Officals told Pagano he couldn't challenge the "blocked" punt....turns out he could have.

[1959Colts]

Let me get this straight...

The officials told Pagano he could not challenge?

But actually, he could?

So the refs didn't know the rules?

[ruksak]

Meh. A football player is most vulnerable when throwing and catching the ball, thus the recent emphasis on protecting passers and pass catchers, particularly when they are passing and catching. If you want players to be able to throw and catch the ball without being destroyed, certain protections make sense.

 

Others are overboard, like the forcible helmet contact to the quarterback. Seems pointless to me.

 

But anyways, this is an ongoing debate, balancing the quality of the game with the safety of the players. No one is ever truly satisfied. Either the NFL is watering down the game in the name of safety, or they're being called out for not doing enough to protect the players. It's a lose/lose. I think they'd rather err on the side of caution.

I think protections for skill positions are necessary. Otherwise this game would diminish itself to a pure blood-sport. 

 

I would call this "rule" as being a gaping exploit. Exploits should be closed off. Griffin trumpeted his desire to exploit this rule, though more-so to the effect upon his running game. 

 

The NFL has made changes to rules in recent years specifically to reduce the use of discretion on the part of the officials, so remove subjectivity from the rule book as much as possible. You're suggesting the opposite.

 Hits to the head, yes. Personal fouls, yes. And this issue we're discussing was a PF. 

 

Sometimes discretion is mandatory. Regarding fumbles, for example. The ref must use what is essentially his 'opinion' as to when possession was lost. Discretion is hard to remove from the game. Imperfect as it is, discretion is the only avenue available to determine if a player was truly declaring the ball down by leaving the field of play;Or; Is he incidentally leaving the field of play while passing. 

 

Some of this garbage needs cleaned up. We got bailed out by a sterile, unresponsive rule. It was third down. We were gifted 4 points on the back of a rule with no brain of it's own. 

[ruksak]

Let me get this straight...

The officials told Pagano he could not challenge?

But actually, he could?

So the refs didn't know the rules?

I've been wondering why there isn't some application available to the coach/coaches as a resource for specific rules, to be used on spot, in real time?

 

i.e. An app on a digital tablet that allows an assistant to pull up the rule in question during the discussion. They allow the play to stop for a discussion. What good does this do if neither party truly has full knowledge of the rule? 

[1959Colts]

I've been wondering why there isn't some application available to the coach/coaches as a resource for specific rules, to be used on spot, in real time?

 

i.e. An app on a digital tablet that allows an assistant to pull up the rule in question during the discussion. They allow the play to stop for a discussion. What good does this do if neither party truly has full knowledge of the rule?

Or maybe get some refs who know all the rules?

[ColtsLegacy]

Discretion is part of their job.

To me, it would seem fair for the ref, in that particular circumstance, to consider that Luck wasn't heading out of bounds (essentially a declaration of downing the ball on spot). Luck was leaping to make a throw. That was his action at the time of impact, correct?

All eligible receivers are also eligible passers behind the LoS. If that's a HB/WR pass, no way they call it. No way. There's your discretionary intervention upon a rule.

Luck was heading out of bounds, he was leaping out of bounds when he made the throw and was subsequently hit. They're going to flag that 9 times out of 10 and the 1 time they don't they'd be wrong.

If they were not to flag it because of a potential pass they'd be changing the rule, rather than just using discretion.

It may be a stupid rule, but that's the way it is for now.

[Coffeedrinker]

Yes, it absolutely was a good call. That's the call that people get all fussy about about ten times a year, but the NFL has been calling it that way pretty consistently for about four years now. 

I was watching the Chiefs and Bills earlier in the day and they had the same type of call.  The Buffalo receiver caught and had control all the way to the ground, as the ref was blowing the whistle the defender took one last desperate swipe at it and knocked it loose.  They ruled it an incomplete pass.

[Coffeedrinker]

I think protections for skill positions are necessary. Otherwise this game would diminish itself to a pure blood-sport. 

I disagree, I think a lot of the rules have made the sport too wimpy.  The application of the "personal foul" on the hit on Luck is a perfect example.  I often wonder what Bradshaw or Staubach think when they see something like that.

[ruksak]

Or maybe get some refs who know all the rules?

To err is human. Therein lies the issue with your statement. 

[ruksak]

Luck was heading out of bounds, he was leaping out of bounds when he made the throw and was subsequently hit. They're going to flag that 9 times out of 10 and the 1 time they don't they'd be wrong.

If they were not to flag it because of a potential pass they'd be changing the rule, rather than just using discretion.

It may be a stupid rule, but that's the way it is for now.

I'll give more examples of discretionary enforcement that we see in every game.

 

I've/We've heard color commentators say it a thousand times, and they're right. If the refs wanted to, they could call Holding on every single play. It's not that they don't see the holds. They make a discretionary judgement as to what extent the rule is being infracted. An imaginary line is drawn, depending on the official.

 

Just that one example causes hundreds of posts across all 32 official fan forums every Sunday. "OMG they didn't call that hold". Sound familiar? 

 

I agree, the rule was enforced by letter of the rule. But most certainly, the ref has the discretion to proclaim that Luck wasn't heading out of bounds, he was throwing the ball. With this I say; It wasn't a bad call. It was poor discretion. 

[Superman]

I think protections for skill positions are necessary. Otherwise this game would diminish itself to a pure blood-sport. 

 

I would call this "rule" as being a gaping exploit. Exploits should be closed off. Griffin trumpeted his desire to exploit this rule, though more-so to the effect upon his running game. 

 

 

QBs are far less protected once they make themselves runners, or when their actions don't declare that they aren't a runner. The NFL's interpretation regarding the read option mesh point speaks to that. When the QB is holding the ball in the running back's chest, the QB is NOT protected as a passer. Point is, there's only so much exploiting the NFL is standing for, and most of it relates to when the QB is passing the football.

 

Like I said, I agree that this rule is a little overboard. But I don't agree that the refs made the wrong call. It's their job to make calls based on the rules, not to insert their own discretion.

 

 Hits to the head, yes. Personal fouls, yes. And this issue we're discussing was a PF. 

 

Sometimes discretion is mandatory. Regarding fumbles, for example. The ref must use what is essentially his 'opinion' as to when possession was lost. Discretion is hard to remove from the game. Imperfect as it is, discretion is the only avenue available to determine if a player was truly declaring the ball down by leaving the field of play;Or; Is he incidentally leaving the field of play while passing. 

 

Some of this garbage needs cleaned up. We got bailed out by a sterile, unresponsive rule. It was third down. We were gifted 4 points on the back of a rule with no brain of it's own. 

 

I couldn't disagree more with your interpretation of when a fumble is called. The ref's opinion has nothing to do with it. When the ball starts moving, possession is lost, and as long as the player isn't down yet, it's a fumble. When the refs go under the hood to review this, that's what they look at. In game time, it's a tough call to make, but it's not about opinion or discretion. That's the whole point of the recent changes to the NFL rule book, it's why they got rid of the old "football move" language, and so on. To remove subjectivity wherever possible.

 

Can't remove it all. Like the "forcible blow to the head" rule. I'm not sure what the exact language is, but "forcible blow" is very subjective. It also relies on common sense, which you hope the refs have. Of course, this is one of the rules I think is over enforced. But to your point, discretion is impossible to remove. I'm just saying that the NFL wants to reduce the use of discretion as much as they can, because one person's discretion differs from that of another. 

 

I'm also kind of puzzled by your outrage over this call. First, it was the right call, according to the rules. Second, we got robbed on two specific calls earlier in the game. To say we were gifted four points kind of ignores the fact that a chance at 3-7 points was already taken from us on the fumble recovery, and it ignores the fact that we should have been given an automatic first down for the roughing call on McAfee. We got a borderline call; they got two clearly bad calls. To me, we're still owed one, at least. 

 

By the way, I think this discussion illustrates perfectly why the NFL wants to reduce discretion by the refs. I respect you as a smart person, and your opinion is valid. I know I'm a smart person. But we obviously disagree on this matter. You can take two thinking people and get two opposite answers on the same matter. That's why they want the rule book to be as black and white as possible. 

[Superman]

I'll give more examples of discretionary enforcement that we see in every game.

 

I've/We've heard color commentators say it a thousand times, and they're right. If the refs wanted to, they could call Holding on every single play. It's not that they don't see the holds. They make a discretionary judgement as to what extent the rule is being infracted. An imaginary line is drawn, depending on the official.

 

Just that one example causes hundreds of posts across all 32 official fan forums every Sunday. "OMG they didn't call that hold". Sound familiar? 

 

 

This is an excellent example. Of course, if you really want to destroy the quality of the product on the field, you'll throw a flag for holding every down. You have to draw the line somewhere. Unfortunately, holding will always be subjective, and will never be totally satisfactory from any viewpoint. For instance, everyone knows Ron Winters' crew is going to call more holding -- offensive and defensive -- than any other crew. Can't do anything about that.

 

All of this having been said, I think the NFL does the best job applying its rules of all the major sports. I mean, if you want to see subjective officiating, look at the way baseball calls balls and strikes. The strike zone for one ump differs wildly from the next. In basketball, contact around the basket is called differently throughout the course of one game. You never know what a foul is once the playoffs start.

[ColtsLegacy]

I'll give more examples of discretionary enforcement that we see in every game.

I've/We've heard color commentators say it a thousand times, and they're right. If the refs wanted to, they could call Holding on every single play. It's not that they don't see the holds. They make a discretionary judgement as to what extent the rule is being infracted. An imaginary line is drawn, depending on the official.

Just that one example causes hundreds of posts across all 32 official fan forums every Sunday. "OMG they didn't call that hold". Sound familiar?

I agree, the rule was enforced by letter of the rule. But most certainly, the ref has the discretion to proclaim that Luck wasn't heading out of bounds, he was throwing the ball. With this I say; It wasn't a bad call. It was poor discretion.

Holding and personal foul late hit out of bounds are miles apart, though.

Holding cannot (for the most part) cause an injury and as you said happens on most plays. It is a penalty in which much discretion is understood or else each game would have 20 holding calls (holding inside the shoulders is generally accepted as long as you don't keep hold of them as they try to run away). Also, refs are human, often times they just don't see the holding, that's why blatant holding calls are often not called. As for personal foul hit out of bounds they still use discretion but saying "Oh, well, he was throwing it while going out of bounds so the hit is ok", that is not discretion that is changing the rule.

[SteelDragon]

That was just a weird game last night and we were lucky the weirdness didn't cost us the game.  The officiating was bad and our execution in the first half was even worse.   Houston WRs made a few exceptional plays in an otherwise pedestrian game, and it seemed for awhile at least, this just wasn't going to be our night. 

If you're Houston, you look back on this game and wonder how did this one slip away?

I think Keenum is a player though.  Much more charismatic and watchable than Schaub.

[GoColts8818]

I normally don't hammer the refs like I have been with this guy but honestly this guy needs to be removed as an official even if it's just temporary.  He blew a tone of calls last night BOTH ways.  Now we find out he is telling coaches they can't challenge things they can?  That just tells me this guy doesn't know the rules as well as he should.  Honestly I think replay needs to be out of the ref on the fields hands completely.  It should be like college where a guy in the booth looks at it and decides if it should be over turned or not. 

[GoColts8818]

This is an excellent example. Of course, if you really want to destroy the quality of the product on the field, you'll throw a flag for holding every down. You have to draw the line somewhere. Unfortunately, holding will always be subjective, and will never be totally satisfactory from any viewpoint. For instance, everyone knows Ron Winters' crew is going to call more holding -- offensive and defensive -- than any other crew. Can't do anything about that.

 

All of this having been said, I think the NFL does the best job applying its rules of all the major sports. I mean, if you want to see subjective officiating, look at the way baseball calls balls and strikes. The strike zone for one ump differs wildly from the next. In basketball, contact around the basket is called differently throughout the course of one game. You never know what a foul is once the playoffs start.

I disagree give me a baseball ump any day over a NFL official.  It doesn't mean baseball umps are perfect they aren't but I think they honestly do the best job of any officials out there.  I think the NBA let's theirs be too much of the show of course it fits what the NBA has become which is more sports entertainment without the predetermined out comes. 

[oldunclemark]

George Bush was present at the game.. Probably paid the refs off..

He was heard to say 'We need Dick Cheney to 'discipline' those refs!"

[Colts420]

to be honest i believe the roughing the passer call was a bad call. I know it helped us and i wasnt complaining but after reviewing it i dont believe it should of been called

[dw49]

to be honest i believe the roughing the passer call was a bad call. I know it helped us and i wasnt complaining but after reviewing it i dont believe it should of been called

 

 

You reviewed it and found that it was contrary to the way the rule is stated ? Or are you saying the rule should read differently ? So a "bad call" or a "bad rule.?" 

[Colts420]

i thought it was a bad call

[dw49]

I disagree give me a baseball ump any day over a NFL official.  It doesn't mean baseball umps are perfect they aren't but I think they honestly do the best job of any officials out there.  I think the NBA let's theirs be too much of the show of course it fits what the NBA has become which is more sports entertainment without the predetermined out comes. 

 

 

I was in two very large fantasy baseball leagues this year and subsequently watched a ton of baseball games. About all these baseball umpires get right on a regular basis is plays at first. The strike zone is a monster joke and they are about 50-50 on close stolen base attempts. If anything , the umpiring is getting worse by the year and MLB is finally doing something about it.

[dw49]

i thought it was a bad call

 

 

So by rule you think you can hit a QB when he's that far out of bounds because he was throwing the ball ? You're sure the rule reads like that ? You researched that ? 

[JoKeR]

A an officiating crew can not correctly determine what's a reviewable play then they shouldn't be allowed to officiate, go on a 2 week suspension and required training sessions. I find that inexcusable.

[Valpo2004]

Does anyone have a video or a gif of the Brazil foot play you guys keep talking about and explain to me what the call was?

 

I turned the game off in the first half because I needed to go to bed so I didn't get to see it.

[dw49]

Does anyone have a video or a gif of the Brazil foot play you guys keep talking about and explain to me what the call was?

 

I turned the game off in the first half because I needed to go to bed so I didn't get to see it.

 

 

If you do see the play , you need to look at Brazil's hands and forget his foot. It was clearly established that the ball never touched his foot. The question would be if when he touched the ball with his hand , was the other hand out of bounds ?

[mystrymaster]

All the calls on the Texans were officially right calls (it wasn't a catch, luck was pushed, and reed hit hilton after the play). They just aren't called all the time but they were the right call. The non calls on the Colts should have been calls by the rule book. So imo no calls really went our way

 

On the hit on Luck, I think the correct call would have been pass interference on the Texan covering Levon Brazil, he was shoved on that play before the ball got there.

[swflacoltsfans]

The punt and the fumble was a bad call by the refs. Colts should have kept the ball on the blocked punt and that KR for a fumble on Houston should have been Colts ball just as well as the ball never changed its course of direction. both times the colts were hosed and the Texans then Scored a touchdown or FG on both failed calls. 

Agree 100%. Bad calls all the way.

[Superman]

I was in two very large fantasy baseball leagues this year and subsequently watched a ton of baseball games. About all these baseball umpires get right on a regular basis is plays at first. The strike zone is a monster joke and they are about 50-50 on close stolen base attempts. If anything , the umpiring is getting worse by the year and MLB is finally doing something about it.

 

Baseball is also a much slower paced and more predictable game. You know where the action is going to be. You can put an official right at each base to make safe/out calls, five feet away from the play. I believe they're expanding replay to get those calls right (a couple years too late for Armando Gallaraga, but still). 

 

But we agree 100% on balls and strikes. And there's really nothing you can do about it, aside from having a robot call balls and strikes, and that's just ridiculous.