Flipping around the channels Sunday, I was watching the Bengals-Chargers game. The Bengals have a 3rd and goal from the 2, the QB rolls out, sees a path to the end zone, dives for the goalline and scores a TD. Replay showed his knee was down short, but he wasn't touched by a defender until after he was across the line. It was ruled a TD.
Here's the account from a news article:
Driskel appeared to score a touchdown with five minutes remaining in the second quarter on a 1-yard scramble that would have brought the Bengals within four, but replay overturned it saying he was short of the goal line.
In the past, quarterbacks were safe to go head-first and not be considered to be giving himself up, but that was changed this season. The league pointed out in its rules of emphasis that "A quarterback does not have to slide feet first to be considered to be giving himself up. Regardless whether the slide is feet-first or head-first, as long as he gives himself up, he should receive the protections afforded to him as a player in a defenseless posture."
The overturn meant the ball was spotted inches short of the goal line and brought up fourth-and-goal. Bengals guard Alex Redmond was then called for a false start and Cincinnati had to settle for a Bullock 23-yard field goal that cut the Chargers' margin to 14-6. |
It was ruled a TD on the field, yet replay overturned it, not on the basis of being down in the field of play, but on the basis that a QB clearly trying to score a TD was "giving himself up".
This should be a significant story today - and I don't think most fans have any clue about the play. The refs basically took a TD away from the Bengals in a game they lost by 5 points.
while competence is at a low point among officials, this kind of outcome FROM REPLAY is completely unacceptable. Under what possible viewpoint is it conclusive to say the QB was giving himself up on a dive for the goalline? Under what possible viewpoint is that even in the realm of possibility?
Did you like after the scrum last night in the first half of the Seattle game when the brain dead ref calls personal foul, 15 yard penalty, automatic first down, number 65 of the DEFENSE? When the infraction was actually on Ifedi and the camera showed Zimmer on the Vikings sideline screaming "It's on them!" and waving them in the right direction.
I don't know what the answer is? Pay these refs better? Make them full-time (did they do that already)? Make them obligated to face the media after games like they ask of the players and coaches?
It's not a big story because they ruled correctly. Story from August: http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/24277319/ball-spotted-first-touch-head-first-dives
Look, The Cowboys game alone was full of bad calls:
The fumble that was a fumble. but not recovered to the liking of the officials even though 3 Eagles were on it.
The OPI on Goedhart where the DB should have been called for a helmet to helmet hit.
Randy Gregory being called for PF, tackling a QB low, when he was on the ground and reached for Wentz.
THe official that called the OPI should be fired. He was nowhere near the play.
It's not a big story because they ruled correctly. Story from August: http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/24277319/ball-spotted-first-touch-head-first-dives
There is a huge difference between diving midfield and going for the endzone and that should be recognized.
A QB clearly trying to score a TD is not giving himself up.
There have been several cases of players diving for the end zone and this is the first time it has been overruled.
It is a terrible call.
Cincy overturned TD - ( New Window )
"Importantly, officials won't distinguish between a player obviously giving himself up and a player who is diving to avoid contact with would-be tacklers, according to Greg Meyer, a back judge on Cheffers' crew. In fact, Baynes said that the definition of "giving yourself up" will be a head-first dive or feet-first slide.
You can disagree with the rule, but overturning it was correct.
Quote:
I believe there was a rule change this year that turned head first dives into a give up situation for all players. They no longer need to be touched down when diving and the ball is marked where the knee touches.
A QB clearly trying to score a TD is not giving himself up.
There have been several cases of players diving for the end zone and this is the first time it has been overruled.
It is a terrible call.
I remember reading before the season that this rule was going to cause this exact problem. There were comments when the rule change came out that a QB diving into the endzone but putting a knee down was not going to get the TD.
Rules that change based on field position and circumstances (what if it was just short of the first down marker near mid-field, instead of the goalline?) make it harder to officiate, confuse fans, and slow things down.
It's not a big story because they ruled correctly. Story from August: http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/24277319/ball-spotted-first-touch-head-first-dives
This right here is the problem. The rules are so ambiguous in some cases that it's nearly impossible to get right. My interpretation of the rule is that a player must be giving himself up, not diving for extra yardage/a score for this rule to be activated and those protections to be in effect. No one in their right mind would think he was giving himself up instead of trying to score a TD there. It's absolutely the wrong call by my interpretation.
And yet the rule is written in such a way that we can have this debate where you view it as saying that ANY dive forward is considered giving yourself up and forward progress stopped. And that is also a legitimate interpretation, at least from my recollection of the rule.
I would say, though, that the ruling in that game is highly inconsistent with the way the rule has been applied to this point. The rule is supposed to be that a runner's progress is stopped when they initiate the act, whether it's sliding OR diving. That would have eliminated how many touchdowns this year if it were applied as it was applied in this case? Our own front page featured a TD by Engram that most certainly would have been called back if that rule were applied in the manner you suggest.
TL;DR - bad rules lead to bad rulings
This is the case. It might be of interest to rule book readers like me, but I think for most people the game is becoming incomprehensible.
The only defense of the NFL is that fans don't seem to know what constitues down by contact, what constitutes a touchdown etc. (I've asked some knowledgeable people and they don't know.) There are pseudo-rules fans cite like "one knee equals two feet" or "the ground can't cause a fumble". That's not helpful either.
If the rule is strictly interpreted as the play ends when the QB begins his slide or dive, why would that be different for other players. We saw several years ago that Cruz gave himself up, so any runner can do it.
I didn't see this play, but I assume the QB was beyond the LOS and was therefore a runner. If the start of his dive signals giving himself up, wouldn't any other runner diving for the end zone also be giving themselves up? Wouldn't a running back trying to leap the pile at the goal line be down as soon as he jumped? Or does the QB still get special consideration even when he becomes a runner, so that they can't dive but other players can?
Make the rule that you have to slide feet first as a clear sign you are giving yourself up, or else you need to be touched down. That way refs don't need to interpret intent and there is one less thing for them to screw up.
And I agree with the poster above that says maybe the refs should have to answer questions from the media after a game. It would surely help quell anger amongst fans if they actually got a detailed explanation of why the call was made or not made.
And are you going to call a penalty on a defender for tackling a QB making a dive for the goal line?
No.
It's not consistent under the rules for the QB not to have that protection from contact and yet be deprived of normal forward progress.
If the rule is strictly interpreted as the play ends when the QB begins his slide or dive, why would that be different for other players. We saw several years ago that Cruz gave himself up, so any runner can do it.
I didn't see this play, but I assume the QB was beyond the LOS and was therefore a runner. If the start of his dive signals giving himself up, wouldn't any other runner diving for the end zone also be giving themselves up? Wouldn't a running back trying to leap the pile at the goal line be down as soon as he jumped? Or does the QB still get special consideration even when he becomes a runner, so that they can't dive but other players can?
Make the rule that you have to slide feet first as a clear sign you are giving yourself up, or else you need to be touched down. That way refs don't need to interpret intent and there is one less thing for them to screw up.
I think we forget as fans that the refs are making the calls in "real " time and not sitting in their armchairs like we are. The speed of these players is incredible and they at times have a nano-second to make the call. Combine that with the myriad of rules in the NFL makes it extremely difficult to get it right the first time.
That being said, when it comes to replay that's a different story...
The answer is simple. Do it like college. Have an off field group of refs for every game reviewing every play real time and GET THE FUCKING CALLS RIGHT.
Too many players and coaches, not to mention paying fans, put too much on the line for the reffing to decide the outcome of games instead of the players and coaches.
It's garbage and it's insane garbage at that.
1. Did he have 2 feet down?
2. Did me make a football move?
3. Did the defender hit him with his helmet?
4. Did the defender touch his face mask?
5. Did the defender hit him too hard and make a lot of noise causing me to throw the flag?
6. Was the WR defenseless?
7. Was the ball moving when the WR went to the ground?
8. Was his forward progress stopped?
I stopped here...
On the play in question FMiC, the whole rule about a running surrendering himself is just nothing more than bullshit. If a QB is going to run with the ball and dive head first he is fair game just like anyone else. However, this rule is there for anyone running with the ball. If this was a court of law where precedent would come into play for future rulings, then anyone diving into the end zone who was not touched would be called down. We would have effectively taken on college rules where the moment you are grounded, the play is over.
Sometimes you can actually see the video but it keeps getting pulled down from YouTube...I was able to catch it recently. The things that happened in that game are inexplicable.
Frankly I thought the 2 calls against Philly....the opening KO fumble and the offensive PI on the Eagles, were further proof that the refs calls are definitely biased towards teams making the playoffs that would provide the best ratings.
officiating is a real problem and is definitely a reason for dwindling interest.
officiating is a real problem and is definitely a reason for dwindling interest.
I agree the officiating is an enormous problem. But the officials are being asked to officiate a game that is as complex as our tax system. Essentially no one understands it.
The NFL HQ is the IRS of sports.
But where is this "dwindling interest"? I wish that was true, but by all accounts the rating are good...?
bluepepper : 10:58 am : link : reply
no trying to figure out if he was giving himself up or trying to get more yardage. Doesn't matter. Knee down on dive, play over. The players need to learn the rules.
By the spirit of the rule, any player diving forward is marked down and ruled as giving themselves up, yet that hasn't been called this year. In fact, there was a play in the 1PM game where a RB dove for the end zone, hit the back of his lineman, and scooted into the end zone on his knees from the 1/2 yard line. What's the difference?
A TD there takes the lead.
What blows my mind about that one is that A REF THREW THE FLAG ON THE PLAY! Then, we are apparently told it was a "judgment call." But in one ref's judgment it was a penalty. How can you not then at least review it, when (it appears) two refs disagreed on the call.
There was some debate after the game over whether Wagner actually propelled himself over the line by using his teammates as leverage. But several former NFL referees posted to social media that a penalty should have been called.
“Clearly a foul by Seattle on the blocked FG,” former referee Terry McAulay, now a rules analyst for NBC, wrote on Twitter. “A player cannot use his hand[s] on an opponent or a teammate to jump through a gap to block a FG.”
Gene Steratore, the former NFL referee who now is a rules analyst for CBS, wrote on Twitter: “As many have noted, the play … should have been a penalty on Seattle for leverage. The officials should not have picked up the flag on that play.”
Mike Pereira, the former NFL vice president of officiating who is a rules analyst for Fox, tweeted: “Lots of talk about the Wagner block. The wording in the rule book is NEW this year and is clear. The new wording states, ‘May not place a hand or hands on a teammate or opponent in an attempt to jump through a gap to block an opponent’s kick or apparent kick.’ Case closed. Foul.”
Officials threw a flag but opted against enforcing a penalty. The blocked 47-yard kick came at a key moment in the game, with the Vikings trailing 6-0 with less than six minutes remaining. The 15-yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, if enforced, would have given the Vikings a first down at the Seattle 14-yard line.
There was debate about that? Why? It was blatantly obvious that he did exactly that.
There was debate about that? Why? It was blatantly obvious that he did exactly that.
This is why penalties should also be reviewed. The spot of the ball for example is also a judgement call. Not sure why the league has no problem reviewing that but will not allow the review of judgement penalties.
There was debate about that? Why? It was blatantly obvious that he did exactly that.
If you think about it, the propelling part actually has nothing to do with it. That's a subjective call. The subjectivity is removed by simply not allowing a player to place their hands on another player to get into position to propel...
So inconsistent.
He tried for the end zone and came up short. Nothing to see here.
Yet, Dallas kept the ball.
Why have referees judge if you have yourself up or not.. it should be on the offensive player to maintain balance and stay up..
Video just feeds this stuff and more often now ensures that the right (if too often too late) answer is eventually be found, but it's hell on the the refs and makes them look increasingly bad. And sometimes it can never be found, video or not.
What can be done about this? More refs probably isn't the answer (the ref huddles are already a disaster). Nor is increasing the amount of official ref review that occurs during the game. (Making penalties reviewable would beloved, even if severely limited, only by the car and beer companies.) I have no idea what to do about this, but they should try something.
Video just feeds this stuff and more often now ensures that the right (if too often too late) answer is eventually be found, but it's hell on the the refs and makes them look increasingly bad. And sometimes it can never be found, video or not.
What can be done about this? More refs probably isn't the answer (the ref huddles are already a disaster). Nor is increasing the amount of official ref review that occurs during the game. (Making penalties reviewable would beloved, even if severely limited, only by the car and beer companies.) I have no idea what to do about this, but they should try something.
I don't disagree with you as a general matter, but the Viking FG try was a no-brainer in my view. ONE REF THREW THE FLAG, and the call was a complete game-changer - basically ended a close game that could have gone the other way. If one ref throws the flag in that situation, and another ref sees it differently (although I don't know how since it was obvious), take a minute and review the video. Don't just pick up the flag.
Look, The Cowboys game alone was full of bad calls:
The fumble that was a fumble. but not recovered to the liking of the officials even though 3 Eagles were on it.
That was horrible freaking call. No clear possession? Who on Dallas was even near the ball? Nobody was. The NFL needs to get someone in the main hub who can actually make a correct determination on replay calls.