum doesn't make my opinions invalid. Neither does my having an opinion different than yours.

But being new to this forum does make your opinion less "respected". Respect is earned, not something that is freely awarded. The only thing we have heard from you is that the officiating was terrible. I don't think I would feel comfortable walking into the teacher's lounge as the newbie and telling the teacher's how terrible other teachers are.

This is why you are a poor excuse for an official. You have an idea and are unwilling to hear any other sides. You defend another official's work because everybody else in the world is coming down on them, and you get defensive.

Many of us who frequent this forum are always willing to listen to the other side of a discussion. However, this isn't a discussion of a call. This is simply someone with no record here submitting an overly general opinion. If we come across as defensive, it is because we have yet to hear a rational argument as to why the officiating was sub-par.

Just because people disagree with your opinion doesn't make them terrible officials.


The Super Bowl was officiated poorly. You think it wasn't because you're a poor excuse for an official.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that the Super Bowl was well officiated. But just because people don't agree with you doesn't mean we are poor officials or that we are somehow circling the wagons. You have yet to say WHY you feel the game was poorly officiated. You really can't bring up the controversial fouls because they were in fact controversial. In order to have controversey, people must have polarizing views of the call(s). In other words, there are an equal number of people who felt the calls were correct. The argument that I'm right because I'm on a certain side of the issue isn't very compelling.

The NFL (and truly the ones whose opinion really matters) agrees with us. If the game were that poorly officiated, you can bet the NFL would have said something about it. They have a history of admitting when mistakes are made in games.

I refuse to play in the mud anymore. I doubt anything anyone says here will sway your opinion.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by carolinaRRREF

Look at the original post of this thread. It's trying to prove the situation. My opinion is this "proof" is slanted because of bias of the officials in this forum.

I haven't tried to prove anything. I'm stating my opinions. Just because I'm new to the forum doesn't make my opinions invalid. Neither does my having an opinion different than yours.

This is why you are a poor excuse for an official. You have an idea and are unwilling to hear any other sides. You defend another official's work because everybody else in the world is coming down on them, and you get defensive.

The Super Bowl was officiated poorly. You think it wasn't because you're a poor excuse for an official.

Whether I am a good official or a bad official is for other people to decide. I do know that I attend two clinics every single year. One is a college camp where Dave Parry attends and speaks and many of the Big Ten officials teach (also MAC and Gateway guys as well). There is also a guy that gives a presentation about the NFL at this camp. He shows NFL training tapes and goes into great detail as to what the NFL does in their training and the philosophies that they use. As a matter of fact, a NFL Back Judge gave a presentation on "Pass Interference" who is also a member of an association I belong to and showed NFL Official's evaluation tapes on what is OPI and DPI. Anyone can attend this camp it is held in Naperville, Illinois every July and it is called the Central Officials Football Clinic. I have attended for about 4 years now.

I teach at another clinic where some of the best officials in the state train officials. Officials much better than me teach what to do as a football official and I am fortunate to be apart of that group. Most officials are either State Final officials or they have extensive experience and work deep into the playoffs. I do not have the same background that everyone has, but I did work further than most in the playoffs last year. I also have two guys on my regular HS football crew that worked a State Finals. As well as teaching football officiating, I listen to officials that have been places I have yet to go. At this clinic that I am referring to, it is considered the best football clinic in the state by the state officials that regularly attend.

Now I do not work any college ball and I do not claim to be a great official. I have worked with some of the best officials in the state and I belong to an association where the teachers you can watch many nationally covered games, these are the guys that come to our meetings and teach the rest of us. We currently have 4 Big Ten Crew Chiefs that regularly come back (one is the Arena League Supervisor) and train the officials in this association. Four Big Ten Technical Advisors were members when they officiated in the Big Ten. BTW, Jerry Markbriet is also a former member and speaks to our organization yearly.

I am bombarded with philosophies, rules and mechanics by some officials that you only read about or see on TV. When many of our guys work a nationally covered game, they come back and talk about the situations and the way to make calls and handle players and coaches. You can think whatever about me, but much of what I am saying here is based on what I have had the opportunity to talk to the people and know the people that are at this level. I am not just dealing with an "opinion" I am dealing with people that rub work at that level and teach the lowly officials like myself what to do and not to do.

As Over and Back said, you do not know me and you certainly do not know anyone here. There was a clinic held in Detroit surrounding the Super Bowl, I know both people mentioned personally as the teachers of that clinic. You do not know who comes here or what they have done. I am just a blip on the screen, but I can tell you do not know much about officiating if all you can say is an "opinion" and that is supposed to be factual. I can guarantee you that this game will be featured on some level at the CFO Clinic in July and many of the plays will be used for training purposes. I will trust their word over some guy that uses a funny name on a discussion board.

Peace

[rulesmaven]

I understand the rules. I understand the logic behind why it was called.

My only problem was the consistency. If a play is called consistently, then nobody can complain. Complaints are valid when the call is never made, then made at the most crucial of times.

Officials unfortunately forget that the game is about the players and the fans, not about them. Let the players play. A properly officiated game should leave the officials virtually invisible. This was not the case in the Super Bowl. [/B]

I would posit that virtually any time OPI is as blatent as it was in the play in question, it gets called.

To the extent you are articulating a "but don't call it in the superbowl" rule, I'd urge you to watch the last minute of Superbowl 38. Carolina and New England are tied. New England is driving to try to get in field goal range. Exact same play occurs. Troy Brown makes a catch to get inside the Carolina 40 yard line to essentially put them just a couple of yards from a championship. But wait -- the precise scenario unfolds -- flag on the play. Brown had briefly touched the defender's chest, pushing him back on his heels, to get momentary separation, and Brady put the ball right on the numbers. Instead of being in Vinatieri range, ball gets marched back near the Patriot 30, for a 1st and 20. (Brown then redeems himself with a spectacular catch, the Patriots ultimatley convert on 3d and 3, and the rest is history.) Same play. Same situation. Same call. If anything, it was a much bigger call in Super Bowl 38. If the patriots don't convert from the 1st and 20, the call would have essentially been responsible for taking away a kick by the most clutch kicker in the NFL that year to win a championship.

As for the Roethlesberger crossing the goal line call, is it just irrelevant to everyone that the Steelers had a down left? The chances of them not getting one inch are like 2 percent. The same people who say without hesitation that, but for the holding later in the game, Seattle would have scored a touchdown from the 3, seem to be the same ones saying that Pittsburgh wouldn't have scored from the one inch line.

[Edited by rulesmaven on Feb 9th, 2006 at 07:22 PM]

[ABoselli]

What position do you mainly work, Carolina RRRef?

[Sonofanump]

Has there been any explaination for the Hasselbach BBW foul? That is the only one that I do not understand why it was called.

Being a wing (LOS NF, Deep NCAA) at all levels, I want to make sure that I understand the rule and when to use it.

I believe the spirit of the rule is to not allow players to take out blockers in the open field, but if the tackler goes through the blocker below the waist to take the carrier down, I personally would have a hard time calling it.

But I am not sure of the extent of the contact (photo anyone?) with the blocker.

[JasonTX]

Originally posted by Sonofanump
Has there been any explaination for the Hasselbach BBW foul? That is the only one that I do not understand why it was called.

Being a wing (LOS NF, Deep NCAA) at all levels, I want to make sure that I understand the rule and when to use it.

I believe the spirit of the rule is to not allow players to take out blockers in the open field, but if the tackler goes through the blocker below the waist to take the carrier down, I personally would have a hard time calling it.

But I am not sure of the extent of the contact (photo anyone?) with the blocker.

I remember that this exact foul happened late in the regular season. The QB threw an Int and then took out the blocker below the waist, even though it appeared he was attempting to make the tackle. A flag was thrown and the NFL made their announcement that there wasn't any exception to the foul even if he was attempting to make a tackle. In the Super Bowl play my only guess is he must have thought that there was contact against another player. I'd personally like to see the play posted on here just for us to learn from it and discuss the mechanics.

[Texas Aggie]

I saw the hold real time, and said outloud: "that's holding; I wonder if he (R) saw it." When either Michaels said there was a flag or a yellow "flag" came up on screen, I did my holding call and a split second later, so did the R!

There was no question it was a hold.

Didn't see the OPI, so the BBW (are we SURE that's what was called??) and the Seattle reception/fumble that was blown incomplete were missed, while the TD was inconclusive.