Mike Pereira on Refs

[ActualCowboysFan]

I agree with OP in the main, although not in the case of that particular tweet. They have embraced the controversy that technology has added to close calls. They even have a "you make the call" weekly article on their website.

 

[tyke1doe]

I rarely complain about the Refs but gooooood grief what incompetence

They need to hire them full time and in doing so start enforcing penalties and fines to hold them accountable.

I agree. I hardly ever complain about the refs, but that penalty was egregious. It should have been first down Dallas. Now, whether it would have changed the outcome of the game, I don't know. But it was a terrible call.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

Sometimes refs make bad calls simply because of the speed and complexity of the game. For example, from their perspective, some contact may look like pass interference when it really wasn't. Or a holding call is missed simply because it wasn't seen, same deal with PI or illegal contact. We know it will never be possible for refs to get everything right. However, this non-call for 12 men on the field or for consecutive timeouts was just inexcusable. It's something I would have expected from those replacement refs (2 seasons ago?). The fact that they were unaware that Seattle had already called a timeout was inexcusable. We'll never know if our offense would have gotten in the endzone, but they deserved the chance to try.

 

[Everson24]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who believes this. I also agree with everything you said too about the Giants and the Patriots. No way does these calls today happen to the Patriots. It makes it not fun to watch sometimes. I think league doesn't want Jerry to win another super bowl cuz of 95 and reasons stated above and that makes me really angry for people like Romo, Witten, etc. Take your anger out on Jerry by black balling him business wise but allow the players to have a fair shot. Every time I see Romo get hit in the head and there's no flag it just angers me cuz we all know that some players can't even be tackled without a flag. Hate Jerry if you want, a lot of people do, but let the players play.

Add the Steelers to these two teams. It is getting so bad during their games that I have to go out of the room and find something else to occupy my mind. Some of the calls they get are mind blowingly bad.

 

[plymkr]

Add the Steelers to these two teams. It is getting so bad during their games that I have to go out of the room and find something else to occupy my mind. Some of the calls they get are mind blowingly bad.

True, I forgot the steelers. Yeah I need to go to bed. I'm crabby and I keep rehashing it in my mind. Thank you my Cowboyszone family for allowing me to vent my anger is a positive way. Truly appreciated.

 

[Biggems]

I have no issues with most of the penalties we receive, as we have long been a very undisciplined team. I do have issue though as of late with the refs making up penalties against us, like the PI against Street or the many bogus offsides against Ware. I also have issue with is the lack of flags for our opponents, especially in crucial moments. The Steelers are the most penalized team in the league, yet against us in the SB, they draw zero flags? The Seahawks are a highly penalized team, yet the refs fail to throw flags today that should have been thrown. Our opponents get away with blatant holding all game, blatant pick plays, blatant defensive holding, illegal contact, or PI.......It is sickening.

The referee treatment we receive reminds me of US men's soccer vs. the rest of the world. Our soccer team gets absolutely hosed by the refs in major competition.

 

[Doomsay]

NFL sued Jerry over Pepsi and Nike marketing deals

We will pay for that forever.

 

[Biag]

Sometimes refs make bad calls simply because of the speed and complexity of the game. For example, from their perspective, some contact may look like pass interference when it really wasn't. Or a holding call is missed simply because it wasn't seen, same deal with PI or illegal contact. We know it will never be possible for refs to get everything right. However, this non-call for 12 men on the field or for consecutive timeouts was just inexcusable. It's something I would have expected from those replacement refs (2 seasons ago?). The fact that they were unaware that Seattle had already called a timeout was inexcusable. We'll never know if our offense would have gotten in the endzone, but they deserved the chance to try.

I agree missed calls happens but, just like the Seattle game where he batted the ball out of bounds, there is no excuse for not knowing the rules of a game you are officiating.

 

[xwalker]

You could argue that they have the poster boy for the NFL in Russell Wilson.

My reservations are that when it comes to the NFL people that are supposed to be unbiased are often not unbiased. We see it with certain media members that proclaim they are unbiased, but show their true colors. I remember a few years ago Mike Tanier did analysis on the Cowboys for Football Prospectus and his anti-Cowboys bias was so strong that it was unbearable (he's an Eagles fan).

Or the stories that Dr. Z (not a Cowboys fan) would tell about Cowboys players not getting into the HoF and one unnamed voter celebrated when they denied Bob Hayes and Rayfield Wright.

So, it wouldn't stun me if there were some refs that get swayed from time to time.

However, I am more willing to blame Garrett. He rarely complains and is afraid to make a scene to get his point across. People hated Harbaugh for how he would act, but it eventually got the point across.

Of course, the better course of action would be to not have a failed stand-up comic who has never refereed a game on any level heading up the referees.






YR

There really needs to be more data given to the public to show that Refs should not be inclined to be biased as a group.

I don't think they could ever prove that each individual Ref is not biased but as a group the public should be allowed to see some facts.
1. What City/State do they currently live in and what City/State was the location of their High School?
2. What teams were they fans of prior to becoming Refs?

Plot out this demographic information on a map and it should show a random distribution. My guess is that the map would show a very heavy concentration of Refs living in and/or being fans of teams in the North East. There is zero reason for that to happen. I'm certain that college refs are spread out all over the country so it shouldn't be difficult to find NFL refs from all over.

Also, they should use the demographic data to make certain that each officiating crew is composed of a mix of geographic/team affiliation backgrounds.

Considering the amount of money that is bet on the game and considering the spotlight that was on officiating in general after the Tim Donaghy ordeal, it's shocking that more checks and balances are not in place to minimize the chance of bias.

The refs should be subjected to the same background checks required to get a government security clearance.

 

[Wood]

who knows. There could have been congratulatory remarks to official by his peers for giving Seattle break in that game.

 

[31smackdown]

The rulebook says:

Item 4. Unsportsmanlike Conduct. An attempt to call an excess team timeout or to call a second timeout in the same dead-ball period by Team B in an attempt to “freeze” a kicker, will be considered unsportsmanlike conduct and will subject the offending team to a 15-yard penalty (See 12-3). This will apply to field goal or Try attempts.

Note: If an attempt is made to call a timeout in such situations, the officials shall not grant a timeout; instead, play will continue, and a penalty will be called, with customary enforcement. If a timeout is inadvertently granted, the penalty shall also be enforced.

As I read that, the fact that the refs stopped the clock as a result of Seattle's requesting a second consecutive time out when they shouldn't have done means the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty should have been enforced. What am I missing?

No really.. This needs to be answered. It doesn't matter at what point you "freeze" a kicker or if that was not your perceived intention.. the kicker still has to wait through both timeouts. It also says call an excess timeout "OR" so an excess timeout by itself should stand as a penalty, why would they need to clarify by saying a "second timeout" if both are in relation to freezing a kicker.

 

[xvendettax914]

Say what you want about why the game was lost, but when you are fighting with one hand tied behind your back and the task of beating the opponent in front of you is already daunting, having to overcome stuff like this makes it nearly impossible to come away with wins. I don't want to be a tin foil hat person but my eye test makes me wonder what's up that each week it seems some obscure cr** happens to us that ends up impacting the result of a game.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

I agree missed calls happens but, just like the Seattle game where he batted the ball out of bounds, there is no excuse for not knowing the rules of a game you are officiating.

I agree completely.

 

[BigD16]

Every coach should just try to call another timeout after already using one if they see something on the field they don't like (such as a critical play on 4th down coming out of a timeout).

I mean, it couldn't hurt. It's not like you will get penalized for it even thought it's clearly unsportsmanlike. Plus, we already know the refs are stupid enough to fall for it.

 

[DogFace]

The rulebook says:

Item 4. Unsportsmanlike Conduct. An attempt to call an excess team timeout or to call a second timeout in the same dead-ball period by Team B in an attempt to “freeze” a kicker, will be considered unsportsmanlike conduct and will subject the offending team to a 15-yard penalty (See 12-3). This will apply to field goal or Try attempts.

Note: If an attempt is made to call a timeout in such situations, the officials shall not grant a timeout; instead, play will continue, and a penalty will be called, with customary enforcement. If a timeout is inadvertently granted, the penalty shall also be enforced.

As I read that, the fact that the refs stopped the clock as a result of Seattle's requesting a second consecutive time out when they shouldn't have done means the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty should have been enforced. What am I missing?

So even in the "explanation" after the game the ref still didn't know the rule. Pathetic.

If this is correct, I believe it is, then it's very clear It should've been a penalty whether they granted the stoppage or not. Even if they didn't it says they will be penalized after the play. I'd like a real explanation where the ref knows the rules. Even if it's two days after the fact.

 

[mahoneybill]

Sometimes refs make bad calls simply because of the speed and complexity of the game. For example, from their perspective, some contact may look like pass interference when it really wasn't. Or a holding call is missed simply because it wasn't seen, same deal with PI or illegal contact. We know it will never be possible for refs to get everything right. However, this non-call for 12 men on the field or for consecutive timeouts was just inexcusable. It's something I would have expected from those replacement refs (2 seasons ago?). The fact that they were unaware that Seattle had already called a timeout was inexcusable. We'll never know if our offense would have gotten in the endzone, but they deserved the chance to try.

Also why should the refs care about " giving the 12 th man an opportunity to get off the field".... It's either 11 or 12 no excuses...

 

[LandryFan]

Also why should the refs care about " giving the 12 th man an opportunity to get off the field".... It's either 11 or 12 no excuses...

Aside from screwing everything else up, the ref even screwed up what he was intending to say in his post game report, IMO. I think what he was trying to convey was that the officials couldn't throw the flag for twelve men on the field until the ball was snapped (there was never 12 in the huddle, or that would have been automatic and instantaneous). For him to say they were trying to give him every opportunity to get off the field kind of makes it sound like they were trying to help that team, when that's not what he meant at all, IMO. Unfortunately, the ball was never snapped because the idiots blew the whistle...that whole process was just one major snafu on the part of the Blandino led officials.

 

[DogFace]

Aside from screwing everything else up, the ref even screwed up what he was intending to say in his post game report, IMO. I think what he was trying to convey was that the officials couldn't throw the flag for twelve men on the field until the ball was snapped (there was never 12 in the huddle, or that would have been automatic and instantaneous). For him to say they were trying to give him every opportunity to get off the field kind of makes it sound like they were trying to help that team, when that's not what he meant at all, IMO. Unfortunately, the ball was never snapped because the idiots blew the whistle...that whole process was just one major snafu on the part of the Blandino led officials.

Are we sure he didn't mean it and was actually trying to give them every opportunity? Then eventually did.

 

[LandryFan]

Are we sure he didn't mean it and was actually trying to give them every opportunity? Then eventually did.

Well, that thought did cross my mind. I then came to the conclusion that even the dumbest official wouldn't publicly admit to being biased for/against any particular team. I could be wrong, however.

 

[Kevinicus]

No really.. This needs to be answered. It doesn't matter at what point you "freeze" a kicker or if that was not your perceived intention.. the kicker still has to wait through both timeouts. It also says call an excess timeout "OR" so an excess timeout by itself should stand as a penalty, why would they need to clarify by saying a "second timeout" if both are in relation to freezing a kicker.

Excess would be a team calling a timeout when they don't have any remaining (i.e. a 4th team timeout in the half). The 2nd timeout would be in regards to the singular stoppage of play. That is the reason for the distinction. Either by calling 2 timeouts in the same stoppage, or by calling a timeout that you don't have, it is a penalty.