Questioning Integrity of Officials & League
 

Below are some comments from a couple of Baltimore Ravens players after Monday nights game against the Patriots...

McAlister said, ... “ It’s hard to go out there and play the Patriots and the refs at the same time... They put the crown on top of them, they want them to win"

Rolle said. "...They're not asking the refs to help them, but it's just an empty feeling."

Other Raven players were telling reporters that the NFL wants the Patriots to win because it sells more tickets and that the league is instructing the referees to give New England the benefit of the doubt on close calls so that they can remain undefeated

Also, Raven player Scott picked up an official's flag and hurled it into the stands

Baseball obviously handles the above situations differently than football.

1. Questioning the ingretity of an umpire and/or MLB is an automatic ejection (if done during the game) and an immediate fine and suspension if done publicly through the media (the league dishes out its punishment within 24 hours on these type of matters - I think the NBA handles it in a similar fashion)

2. I can't believe the player who throw the flag in the stands was not ejected IMMEDIATELY. How much more can you disrespect an official than what that idiot did? Also, what kind of precedent does that send to other players in the league - are they going to be able to get away with that? And no, penalizing a player, I don't care how many yards, does not take care of the problem

3. Here we are, 48 hours after these comments, and the NFL has done absolutely nothing to back it's officials. That is SAD!!!! McAllister, Rolle & Scott should have been fined and suspended for their comments/actions on Tuesday

4. As for the "Boy" comment - this should be dealt with separately. With this type of matter, it usually takes a little longer to get all of the details. I would imagine that this official will probably be suspended for a certain amount of games and probably deservedly so.

Can you football guys help this ignorant baseball umpire understand why things were handled so poorly - both by the referee who did not throw Scott out of the game and the NFL for not immediately handing out suspensions and fines for the integrity comments?????

Let me qualify my statement by saying I did not see this live. I turned back to the game after all of this had happen. First of all the comments you just mentioned were not things that were said during the game. These were things said in the locker room. So to say there should have been an "automatic" ejection does not even apply. And from what I understand it is hard to know what was said on the field. And for the record fines and suspensions are common in the NFL without action being taken by officials. It happens much more in the NFL than I have ever heard done in other sports.

All I will say is I did not see if there was an ejection. But what I understand is he did not play anymore and received two unsportsmanlike penalties. From what I understand in football there is not a 2 and out limit with unsportsmanlike penalties, but you can be ejected. I am not sure if that happen here or not.

We do not know what they have or will do. The issue is definitely being investigated. We just do not know what the action will be. There will be action, it is just under review. The NFL talks their time on these issues.

Once again this is under investigation. I can tell you that this is a little different because that will involve what happens to the officials. The same individual that would fine or suspend the officials is not the same people that fine and suspend players. Different "departments" that take care of those issues and who they fine and suspend in the NFL.

I am a football and baseball official. The sports are different for many reasons. For one there is no equivalent for penalties in baseball like there are in football. Penalties can cost series yardage and can change the complexion of the game. All that happens to a team in baseball is an ejection. Which I would argue does nothing. All they do in baseball is getting rid of the player from the game instead of awarding a game penalty. You do not award bases or give runs for an unsportsmanlike act in baseball. You do award significant yardage in football and as it did the penalties help the Ravens lose the game. And I really do not know that MLB does a better job in handing in fines and suspensions. I know it takes days to bring down fines and suspensions in baseball and they can play as they decide to appeal the punishment. Last year when a player stepped on the face of another player, this player lost about 6 games or a quarter of the entire season. In some cases when players get suspended in baseball they do not miss that much time and in some cases it is minor compared to what happens in football. I think you need to put some things in perspective about how penalties are handed out. If anything players in the NFL get fined from how they do not wear their uniform to hits that are not penalized. A MLB player can curse out an umpire and they will play the next day and not ever get suspended unless they go so over the top the league feels like they should do something.

Peace

Thanks Rut - since you work both sports, your input is what I was looking for. Frankly, I'm surprised more people in this football section are not discussing this topic as it relates to the treatment of officials.

In reply, I realize that the comments regarding the integrity of the officials and the league were made AFTER the game. However, since those comments appeared in every major newspaper, TV and radio stations across the US on Tuesday, I don't understand what the NFL is "investigating". Allowing players to openly question the integrity of officials as well as the ethics of the league undermines the backbone of the sport and that has to be dealt with SWIFTLY and SEVERLY


As for Baltimore's Scott throwing the flag into the stands, that SHOULD have been an AUTOMATIC, IMMEDIATE ejection and no one will convince me otherise. And I know he was not ejected because he remained on the sideline and never left the field. I don't care how many yards he was penalized, he has got to go for that... PERIOD! Moreover, because Mr White Hat did not take care of business, it will only be a matter of time before some other idiot does the same thing and then what... he has screwed his fellow referees because he set a bad precident by allowing a player to do that and still remain in the game. That looks bad - REAL BAD now doesn't it?

I understand that the different sports handle on field actions differently - mainly because football has USC penalties and basketball has technical fouls they can hand out to diffuse situations. However, when a player crosses the line as bad as Scott did, an ejection has to be given or else an official will lose credibility and appear as "soft". Now I'm not saying you have to be a red a$$, but come on, what he did was totally unacceptable and ONLY punishable, IMO, with automatic EJECTION.

I think if you wait to see what the fines or suspensions might be, you might feel differently. You are just talking about 2 days from the incident. It is not like they waited a week and nothing is being done. My understanding the league will wait until sometime tomorrow to take whatever action will be taken. For all you know Scott might be suspended a couple of games. You do not know.

Once again I think officials know the league will take action. Once again, I do not see this as a big deal. And I have never seen MLB make a big deal about an ejection (and they get in the faces of umpires all the time) unless the player or coach does not leave in a timely manner. And even when they throw stuff they do not lose games. I have seen umpires contacted and it takes time for them to suspend the person for 1 game.

This is the difference between baseball umpires and other sports. Baseball umpires are worried about being called soft. I can tell you that as a basketball official the last thing I am ever worried about is being called soft. As a basketball official trying to be a “tough guy” can go against you rather fast. And as a football official it does not even cross my mind. If you look at NFL particularly they fine the hell out of their players for all kinds of stuff. And I do not think the officials have to worry about credibility when players and coaches are fined big time for what they say in the media and how they act on or off the field. Michael Vick was not even convicted of anything and he was already suspended. I have never heard of a player in baseball even suspended for a DUI let alone anything they do on the field towards and umpire. So relax. I think the reason you do not see anyone talking about this, is because it is not that big of a deal.

Peace

I'm sure they are addressing all of it and want to get it right. Perhaps they just need time.

The Big Deal is that Scott was not IMMEDIATELY ejected from the game for what he did. Do you think picking up an officials flag and throwing it in the stands should NOT result in an ejection from the current game? Come on Rut


Ask Joey Crawford about that ;) -

I think you bring up a good point here. Personally, I've always admired how basketball referees and football sideline officials seems so composed when players and coaches are screaming in the ear. Even when they throw a flag or give a T, they always seem to be under control.

I think MLB umpires are moving in that direction. Those days of the Earl Weaver/Billy Martin animated arguments are soon coming to in end because umpires are now just walking away. I think discussions on the baseball field will still get heated from time to time, but umpires will now do more things to difuse the situation rather than escalate the arguments.

I'm not really concerned with all of the off the field troubles that athletes get into. However, I do feel it's a big deal when they go to the media and say that the Refs are purposely cheating and the NFL is "fixing" games. Considering the amount of money that is wagered on games and the whole Donahay betting scandal - the last thing football needs is players coming up conspiracy theories and telling evey media outlet how crooked the officials are. Just my opinion - I'll take a chill pill now :D

OK. The NFL is different than other levels I work. When I work the NFL I will worry about what should have been done. ;)

If you have not noticed, Joey Crawford was suspended last year from the NBA for being overly aggressive (right or wrong). And you do not see what goes on in the NBA apply to other levels. You do not see big time D1 Officials challenging players and coaches. They do not need to. And showing your a tough guy does not work very well.

That behavior is expected.

I would agree the pushing and shoving matches are not common. But you still see umpires willing to get in the face of the players when and ejection takes place. Why not just walk away and let the coach or player make a complete azz of themselves?

OK that is fine, but the NFL has and will punish players for that. Neither of us knows the penalties that are coming or not coming. And if you have not noticed, players in all sports come up with theories of conspiracies and think the officials are out to get them. All you have to do is get on a chat room to figure that out.

Peace

I'm not sure I follow you on this.... Do you think he should have been ejected or was a 30 yard penalty acessed on the kick off punishment enough? If you want to see the video, I'm sure you can google it but I would hope that you realize that an ejection is the only way to go


My comment about Joey Crawford was sarcastic. I totally agree with you about being overly agressive. Crawford's always been a hot head and I think he went overboard and Stern gave him a little "reality check". I'm glad he got a second chance because he's a good official and I bet he learned a lot from that situation. IMO, NBA players show the most disrespect towards officials than players in the NFL, MLB or NHL.


I agree that they should eject if necessary, then walk away. I think MLB has put an emphasis on getting away from the head bobbing arguments and moving towards more lower key discussions. The trend will continue to go in this direction: a classic example of this was the Lou Pinella - Mark Wegner confrontation this past season. For a baseball argument of that magnitude, I thought Wegner handled himself well and did not let Lou's shinanigans get the best of him.

I think the Ravens could have used those 30 yards considering that they lost the game by a couple of yards away from the EZ. You tell me if that hurt them enough?

Peace

I think you're missing the point Jeff. The Ref made a poor choice by not ejecting him from the game. Regardless if the penalty yards hurt the Ravens more or less, I feel, and I'm sure all of the other football officials on this site think the same way, that the ONLY option for an act of this nature is an ejection. You simply can not allow a player that does this to remain in the game. Why are you struggling with this? Isn't it obvious to you?

I am not missing anything and I am not trying to make a point. I personally do not care if he was thrown out or not. That is based on the philosophies of the NFL and their officials. I do not make a habit of trying to second guess officials I see on TV when I did not hear what was said and the league is not paying me to work the game. And you cannot use standards of amateur sports and apply them to the pro game. You never can. This is why what you see MLB Umpires do would get you fired at other levels. I personally could give a damn. They lost the game and largely did so because their team imploded at the end. Why do you care why I do not care? And if you have not noticed, I am the only person really talking to you about this. That should tell you something about the outrage. If I was not bored I might not be talking to you either. ;)

Peace

Alright, Alright - I give up. I'm not trying to second guess NFL Officials either. Actually, just trying to get a better understanding for their thought process. As I said, I only work baseball (I have a hard enought time with balls/strikes & safes/outs - I can't imagine trying to call holding, illegal formation etc). However, I think we can all learn from each others' experiences and if I can pick something up from an official from a different sport and apply it to mine, then that's a good thing. Thanks for your thoughts

He was not ejected probably because under NFL rules it was not an ejectable offense. They let a lot of things go under the guise of "entertainment."

Really? Now that's interesting. I'm not sure I would classify Scott's act as entertainment, but if it's not an ejectable offense - then maybe the 30 yard penalty was the only other option. Thanks for your input

I know in college and NF ball, 2 unsportsmanlike conduct flags is an ejection. The NFL doesn't have that? Do they even have a limit? If not, then what the h*ll good is an unsportsmanlike conduct flag to start with?

If their limit was two, he would have been ejected. In football, an ejected player doesn't have to leave the confines of the field until an intermission or the end of the game. They're just not allowed back on the field. (Correct me if I'm wrong on that)

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.

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.

Official review
 

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.

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.

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.

Boy, howdy.

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

"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.

Fines, Just Fines!

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

Amazing how football teams survived for years with 40 guys.

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?

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

Apparently it is for some. Back in the day when they used to be able to kick off of the 3" tee the goal was not to have touchbacks. They wanted the ball in the air as long as possible but to come down inside the 5 so that it had to be returned. Then they eliminated the tee, well made it hold the ball so that the ball was touching the ground, backed up the kick off, and went to kicking-only balls. All of these changes happened since the third kicker came into existence.

The skill level of all players has greatly advanced over just ten years prior. If you look at the all-time list of field goal percentage you will find it dominated by current or very recently retired players. In fact Jan Stenerud, the only kicker-only player in there, would have no chance getting into the Hall of Fame today.

Points are so valuable that whenever a team is close enough to kick a field goal they must make it. So no matter how well a kicker can kick off a team will almost always take the kicker that can score points. However field position is also so important that if they can gain 10 yards every time they kick off it is worth a roster spot.

This is far more common in college as they have 85 scholarships to work with. It is the only reason I have 4 letters from college. The other guy may have never kicked a touchback if he had been doing it but I had touchbacks 40% of the time. Knowing I was going to the road games anyway they also made me the back-up punter so as to not have to have another player traveling. It even got to where I was the starting holder for 6 games, the starting kick off guy, and the back-up field goal kicker.

The precedent sent is that your team will be penalized "to the hilt" and ultimately cost them a game which depending upon the year could mean the difference between making the playoffs or not.

How would like to be the player that has to face his teammates because they lost a tie-breaker which meant no playoffs becuase of his "bone-head" move.

I am a baseball official and I wish baseball had another penalty other then ejection for some antics that are displayed.

A similar comparison to a football player throwing an officials flag is when a baseball player dislikes a strike call by the PU and draws lines.

Both acts are meant to show-up the official, however, in football you can penalize the team severly. With all that happened, the Ravens still had a very good chance to tie the game if they were not penalized 35 yards. (30 for unsportsmanlike and during the extra point 5 more for offsides) With the wind the way it was, chances are they would have had a decent run back. There were some 44-48 seconds left and one TO left. They only trailed by 3 so they didn't need a TD.

In baseball we cannot TRULY penalize the team for unsportmanlike acts as in basketball / football. Yeah it would be nice with say 2 outs and a player draws a line and we say TIME - That's out number 3. IMO, a better way to handle things then a simple ejection.

Therefore, it's difficult to compare baseball officials to other officials when it comes to EJ's because as mentioned in baseball the TEAM does not suffer other than if the player EJ'D is their Ace F1 or number 1/2 hitter.

Pete Booth

questioning of integrity
 

After years of officiating at various levels my integrity is always on display each time I work a game.

All of us should be transparent on the field while the game is underway and our actions should only be "reactions" to the events we witness.

I have no problem when coaches or the fans question my integrity, although I never will allow a player to do so - their only job is to play.

Hide nothing, fear nothing and reveal everything on the field is the motto I have employed throughout the decades of officiating.

My personal opinion has no outlet during the contest, although I allow it to breathe after the game is over.

:confused: