Dallas - Cincy Hit

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Sounds like some people, who should know a lot better, are forgetting that it's no secret that slow motion replay on a big screen can actually reveal minute details that are not as readily available to the naked eye at live action speed.

Don't forget, the main difference between what the game official sees on the field and what can be seen on replay, is that what the game official sees during live action, matters. If anyone has earned the benefit of the doubt, it's these guys, considering exactly who and what they're looking at.

The problem in this case is that the official that's 20-someodd yards away didn't give the benefit of the doubt to the official that was right on the play who didn't flag the perfectly legal hit.

[jTheUmp]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

The problem in this case is that the official that's 20-someodd yards away didn't give the benefit of the doubt to the official that was right on the play who didn't flag the perfectly legal hit.

As it's described here, we've got a sideline catch/no-catch situation. In that case, the sideline officials (SJ, HL) are going to be primarily watching the receiver's actions relative towards possession and in/out of bounds. The "off" officials (BJ primarily, possibly U depending on where he's aligned at the snap) will be looking at the defenders and how they initiate contact.

If the SJ or HL has a chance to see what the defender does, fair enough. But they've got other considerations that take priority.

Was the hit legal? I don't know, I haven't seen the video. But given what I've been hearing from a few NFL and high-level NCAA officials, flags thrown on questionable contact such as was described here will almost certainly be supported.

[sj]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

As it's described here, we've got a sideline catch/no-catch situation. In that case, the sideline officials (SJ, HL) are going to be primarily watching the receiver's actions relative towards possession and in/out of bounds. The "off" officials (BJ primarily, possibly U depending on where he's aligned at the snap) will be looking at the defenders and how they initiate contact.

If the SJ or HL has a chance to see what the defender does, fair enough. But they've got other considerations that take priority.

.

Exactly.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

The problem in this case is that the official that's 20-someodd yards away didn't give the benefit of the doubt to the official that was right on the play who didn't flag the perfectly legal hit.

A reasonable "rule of thumb" has always been that an official who actually sees something, should trump a fellow official who may not have seen that same something.

At any level it's important that officials who share a sideline have discussed, in some detail, how they will interact on collaborative calls, and I would suspect at the NFL level such discussion is an integral part of pre-game review. There's really no doubt involved when one official sees something his fellow official was not in position to see, nor may have been looking for (as discussed in the pre-game responsibility review).

If there was some dispute between officials, they were obviously skilled enough to understand any such discussion would be held in private.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

A reasonable "rule of thumb" has always been that an official who actually sees something, should trump a fellow official who may not have seen that same something.

At any level it's important that officials who share a sideline have discussed, in some detail, how they will interact on collaborative calls, and I would suspect at the NFL level such discussion is an integral part of pre-game review. There's really no doubt involved when one official sees something his fellow official was not in position to see, nor may have been looking for (as discussed in the pre-game responsibility review).

If there was some dispute between officials, they were obviously skilled enough to understand any such discussion would be held in private.

I see your point. Unfortunately, I guess, in this case... the off-official "saw" something that didn't exist.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I see your point. Unfortunately, I guess, in this case... the off-official "saw" something that didn't exist.

Didn't exist, or saw something that you didn't see, or don't understand?

[voiceoflg]

[JugglingReferee]

Thanks for the video.

I agree with Pereira.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Didn't exist, or saw something that you didn't see, or don't understand?

?????

Why the shot?

He saw helmet contact where helmet contact didn't exist. Watch the video and come back and explain what you mean. What do you think I don't understand?

PS - I'm not saying any of this as a fanboy --- I'm a Cowboy fan if anything, and the call went in their favor.

[asdf]

The foul was for a hit on a defenseless receiver, not for illegal helmet contact.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by asdf

The foul was for a hit on a defenseless receiver, not for illegal helmet contact.

Is that what the official said? (I have no audio for these clips here at work, and thought they said helmet contact when I saw this live).

OK, if that's the case, I'm back to my original question... is this REALLY where we want the league to go --- a receiver who has the ball in his hands and has not yet dropped it is considered defenseless?

[APG]

Originally Posted by asdf

The foul was for a hit on a defenseless receiver, not for illegal helmet contact.

There are legal hits on players in a defenseless posture. It's only illegal to hit a player in the head or neck area with the helmet, shoulder, or forearm, using the crown of the helmet to hit the defenseless players player in any part of his body, or illegally launching into the defenseless player's body.

[PSU213]

Originally Posted by asdf

The foul was for a hit on a defenseless receiver, not for illegal helmet contact.

How can a receiver, in bounds, still on his feet, with the ball in his hands not be 'fair game' for a hit that is not to his head and/or a hit made by the tackler with his helmet?

There a lots of reasons that the focus on player safety is a really, really good thing. However, this hit is a strong play by the defender preventing a completion.

[ajmc]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

?????

Why the shot?

What do you think I don't understand?

What I don't think you understand, Mike, is exactly what the covering official believed he saw, that prompted him to throw that flag. On the field, at that very moment, there's really not a whole lot of difference between what he may have seen and what he truly believed he saw, as least as far as reaching for the flag is concerned.

Considering the speed of play, the skill of the players and the nature of this particular contact, I would think most officials, who may have walked in somewhat similar footsteps, would be inclined to give the covering official the benefit of the doubt. Thankfully, that circumstance doesn't seem to fall under the reviewable situations, so often the final judgment is determined by what the covering official believes he sees, which hopefully matches what he actually sees, and prompts an appropriate reaction.

That official made the call, presumably based on what he believed he saw, without the benefit or the hindsight of replay that slowed the action down to that of a gnat winking as viewed from multiple angles and positions.

Whether from a "fan" perspective or not, there's a point where even constructive criticism, especially when it cannot change or make any difference to anything, can become hyper critical and lose any value it might otherwise offer.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I would think most officials, who may have walked in somewhat similar footsteps, would be inclined to give the covering official the benefit of the doubt.

I see the reason for your misunderstanding now.

I am NOT blaming the officials. The officials are not at fault - they are told to err on the side of safety, and there have been numerous examples of a hit on a not-yet-downed receiver being flagged AT THE DIRECTION OF THE LEAGUE. They are TOLD to call this. And I believe it's step one in the direction of the demise of the league.

I'm blaming the league and/or Roger Goodell. The direction was fine, and somewhat needed ... but we've gone too far. Far too far, yet we keep going further in that direction.