DMN Blog: NFL to Jerry Jones: Play was not reviewable

[DallasEast]

LOL

I had a good laugh on that one. Your right M. Night Shyamalan's movies of late have been real stinkers. I swore to myself I would never watch another one of his movies after watching "The Happening".

That movie was horrible and wow did the previews mislead you?

Yep. Guilty as charged. I thought he had another The Sixth Sense in The Happening. Wrong. Way wrong. If he messes up The Last Airbender, I'm swearing off his movies forever.

 

[ZeroClub]

Goodell has a ref problem.

There is a problem and the refs are a big part of it.

I can't help thinking that as the rule book has expanded and grown more complicated, the refs have reached the point of saturation / overload. Their RAM space has been exceeded; their performance has deteriorated sharply.

 

[speedkilz88]

If the league office was able to contact the refs about the delay of game penalty not counting how in the heck did they not say anything about the play not being reviewable? Looks like the league office(Mike Pereira) doesn't even know the rules.

 

[coblue]

STILL doesn't get his first sack.

What else can prevent it for this man!

 

[speedkilz88]

Ok. They were over 3 yards down field.

what does the rule state? I am not sure. I am assuming from where I got it from 3 yards is the rule.

http://img413.*************/img413/6431/illegalplay.jpg

No they aren't, both have body parts behind the red line.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

If the league office was able to contact the refs about the delay of game penalty not counting how in the heck did they not say anything about the play not being reviewable? Looks like the league office(Mike Pereira) doesn't even know the rules.

No kidding. What a fiasco.

That's two weeks in a row the officials have reviewed something that wasn't reviewable, in addition to McCarthy not being penalized for using an extra challenge. How is this possible?

I think ZeroClub is right and the refs have too much to worry about, but they should at least assign an extra official just to prevent procedural mistakes like this.

 

[BrassCowboy]

Coach Wade Phillips argued it should have been intentional grounding because Campbell's pass never cleared the line of scrimmage.

Wade is right, even if you claim that he got rid of the ball before stepping out of bounds that does not change the fact the ball never made to the line of scrimmage.

not the first time I have seen those throw aways outside the hashmarks thrown short and refs did not call them.

Wonder how those are getting overlooked. Think they are so focused on the part that says they must be outside the hashmarks that they forget they also have to go further than the line of scrimmage.

 

[pgreptom]

Ok. They were over 3 yards down field.

what does the rule state? I am not sure. I am assuming from where I got it from 3 yards is the rule.

It is a foul when an ineligible offensive player, which is difficult to describe but is often an offensive lineman, advances beyond his line of scrimmage after losing contact with an opponent at the line of scrimmage. It is also illegal when an ineligible offensive player moves downfield without contacting an opponent at the line of scrimmage. These restrictions end when the ball leaves the passer's hand. The offending player must be more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage prior to the pass to be illegally downfield. This guideline is used in college and professional football.

From the 2006 rules:

Article 2 It is a foul when an ineligible offensive player (including a T-formation quarterback),
prior to a legal forward pass:
(a) advances beyond his line, after losing contact with an opponent at the line of
scrimmage;
(b) loses contact with an opponent downfield after the initial charge and then continues
to advance or move laterally; or
(c) moves downfield without contacting an opponent at the line of scrimmage.
The above restrictions end when the ball leaves the passer’s hand.
Note: The guideline for officials to use for an ineligible player(s) to be illegally downfield: the
offending player must be more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage prior to the
pass.

See rulebook:

http://blogmedia.thenewstribune.com/media/2006 NFL RULEBOOK.pdf

Guorde was 1 yard down the field.. Kosier was still in contact with his player, even though he was "down the field"

Since Kosier was still in contact(he pancaked the guy), and Guorde was 1 yard down the field.. I don't see how this is a penalty.

 

[theebs]

It is a foul when an ineligible offensive player, which is difficult to describe but is often an offensive lineman, advances beyond his line of scrimmage after losing contact with an opponent at the line of scrimmage. It is also illegal when an ineligible offensive player moves downfield without contacting an opponent at the line of scrimmage. These restrictions end when the ball leaves the passer's hand. The offending player must be more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage prior to the pass to be illegally downfield. This guideline is used in college and professional football.

From the 2006 rules:

Article 2 It is a foul when an ineligible offensive player (including a T-formation quarterback),
prior to a legal forward pass:
(a) advances beyond his line, after losing contact with an opponent at the line of
scrimmage;
(b) loses contact with an opponent downfield after the initial charge and then continues
to advance or move laterally; or
(c) moves downfield without contacting an opponent at the line of scrimmage.
The above restrictions end when the ball leaves the passer’s hand.
Note: The guideline for officials to use for an ineligible player(s) to be illegally downfield: the
offending player must be more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage prior to the
pass.

See rulebook:

http://blogmedia.thenewstribune.com/media/2006 NFL RULEBOOK.pdf

Guorde was 1 yard down the field.. Kosier was still in contact with his player, even though he was "down the field"

Since Kosier was still in contact(he pancaked the guy), and Guorde was 1 yard down the field.. I don't see how this is a penalty.

Gurode was 3 yards down the field and kosier ran 3 yards down the field and tried to cut his guy because he thought romo was running. After the game kosier said "He fell Down" lol. Those guys thought romo was running and we got away with one.

no big deal. After all the blatant missed crap on us, we got away with one and shouldnt feel bad about it.

 

[craig71]

What will the spinmaster come up with this week,I bet Pereira will be ready.

Craig

 

[speedkilz88]

Gurode was 3 yards down the field and kosier ran 3 yards down the field and tried to cut his guy because he thought romo was running. After the game kosier said "He fell Down" lol. Those guys thought romo was running and we got away with one.

no big deal. After all the blatant missed crap on us, we got away with one and shouldnt feel bad about it.

Since Kosier was still blocking the same DL from the snap, I don't think he was illegally downfield. Gurode would be the one that may have been slightly downfield.(Then again they could have decided that Gurode was helping Kosier)

 

[theebs]

Since Kosier was still blocking the same DL from the snap, I don't think he was illegally downfield. Gurode would be the one that may have been slightly downfield.(Then again they could have decided that Gurode was helping Kosier)

they are both downfield. Kosier chased the guy down and cut him from the side.

We got away with one...Good for us. we have had enough go against us.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

They should do away with that stupid down field thing anyway because you're asking lineman to decide what the QB is thinking on rather he's actually going to run or keep looking for an open receiver. It's a stupid rule.

That said we likely got away with one there but I guess that all evens out with the other junk from the game.

 

[speedkilz88]

they are both downfield. Kosier chased the guy down and cut him from the side.

We got away with one...Good for us. we have had enough go against us.

The DL retreated downfield and he followed him to maintain the block. That is legal.

 

[DallasEast]

There is a problem and the refs are a big part of it.

I can't help thinking that as the rule book has expanded and grown more complicated, the refs have reached the point of saturation / overload. Their RAM space has been exceeded; their performance has deteriorated sharply.

I will not attempt to quantity how large the officiating problem currently is, both at the NFL and college level, but I will say two things. First, referees' inability for making correct judgment calls has become quite noticable during plays which they can see unobstructed. That shouldn't be the case. The speed of the game has grown faster each decade, but not to a level where routine calls should be second-guessed as often as they are now.

Secondly, it's entirely possible that the everyday official isn't sophisticated enough to process the information delivered to him by the instant replay technology. There are men 10 -15 years older than me (if just that) huffing-and-puffing up-and-down the field throwing flags every Sunday. I know professionals that age with multiple college degrees who have complained about their computer crashing on them--only to find out afterwards that they accidentally pulled the plug out of a wall outlet. It's possible that some officials, who plop their heads under the hood, may not fully utilize all the tools available to them (i.e. Zoom, Freeze Frame, etc.) to review REVIEWABLE penalties.

Excuse the rant, but it kinda nuts sometimes to watch network replays and wait for the official to basically say they didn't see what I plainly could. Sure, they may not have every single replay angle which the network might replay for viewers, but they are not devoid of all replay angles either.

 

[jazzcat22]

Coach Wade Phillips argued it should have been intentional grounding because Campbell's pass never cleared the line of scrimmage.

Wade is right, even if you claim that he got rid of the ball before stepping out of bounds that does not change the fact the ball never made to the line of scrimmage.

Right, even though he was outside the pocket, it still must go beyond the LOS.

The way I see this, it should have not been reviewed.
The play happed, they then had the delay of game penalty. Isn't that like running a play, so therefore the play cannot be reviewd.

 

[theebs]

Right, even though he was outside the pocket, it still must go beyond the LOS.

The way I see this, it should have not been reviewed.
The play happed, they then had the delay of game penalty. Isn't that like running a play, so therefore the play cannot be reviewd.

the real kicker to me, the playclock was down to 1, meaning they were about to have another delay of game on their field goal try and got bailed out.

That whole scenario was insulting. Had I been wade, I would have been ejected for the nonsense I would have started with the officials.

of course had wade done that, we probably give up more points and lose because he has been excellent at calling plays.

 

[theebs]

[youtube]-keoCERmAYw[/youtube]

 

[StylisticS]

Coach Wade Phillips argued it should have been intentional grounding because Campbell's pass never cleared the line of scrimmage.

Wade is right, even if you claim that he got rid of the ball before stepping out of bounds that does not change the fact the ball never made to the line of scrimmage.

I was screaming for that. I was yelling where is the penalty for intentional grounding. Campbell got away with two of those. But that play should have been a penalty regardless because the ball didn't pass the LOS.

 

[viman96]

I still do not understand how the delay of game penalty is not the same as running a play. Which means the play can not be reviewed.