Questioning Integrity of Officials & League

[Forksref]

Baseball certainly is different than other sports. It must be tradition that allows players to berate umpires 6" from their face. Also, it seems kinda strange that managers and coaches, who are not active players, wear the uniform. Is this a requirement? It seems that I saw footage of Connie Mack managing in a suit. I am sure glad that basketball coaches don't have to wear the uniform. (I am thinking of you, Rick Majerus and Red Auerbach.) And Tom Landry looked better in a suit and fedora

And... as was mentioned above, really no penalty except ejection for unsportsmanlike acts.

Baseball is so ingrained in me that I guess I just accept these differences.

[jaybird]

Also, it seems kinda strange that managers and coaches, who are not active players, wear the uniform. Is this a requirement?

Yes, at virtually all levels.

[HLin NC]

I went back and watched Mile Pereira's comments from the NFL Network on NFL.com. I'm paraphrasing here but the topic for this week was indeed all from the Ravens-Pats game-

Topic 1- Coaches calling time-out. HC or player is supposed to be the only one to call a TO. However, the NFL has a policy of last second request which concedes that an official can not look to see who is calling a TO at the last moment before a snap and therefore lets anyone on the sideline ask an official for a TO. He did state this rule may need "tweaking".
This theory is the exact opposite of what we are taught as Fed officials, which is when the snap is imminent, we are NOT to look away to discern who is calling a timeout or kill it.

Topic 2- Winborn Hold - In opposition to the "let'em play" theory, he said that the preferred course is to call the game at the end like you would at the beginning. The hold was still on 10 yards from the LOS and thus needed to be called.

opic 3- Gaffney Catch - He notes that the palms come off the ball but never the fingers. That in a play such as this, the referee is probably going to have to stick with whatever call was originally made by the covering official.

Topic 4- Ravens aftermath - He did not discuss the two USC's on Scott so to me, apparently, this is a non-issue. He did comment on the post-game comments by Rolle that the HL used a slur. He said that the reports he received have differed from what the Ravens players have reported and that he is in the process of gathering all the info to pass on up to whoever is going to make decisions on the issue. He did state that the officials are instructed that they need to be professional and try to walk away from these things but at some point IT IS DIFFICULT.

As for ejections, I believe the NCAA allows for the ejection of players but not coaches. Our college friends can correct me but I thought I was told or read somewhere that a college coach can dog-cuss you all day long and its only going to get him USC's.
According to the NFL's on line digest of rules, USC can be an ejection if flagrant. The only automatic ejections are for swinging a helmet as a weapon and striking/intentional shoving of a game official. http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/penaltysummaries

While Scott's act was certainly flagrant, I guess the official deemed 30 yards of penalties sufficient AND considering the Pats scored and Scott was probably not coming back on the field anyway.

[Warrenkicker]

Everyone keeps talking about the holding near the end zone on 4th down. I think it was the right call. But even if you don't like that call there was pass interference after it by 26 I think. He played through the receiver just before the ball got there. So if you don't like the hold call there still was a foul on the play.

As for why Scott was not ejected and why the NFL doesn't have automatic ejection criteria, I think it is because of the limited team size. The NFL ejects players for fighting but for just talking back there was no harm to the other team. Fighting means you get to sit and get a fine. Talking back may get you a fine but doesn't also cost your team one of its limited number of players. To have a starter ejected may affect the outcome of the game. The NFL is more than happy to deal with players Tuesday morning.

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by HLin NC

Topic 1- Coaches calling time-out. HC or player is supposed to be the only one to call a TO. However, the NFL has a policy of last second request which concedes that an official can not look to see who is calling a TO at the last moment before a snap and therefore lets anyone on the sideline ask an official for a TO. He did state this rule may need "tweaking".
This theory is the exact opposite of what we are taught as Fed officials, which is when the snap is imminent, we are NOT to look away to discern who is calling a timeout or kill it.

Situational officiating here, too - by the end of the game, if you're a wing, you (hopefully) can recognize the head coach's voice, but I will usually say "Coach, I'm going to be listening for you and you only if you want to call a time out here (or soon)." Knowing the game and knowing when a time out is likely or can possibly come can help you prepare for this. Of course, we don't have to deal with trying to pick out one voice with 70,000 other people screaming at the same time - but when I'm a wing, I'll often try to make sure I know where the head coach is (often he'll be near me anyway depending on where the LOS is) so that if I hear a time out call coming from the other direction, I know it wasn't him who called it and I'll ignore it.

He did state that the officials are instructed that they need to be professional and try to walk away from these things but at some point IT IS DIFFICULT.

Boy, howdy.

One reason I loved loved LOVED moving to back judge this past season.

Originally Posted by Warrenkicker

As for why Scott was not ejected and why the NFL doesn't have automatic ejection criteria, I think it is because of the limited team size. The NFL ejects players for fighting but for just talking back there was no harm to the other team. Fighting means you get to sit and get a fine. Talking back may get you a fine but doesn't also cost your team one of its limited number of players.

"Limited number of players?" Some NFL teams have or have had guys whose only job is to kick off. To paraphrase Robin Williams, that's God's way of letting you know you have too many roster spots.

(Grumpy old man) Anybody remember "40 for 60?" with Joe Kapp and company?(/Grumpy old man)

My, how times have changed.

[sj]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3145369

[Ed Hickland]

Fines, Just Fines!

These guys set aside money for fines. Get them where it hurts, suspensions.

[PS2Man]

That is a lot of money in fines. I can tell you that hurt big time more than you will ever know. In some cases they lost almost a whole game check with those fines. Not everyone makes millions of dollars playing football.

[Warrenkicker]

Originally Posted by OverAndBack

"Limited number of players?" Some NFL teams have or have had guys whose only job is to kick off. To paraphrase Robin Williams, that's God's way of letting you know you have too many roster spots.

Well you might want to talk to Indianapolis if their roster size is large enough. I seem to remember that in one game they only brought 17 offensive players to the game due to injuries.

And the reason some teams employ an extra player just to kick off is because field position is so important. In fact I was that extra player in my time in college. We had a limit of 60 for the travel squad, conference rules, and the coaching staff would have rather had that position for a more used player but because of the different abilities of kicker it may take three to do all the jobs needed on one night.

And even though I think Robin Williams is very funny I don't think I want to go around quoting him regarding football coaching theory. He may have been on the goal post at Colorado State in the opening to Mork and Mindy but I'm guessing he didn't learn much about football that day.

[TXMike]

Bart Scott gets over $7.5 million a year. His fine is equal to 1/3 of 1%. If you make $100,000 the equivalent would be $333, not much more than a bad speeding ticket.

Samari Rolle makes over $3 million a year. His fine is equal to 1/2 of 1% , That equates to about $500 if you make $100,000 a year.

Chris McAlister makes $5.5 million a year. His fine is equal to 1/3 of 1% and you know what that rquivalent is already.

Derrick Mason makes $3 million so he is in same boat as Rolle.

This would be laughable if not so sad. The NFL just does not get it.

[sj]

Perhaps the fines should be split among the crew that worked the game or even the whole roster of NFL officials. That might be a bit more of a disincentive.

[PS2Man]

You make it sound like that is all the money they take home. That money is taxed, not guaranteed and they have other expenses like agents and other things that $25,000 could go for. As far as I know these guys are not repeat offenders. I also do not know many fines that exceed these amounts for first time offenses. I know many would like to think a fine of $500,000 would be better, but I am sure there are some collective bargaining issues that would prevent a fine much bigger than what they received.

[Ed Hickland]

Originally Posted by TXMike

Bart Scott gets over $7.5 million a year. His fine is equal to 1/3 of 1%. If you make $100,000 the equivalent would be $333, not much more than a bad speeding ticket.

Samari Rolle makes over $3 million a year. His fine is equal to 1/2 of 1% , That equates to about $500 if you make $100,000 a year.

Chris McAlister makes $5.5 million a year. His fine is equal to 1/3 of 1% and you know what that rquivalent is already.

Derrick Mason makes $3 million so he is in same boat as Rolle.

This would be laughable if not so sad. The NFL just does not get it.

Lets do the math. NFL players get 17 checks.

Bart Scott - $441,176.47 - $25,000 = $416,176.47
Samari Rolle - $176,470.59 - $15,000 = $161,470.59
Chris McAllister - $323,529.41 - $15,000 = $308,529.41
Derrick Mason - $176,470.59 - $15,000 = 161,470.59

Ouch! That hurts. A small bandage will easily cover that wound.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by PS2Man

That money is taxed, not guaranteed and they have other expenses like agents and other things that $25,000 could go for.

Afaik, fines are tax deductible too. I know that Charles Barkley commented on all of the NBA fines he accumulated one season by saying that it was the same as giving money to charity because he could deduct it. Comments?

[OverAndBack]

Originally Posted by Warrenkicker

Well you might want to talk to Indianapolis if their roster size is large enough. I seem to remember that in one game they only brought 17 offensive players to the game due to injuries.

Amazing how football teams survived for years with 40 guys.

And the reason some teams employ an extra player just to kick off is because field position is so important.

Again, amazing how much more important it is now than in the 70 years of pro football prior to 1990.

What do you think the difference in average field position after a kickoff is between the teams who have a guy who only kicks off and the teams who have their regular kicker do it? Significant enough to justify the roster spot?

And even though I think Robin Williams is very funny I don't think I want to go around quoting him regarding football coaching theory. He may have been on the goal post at Colorado State in the opening to Mork and Mindy but I'm guessing he didn't learn much about football that day.

You do know what a paraphrase is, right? He wasn't talking about football. I was adopting something he said about...oh, never mind.