Dallas vs. Seattle
 

OK, yes --- 99% of the time here, I'm an official. For this thread, call me fanboy if you want.

That said... did you guys see the reviewed pass to Terry Glenn around the 2 yard line? It appeared to me to be a very obvious non-catch. The ball hit his hands, was not controlled, went to the ground, where Glenn used the contact with the ground to retain control (a little - still not sure he really had it even after it hit the ground), and then immediately fumble.

While watching it, I was glad to see the play reviewed. I was not even worried about it - I knew it would be fixed. When the fix turned out to be the change of a TD to a safety (which turned out to be worse for the Boys, actually), I was shocked. I'm not sure when I crossed over from being able to rule objectively on the play, but I definitely don't feel very objective about it right now.

What say you - who saw it, and what did you think?

I say you were viewing that play through Texas-colored glasses. :D

My initial thought before seeing the replays was that there was a possibility that the play would be ruled incomplete for the exact reason you stated. But then after the replays I thought it was obvious that Glenn controlled the ball while standing, attempted to tuck the ball away, slipped, his bottom hand hit the turf (left hand I think), and then he got up.

I thought that play was called correctly, after replay.

What I couldn't believe was why did Parcels have Romo as the place kick holder if he wasn't going to fake the field goal? Isn't that the back-up quarterback's job usually?

In the NFL, can they attempt a field goal on 3rd down and again on 4th down if it misses?

They changed the rule a few years ago. It used to be if you kicked prior to 4th down and it was blocked and the K-team recovered behind the LOS they could continue with their series. Now, once they attempt their kick, they lose their series of downs, unless of course, someone pulls a Leon Lett in which case it's treated like a muffed punt.

Romo, was the holder because he started the season as the backup qb, which as was pointed out above is usually the holder.....even more unusual than having the starting qb be the holder (1 team this year...the broncos while plummer was starting) is changing the holder in the middle of the year, thus romo as the holder......if this play had occured on 3rd down, they would have had the opportunity to try it again as there was no legal kick attempted

Why is no one questioning the review of the spot near the 1 yard line? Has anyone ever seen a review of a quarterback sneak that is within inches of reaching the line to gain? The camera angles just aren't that perfect to make those determinations. In this case, I think they probably got the call right, but I do have a problem with the use of replay in that situation.

My problem on the review at that 1 1/2 is a) I don't think there was an angle that gave "indisputable evidence" that he didn't achieve the line to gain and b) Even without "indisputable evidence", I think (best guess from the replays we did see) they missed it by at least 2 feet. At WORST, Witten made it a few inches short of the 1.

They determined Witten's progress by the fact that he was parrallel to the sideline, with his left shoulder making the deepest penetration, which was only the 1-yd line (at best) and the ball stayed outside his right shoulder/hip the entire time it was in his possession.

I'm TE-sized (6'5"/265lbs) and it's at least 24" (2/3 of a yd) from shoulder-to-shoulder and I'm not wearing shoulder pads. I knew from the live action view of the play that the official gave Witten way too much progress. I was screaming for a replay immediately.

Honestly, I thought the initial ruling was too far forward as well. But I disagree with your assessment. Before he was turned around, his right side was further forward than his left. While it's possible he did not reach the LTG, I think he was AWFULLY close to it before he got turned. The viewpoint from the sideline was the clearest, and that's the one you describe. But the viewpoint from about the goalpost appeared to have him closer before he rolled sideways.

The initial ruling was that Whitten got about a half or so yard ahead of the line to gain, and that was probably too much. However, the ruling that placed the ball a half yard behind the line to gain after the replay was equally incorrect. He go ABOUT to the line to gain (give/take 6 inches), and the ball should have been put there for measurement.

The other problem was that they didn't really take a look and possibly measure Romo's advance either and he *might* have gotten very close to the first down spot. Had the replay taken the time they took on the previous play, it would have been very interesting.

That's the problem with replay. Under its best use, its still very inconsistent.

More like <b>whineboy</b>.

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...ight=Mavericks

Nothing changes with you. 99% of the time you're a fanboy. 1% of the time you're an official. If a Dallas team loses, it's the officials' fault.

Can you please point out where in this or the one other thread you referenced that said anything about a loss being the officials' fault?

NFL officials use a mechanic (and our FED crew is now using it as well) where they start a new set of downs with the nose of the ball touching a yard line. With the perfect lines on an NFL field you can be guaranteed of judgement without measurements if the nose of the ball is reaching the line to gain.

If that was the case here, the crew knew the ball had to reach the 1 to be a first down. I thought the same thing as BadNewsRef. He was pretty much straight-up with the ball in the arm furthest from the end zone and his feet never crossed the one. What this tells you is he never reached the line to gain. Whether it's 1 inch or 18 inches from the line is irrelevant. He was still short.

That being said, I thought it was pretty bold of the referee to overturn the spot. That was a very big spot in a very big game and you had better be 110% certain the spot was wrong. I guess it actually helped Dallas in a strange way. Had they given him the first down, they would have run the clock down to 4 seconds left and missed the field goal (assuming the same misfortune for TR) with no chance for a Hail Mary at the end. Terry Glenn was open at the back of the end zone and any tip would have resulted in a TD and win for Dallas. Just an odd twist to the play. What an amazing finish! I feel for your mcrowder.

Iirc correctly, there were a couple of other Mavericks fans whining about the officials too. Guess who?:rolleyes:

Coming on here to ask for impartial thoughts from this group regarding officiating in a game where we feel we may not be impartial does not mean we are "blaming a loss on the officials". Far from it. I could name 10 reasons the Cowboys lost the Seattle game, and would never mention anything about the officiating. I could name 5 other reasons they are out of the playoffs (meaning ... reasons they were playing the Seahawks in the first place instead of sitting at home watching Philly play Seattle).

I simply wondered how the impartial official saw the play. I certainly am not going to get an impartial view at the water cooler around here. I thought the officials did a great job in the game, to be honest (as usual for the NFL). I just wanted to hear national thoughts on the play I had a question on.

JR: did your most recent post attempt to answer this question?

If so, it didn't. Can you please try again?

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...ight=Mavericks

See the post from June 22, 2006 @ 3:01pm.

<i>"Yes I'm from Dallas and I'm a Maverick fan".

"But this series was just <b>bad</b>. Your defense of these <b>very one-sided mistakes</b> is simply either blind obedience or just stupid stubborness. Refusal to recognize what are <b>obviously bad calls</b> doesn't help anyone"

"Surely at a minimum, you "experts" in the field can at least recognize that in this particular case, <b>the inevitable mistakes did happen to go the Heat's way more than it's FAIR SHARE</b>".</i>

"Bad"? "Very one-sided mistakes"? "Obviously bad calls"? "Go the Heat's way more than it's fair share"? And all this is from a guy that's supposed to be a devoted football and baseball umpire but admits that he has never officiated a basketball game in his life and doesn't know the rules.

I can track some more down if you want. I can also dig up some quotes from some other Dallas fanboys too.

If you fanboys want to crap on the officials, hey, be my guest. Just don't intimate that you've got more credibility because you happen to officiate a sport. You don't. You're fanboys first and officials second.

That's my point, like it or not.

You're an idiot. Other nouns come to mind as well, but are not fit for this forum. Adjectives do as well - I'll leave them to your imagination.

THIS post was intended to try to get an unbiased opinion on a play that bothered me - from a fan's point of view. I completely admitted that I was likely biased, and in fact it was that bias that led me to try to get an impartial viewpoint from folks I respect (a group that most pointedly does not include you).

In the basketball posts, again, I fully admit that not only was I a biased fan WRT that particular game, but also that I was not an official of that sport, and was wanting to discuss what I saw as an injustice with people who I admit probably knew better than I. But even in that thread (where I did and still do feel like (intent or not --- probably not) the bulk of the questionable calls went in one direction), I never stated (or felt, or thought) that the "refs cost us the game." The Mavs lost that series because they got cocky and complacent. Period. But if you could watch that particular series objectively (you can't... for some reason, the fact that you are an official in 3 sports leads you to believe that no official anywhere ever makes a mistake), then you should be able to admit that the documented mistaken calls DID, in fact, go more against one team than the other. It's unfortunate, but it happens. The statement you quote above was in rebuttal to one of your many absurd posts saying that anyone who ever had the temerity to even mildly disagree with even a single call was a blind fool.

I tire of your idiocy. You spread it across 3 boards. At least you're consistent - you are a moron on all 3. Always have been. You contribute nothing. You never post anything constructive. You're sole purpose seems to be starting fights. Now I finally find a use for the ignore feature if I can get it working. I'm done with you.

Anyone wishing to contribute to the discussion, please do so. I asked an honest question. Until JR derailed the discussion (as per usual), I got honest answers from people whose opinions I've come to respect, and I thank you all for that.

I might be an idiot, but I'm an idiot with some integrity.

'Nuff said, fanboy.

Careful with that integrity stuff...mcrowder - aren't you the same one who jumped all over a HS football coach earlier this fall on this same discussion board? I seem to remeber that the coach asked whether a play was legal or not, found out it wasn't and said it would not be used and you felt the need to to insult that coach and tell him he had no integrity...hmmm - yet you think NBA officials purposely made calls that favored Miami. And you think the best football officials in the country screwed up and that let Seattle win. Guess I'd rather be an idiot of JR's caliber than yours...

Back to the play in question.

www.nfl.com/video


Mike Pereira says the officials got it right.

Are you ever going to let it go, fanboy? Seven months later and it's still the official's fault?

Rockyroad, the above tells you all that you need to know about his own integrity. I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep over anything he says. Consider the source.

It must have been a "make-up" call for screwing Seattle over in the last Super Bowl, right? :rolleyes:

Seattle screwed themselves in that last Super Bowl...

While I think one can obviously disagree with those statements from either an unbiased (officials; supposedly) or biased (fan/Heat fan) perspective, it still doesn't doesn't rise to the level of the "loss being the officials' fault."

There's a lot of reasons why the Mavs lost. None of the reasons include being the "officials' fault," but that doesn't mean there weren't problems with the officiating in the finals. Most or virtually all of that can be attributed to the NBA and not the officials themselves, but criticizing the officiating doesn't make one a "fanboy." Calling him such, without dealing with his points specifically, makes you, JR, look foolish. You'd rather, it appears, deal with ad hominem than the points at hand. And contrary to your assertion, integrity has nothing to do with any of it.

You and mcrowder are two of a kind, TEX. Blame the officials when your team loses. Fanboys first.

Please don't mention integrity. You two and integrity don't dwell in the same neighborhood.

Yes, careful with that integrity stuff, rocky. :)

You might have to regurgitate quotes for us if I said something that contradicts this ... but if memory serves, I did jump all over a coach for saying that he DID run a play that we summarily told him was not legal. I believe (again ... if memory serves) that there was some confusion in that he said "We run this play ..." and then later said, "I never said we actually RAN the play". Anyway, I had a problem with him saying he ran a play that was not just illegal, but was likely created from an unethical frame of mind.

But what does that have to do with MY integrity?

And no ... I never said I believe there was any INTENT on the part of the officials to throw the game from the Mavericks. No thought along those lines even popped into my little brain. I was not trying to claim they intentionally cheated. I was trying to say that it seemed rather obvious that there were a fair share of really bad calls, and that of those ACTUAL CALLS, the preponderence of the bad ones seemed to go against the Mavs. Again - the difference being that I was not (am still not) saying the referees did that on purpose - just that it turned out that way. There were people on there (JR, for one) who had their blinders on or simply chose to be obtuse, and refused to admit that there were any missed calls ... much less that those missed calls seemed to hurt the Mavs more than the Heat.

I am pretty comfortable saying that by and large the overwhelming majority of officials do the best jobs they can, call what they see, and have no bias. And that percentage escalates as you get into the higher ranks. There ARE exceptions (for example, even though I'm a Texas fan, and hate the Sooners, I still actually believe that there was an inherent bias in place in the OU-OU replay booth, and I truly have a problem with the PROCESS that puts such possibilities in place), but they are rare.

THIS thread was supposed to be about the Terry Glenn "fumble". Being the token official in my office, I was bombarded by Cowboy fan coworkers wondering why there was no real discussion of whether he caught the ball or not ... which is why I asked you guys here what you saw. If that somehow shows a lack of integrity on my part, I guess I'll have to go study the dictionary some more, as I clearly don't understand the definition of the word.

http://www.dictionary.com/

Personally, I don't think that it's gonna help you, but give it a try.

And as was pointed out in that long ago thread, teams "RUN" plays in practice, no? Isn't that what happens? Coach tells offense to line up and "RUN" play such-and-such...part of integrity (adherence to a code of especially moral values) is realizing when one makes a mistake and admitting that - you chose then and in other threads to blast away at people you don't even know...and when that blasting turns toward other officials, you are surprised when someone calls you on it...