Bad refereeing in sport

[Alex Holowczak]

There have been many complaints (OK, not on here!) about the refereeing of the Liverpool-Man United game on Saturday, and this is an issue that the forum has previously discussed.

This pales into insignificance, in my opinion, to an NFL game between the Green Bay Packers (who I support) and the Seattle Seahawks, played overnight in Seattle.

The proper NFL referees are on strike, and replacements have been drafted in. The refereeing had been dubious at times, but yesterday was the disaster that people feared would happen.

After a series of iffy penalties against them, Green Bay led 12-7, and it was the last play of the game. Seattle had the ball. Their QB threw to the corner of the endzone, where the Seattle player pushed a Green Bay player (which would have been a penalty against them), and then a different Green Bay player caught it anyway for an interception. A Seattle player then wrapped his hands around the caught ball, to claim it was a touchdown.

That's what happened. The referees had another version of events. They ignored the pass interference altogether. The two referees standing right next to the play gave opposite decisions - one signalled touchback, the other signalled touchdown. The video official called for a review. The referee then rewatched the play, and after a lengthy pause, declared that the ruling on the field stood, and Seattle won 14-12.

The rule is that if two players who catch the ball simultaneously, the ball goes to the offence. If a player catches it, and another player tries to steal it, then the original catcher caught it. The Seattle player who "caught" the ball afterwards said "I think so. ... Oh, well maybe he did. But I took it from him [...]'' In other words, he admitted that it wasn't a touchdown. Maybe if he knew what he'd just admitted to, he'd have said otherwise.

It being 2012, several Packers vented their frustration on Twitter; some said that the fines that undoubtedly result could be used to pay the regular referees.

There's a video of this here: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... line_stack

A photo immortalises this decision. Number 84 is signalling touchback. Number 26 is signalling touchdown.


Apparently, the NFL will clarify the call today. Not quite sure what they can say.

Not happy.

[Sean Hewitt]

There have been many complaints (OK, not on here!) about the refereeing of the Liverpool-Man United game on Saturday, and this is an issue that the forum has previously discussed.

And all of those complaints were wrong. The referee got all of the big calls absolutely right.

[Alex Holowczak]

There have been many complaints (OK, not on here!) about the refereeing of the Liverpool-Man United game on Saturday, and this is an issue that the forum has previously discussed.

And all of those complaints were wrong. The referee got all of the big calls absolutely right.

I suspected so.

This is where US sporting punditry is good - they actually referenced the rules in question when discussing the quality of the decision afterwards!

[David Gilbert]

The video official called for a review. The referee then rewatched the play, and after a lengthy pause, declared that the ruling on the field stood, and Seattle won 14-12.

Tricky this because the booth cannot review who caught the ball, only on whether the ball was caught. If they could the touchdown would have been overturned. That's rules for you ....... and replacement officials of course.

[Alex Holowczak]

The video official called for a review. The referee then rewatched the play, and after a lengthy pause, declared that the ruling on the field stood, and Seattle won 14-12.

Tricky this because the booth cannot review who caught the ball, only on whether the ball was caught. If they could the touchdown would have been overturned. That's rules for you ....... and replacement officials of course.

Not sure what they could and couldn't review, but could the touchdown have been overturned for Golden Tate's obvious shove in the back on Sam Shields?

[David Gilbert]

No. It's what's known as a 'judgement call' so for example they can't review holding calls or pass interference calls (or non-calls) - otherwise they'd be there all day!

[Alex Holowczak]

No. It's what's known as a 'judgement call' so for example they can't review holding calls or pass interference calls (or non-calls) - otherwise they'd be there all day!

So there were two key judgement calls:
(1) Golden Tate's push on Sam Shields - no penalty
(2) Whoever caught the ball - made no decision

I still don't get "The ruling on the field stands." The two referees made two different decisions, and from the video I've seen, it was never announced exactly what the decision was. There was no challenge from the coaches against a decision, because it was in the last two minutes. Poor communication...

If the two key decisions on the play couldn't be considered, it makes me wonder why the play was reviewed at all.

[David Gilbert]

No. It's what's known as a 'judgement call' so for example they can't review holding calls or pass interference calls (or non-calls) - otherwise they'd be there all day!

If the two key decisions on the play couldn't be considered, it makes me wonder why the play was reviewed at all.

All touchdowns are reviewed - but they can only do this in accordance with the complex NFL rules. It's tough because the officials missed the crucial push, just glad we don't have reviews in football!

[Alex Holowczak]

The NFL has released a statement.

The highlights include:

"While the ball is in the air, Tate can be seen shoving Green Bay cornerback Sam Shields to the ground. This should have been a penalty for offensive pass interference, which would have ended the game. It was not called and is not reviewable in instant replay."

This basically admits the referees made a mistake.

"When the players hit the ground in the end zone, the officials determined that both Tate and Jennings had possession of the ball. Under the rule for simultaneous catch, the ball belongs to Tate, the offensive player. The result of the play was a touchdown."

This is a judgement call, which I believe the referees got wrong, based on the replay.

"Replay Official Howard Slavin stopped the game for an instant replay review. The aspects of the play that were reviewable included if the ball hit the ground and who had possession of the ball. In the end zone, a ruling of a simultaneous catch is reviewable. That is not the case in the field of play, only in the end zone."

So they could actually review the play in this case!

"Referee Wayne Elliott determined that no indisputable visual evidence existed to overturn the call on the field, and as a result, the on-field ruling of touchdown stood. The NFL Officiating Department reviewed the video today and supports the decision not to overturn the on-field ruling following the instant replay review."

I think there's evidence to show it was the wrong decision from the replay, but to be fair, I can see that having decided it was a touchdown, there's no clear evidence to show the decision was wrong.

"The result of the game is final."

This is absolutely correct. It's not the NFL's business to go around changing results of games.

However, what is clear is that the NFL have admitted that the referees made a mistake in missing the pass interference penalty on Tate, and that Green Bay should have won the game.

Credit to the NFL for doing this. Taking the FA and Liverpool-Man United, why don't the FA do this when controversial decisions are made? At least then, everyone knows where they stand.

[David Gilbert]

Well there you go. Few people understand every peculiarity of NFL rules. So the simultaneous catch was reviewable because it was in the end zone, but I suppose there was not enough evidence that he had maintained possession and control of the ball until he hit the ground, so they couldn't overturn the decision on the field. The offence pass interference was not reviewable.

[Alex Holowczak]

I was reading YouTube comments for this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hTFMD5NX1Q

This is why chess is the best sport in the world.

HarryTheHorseCritic 1 minute ago

I like the cut of his jib.

[Matthew Turner]

I have watched the disputed catch a few times and it might be touchdown or it might not, but I think it was a perfectly justifiable call. Some of the other calls on the game winning drive were just awful as were the calls in the Patriots - Ravens game. What surprises me is that the calls in the first week were very good, but suddenly it has all fallen to pieces.
I had a bet on Green Bay to win the match, but I've just noticed that Paddy Power have given me an 'NFL Justice Refund' which is jolly nice of them.

[Alex Holowczak]

I have watched the disputed catch a few times and it might be touchdown or it might not, but I think it was a perfectly justifiable call.

I would agree that the decision that the ball was caught was justifiable. (I still think it was the wrong judgement.) The thing that makes that decision irrelevant is the Offensive Pass Interference non-call when Tate shoved Shields. Even if you then rule that Tate caught it, the touchdown doesn't stand. The NFL admitted that the OPI should have been called.

Some of the other calls on the game winning drive were just awful

There was a play on the previous Seattle drive where GB had an interception waved off due a widely criticised Roughing the Passer call. Admittedly, Cedric Benson fumbling when GB next had possession didn't help matters.

as were the calls in the Patriots - Ravens game

Couldn't help but laugh at the one where the Ravens had a 15-yard penalty because their coach called a timeout.

suddenly it has all fallen to pieces.

It's reached the stage now where absolutely no one seems to have any confidence in the replacement referees. So even when get the call right (as I think they did on the Tucker kick to win the game for the Ravens), there's a controversy, and the first thing the TV shows are a dozen replays and commentators questioning it.

[Matthew Turner]

I have watched the disputed catch a few times and it might be touchdown or it might not, but I think it was a perfectly justifiable call.

I would agree that the decision that the ball was caught was justifiable. (I still think it was the wrong judgement.) The thing that makes that decision irrelevant is the Offensive Pass Interference non-call when Tate shoved Shields. Even if you then rule that Tate caught it, the touchdown doesn't stand. The NFL admitted that the OPI should have been called.

Yes the officials made a mistake, but pass interference calls are difficult to make and even the number one officials sometimes make mistakes on these. They are particularly difficult on hail mary passes because basically everyone is rushing towards the endzone. Even the regular officials are more likely to make a mistake/not make a call on a final play

Some of the other calls on the game winning drive were just awful

There was a play on the previous Seattle drive where GB had an interception waved off due a widely criticised Roughing the Passer call. Admittedly, Cedric Benson fumbling when GB next had possession didn't help matters.

as were the calls in the Patriots - Ravens game

Couldn't help but laugh at the one where the Ravens had a 15-yard penalty because their coach called a timeout.

In fact this was a correct call. Coaches are not allowed on the field of play and the NFL highlighted this before the weekend's games (to avoid the intimidation of officials). Harbaugh tried to claim that he calling a time-out but I think it was absolutely clear that this wasn't the case.

suddenly it has all fallen to pieces.

It's reached the stage now where absolutely no one seems to have any confidence in the replacement referees. So even when get the call right (as I think they did on the Tucker kick to win the game for the Ravens), there's a controversy, and the first thing the TV shows are a dozen replays and commentators questioning it.

[Alex Holowczak]

Yes the officials made a mistake, but pass interference calls are difficult to make and even the number one officials sometimes make mistakes on these. They are particularly difficult on hail mary passes because basically everyone is rushing towards the endzone. Even the regular officials are more likely to make a mistake/not make a call on a final play

I suppose. The problem I have with it is that it was clear for all to see, but it couldn't be reviewed. I get that it's a judgement call, but this was so clearcut that there was no reason not to use the technology, other than the rule preventing it. It's a bit like the situation in rugby, "Is there any reason why I can't award the try?" Something like that last night would have been fine.

In fact this was a correct call.

Sure, but his reaction was funny!

The other funny one was the 49ers kicking off v Minnesota, and the penalty for an illegal block in the back... on the kicking team.