I'm trying to find a clip of the play as I didn't see it...from what I've read, it sounds as if the ball was nowhere near the goal line. There was no penalty on the play (such as a kicking team player being the first to touch the ball after going OOB (illegal touching) with the touch occurring inside the 5...which in the NFL would mean a touchback would be awarded), and there was only one kicking team member in the end zone, but he was nowhere close to the ball.

Here's the play:

NFL Videos: Referee gaffe in Buffalo

The bargaining power of any union is always proportional to the degree of skill and the quality of work that it can provide compared to any replacements. That is why, for example, auto and mechanics, police and firefighters unions are traditionally very strong, while unions for jobs that can be easily replaced such as janitors and unskilled line workers are comparatively weak.
When "replacements" are adequately skilled off the street to perform similar work with less training than the cost of negotiating, then the union really has no choice but to capitulate, and the members must accept that they either need to develop greater skill to justify increased wages* or accept that they can be replaced quickly. Fortunately, in many ways, this is an individual choice. But when the union can prove that it promotes the skills and quality of work that the owners need in order to succeed, then it can frequently win enormous concessions, and secure a healthy relationship that benefits all the parties (workers, owners, stakeholders and customers).
The union vs. scab debate has long been filled with the "always-or-never" narrow-minded mentality ideologies that is currently ripping our country apart in every other politically related discussion. If the officials are indeed much more skilled than the replacements then it can do nothing but help the NFLRA. If they find that the replacements can handle the game, then at least the truth has come out and everyone can re-assess the value that they provide. But to not take a look at the skill of those who would take the field in their stead is to be complacent with the status quo. And if there is anything that I've learned from war, it's that complacency kills.

*Working conditions must always be up to standard. Non-union employees who don't take the time to learn the rules for occupational safety are inviting their own hazards. Most industrial machines will kill you if given the chance, and the government has plenty of avenues for redress. Not taking them up on those opportunities when necessary is being complacent with your own life, and manifest stupidity.

Wow, that's horrifying. Like I said - this would have been the same at ANY level of football. It's not like they implemented an NCAA rule on accident. Yuck. (And as badly as this was screwed up, it shouldn't have taken a challenge to get them to get the rule right, and it shouldn't have cost them a replay challenge once the referee went under the hood and saw what happened).

I'm REALLY curious to know what caused them to move it from the (almost) right spot up to the 20. Someone said something, the referee then talked with the HL, agreed, and left it at the 20. What caused them to move it?

PS - ball should be at the 5, not the 4.

Ouch. I wish we could hear the R's initial explanation. Sounded like he said something about a "fumble"?

No, its not illegal. But that something that is done should be something society values as wrong -- a crime, moral wrong, etc. Being a replacement official, even if you're in the union, doesn't come close to rising to that level. As I've said from the start of this thing: behave in an unprofessional way at your own risk. It is unprofessional to treat people poorly simply due to the fact that they made decisions that were not in YOUR best interest. It is unprofessional to use your job in leadership or in an authority position in an organization (D-1 conference, in this case) to retaliate against those who made decisions that, again, were not in YOUR best interest.

Look -- I WANT the NFL officials to get as much salary and benefits as possible. The NFL makes a lot of money and the officials play a significant role in that. And I think virtually all replacement officials would agree that the game would be better officiated with the regular officials than it is with what amounts to as a crew of NFL rookies.

However, the NFL has made a firm offer that the union has refused. That's fine -- negotiations can be a *****. But unless the NFLPR can convince the players to not play (and they can't) the games are going to go on and they must be officiated. Its the officials in the NFLPR that have chosen not to accept (and possibly for good reason) the NFL's offer, so others will be needed to fill their place. I'm sorry, but they've had their chance and can't complain. Blackballing, ostracizing, threats, etc. are all examples of unprofessional behavior, and you can't separate professionalism in your life. In other words, you can't be unprofessional in one part of your life and be a professional on the football field. It doesn't work like that.

Aggie- thanks for putting succinctly what I have tried to say the last couple of weeks. If I were in a union, I would probably look at the issue somewhat differently but I'm not. I do understand both sides of the issue.

The replacement officials, or as I have preferred to call them, substitutes, have the same right to persue their dreams and goals as did the existant officals. One may deem them unethical, immoral, scabs, what have you.
It is for their conscience to decide. If they are not up to the task, that is for the league to decide. Coersion, blackmail, extortion, undue influence- however one wants to put it, is wrong.

There is an officials code of conduct. I don't see anywhere that it says that an official has to reject employment because some other official is in a negotiating impasse with the assignor. We are not to publically speak ill of another official.

Concern rises as the season gets closer......
 

"I'm even more concerned than I was before they started playing the games," Mike Pereira, the Fox analyst who is the NFL's former director of officiating, said by phone Sunday. "They're struggling, though it's no fault of their own. They're competent officials for the level they're on, like, in Division II."

NFL needs to blow whistle on replacements ? USATODAY.com

It's been rough to say the least...there have been plenty of gaffs...especially penalty enforcements. But the NFL has not put these people in positions to succeed and even minor things are amplified by the public.

I hate to blast my fellow officials ... but these guys are awful. Not saying I'd do better ... but I would also not have taken the job --- and they did.

I can understand some speed-of-the-game issues. But these folks are screwing up basic penalty enforcements, forgetting to review scores, and making bad rulings on plays where the rules are the same as NCAA, so they should not be screwing them up.

Frankly, their performance is embarrassing.

The NFL knew they were bringing people up to a level at which they had never worked. While I do find the gaffes painful to watch, I cannot imagine league executives NOT putting their heads together to find someone to conduct an intense fire-hose training session (12-16 hour days if necessary) to get the guys ready for the subsequent weeks. If the league doesn't take action after seeing the errors so far, they're complicit in the quality of work they are getting out of the guys.

The real blacklisting is coming from the D-1 conferences. They have said that any of their officials who go to the NFL now are fired from their conference. I wholeheartedly agree with this. The conferences don't need to be trying to replace officials at this stage of the season. Any official who goes to the NFL now should know that they didn't earn their spot there and that they will never get back there once this is over. And watching them, I can see they are way over their head.