Bad call on MNF

[jknezek]

The NFL was doing everything it could to spin it their way. If the NFL reversed the decision it would make them look 1,000,000 times worse. The replay rules are murky in this situation and the actual ref on the field is the one who makes the final call in these situations (or did before this three-ring circus started) and like HE was going to overturn THAT call in Seattle.

The rules are not murky.  It was ESPN and the majority of people to this day whose understanding of the rules is murky.   It was a bang-bang play on the field and the replay didn't show Jennings having sole control prior to Tate's control with his left hand.

Your conspiracy theory isn't even consistent.  If the NFL and the referrees was so worried about their appearance, they would have overturned the play at the time of the replay.  That would have made the majority of people who don't understand the rules happy and Goodell wouldn't have gotten 70,000 voicemails.

I read that the replacement officials made 65% of their calls in favor of the home team. That's the majority I believe officials were more likely to cater to.

I'd be interested to know if that stat is a) true and b) how it compares to last season with the regular refs. Putting that stat in a vacuum is insufficient to draw any conclusions about the replacement refs.

[smedindy]

I think Bill Barnwell has done some analysis on this on Grantland, also some work was done on Football Outsiders.

[smedindy]

The NFL was doing everything it could to spin it their way. If the NFL reversed the decision it would make them look 1,000,000 times worse. The replay rules are murky in this situation and the actual ref on the field is the one who makes the final call in these situations (or did before this three-ring circus started) and like HE was going to overturn THAT call in Seattle.

The rules are not murky.  It was ESPN and the majority of people to this day whose understanding of the rules is murky.   It was a bang-bang play on the field and the replay didn't show Jennings having sole control prior to Tate's control with his left hand.

Your conspiracy theory isn't even consistent.  If the NFL and the referrees was so worried about their appearance, they would have overturned the play at the time of the replay.  That would have made the majority of people who don't understand the rules happy and Goodell wouldn't have gotten 70,000 voicemails.

What? Two refs made different calls on the field. No conference was called to sort it out. And if I recall, a call of 'simultaneous possession' CAN'T be reviewed. The refs didn't control players and others from the site of the catch after it was made, either. It was horrible.

The NFL HAD to back up the replacement refs Tuesday - otherwise they had absolutely zero leverage instead of 1% leverage.

Of course, that's the tree - the forest is the blatant PI, the egregious calls on Green Bay before that play in the last two drives - the horrible job the refs did all over the place last Sunday, etc. etc.

[smedindy]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/38256/what-the-return-of-the-nfl-refs-really-means

[AO]

The NFL was doing everything it could to spin it their way. If the NFL reversed the decision it would make them look 1,000,000 times worse. The replay rules are murky in this situation and the actual ref on the field is the one who makes the final call in these situations (or did before this three-ring circus started) and like HE was going to overturn THAT call in Seattle.

The rules are not murky.  It was ESPN and the majority of people to this day whose understanding of the rules is murky.   It was a bang-bang play on the field and the replay didn't show Jennings having sole control prior to Tate's control with his left hand.

Your conspiracy theory isn't even consistent.  If the NFL and the referrees was so worried about their appearance, they would have overturned the play at the time of the replay.  That would have made the majority of people who don't understand the rules happy and Goodell wouldn't have gotten 70,000 voicemails.

What? Two refs made different calls on the field. No conference was called to sort it out. And if I recall, a call of 'simultaneous possession' CAN'T be reviewed. The refs didn't control players and others from the site of the catch after it was made, either. It was horrible.

The NFL HAD to back up the replacement refs Tuesday - otherwise they had absolutely zero leverage instead of 1% leverage.

Of course, that's the tree - the forest is the blatant PI, the egregious calls on Green Bay before that play in the last two drives - the horrible job the refs did all over the place last Sunday, etc. etc.

You recall incorrectly, Simultaneous possession is reviewable in the end-zone.  The review didn't affirm the call on the field, it just didn't overturn it due to Golden Tate clearly showing some control over the ball with his left hand. 

The NFL officiating department did not back up the replacement refs on the whole play.  They acknowledged the missed pass interference that should have ended the game in the Packer's favor.  They didn't say "but, that never gets called in a hail mary situation". 

The home team bias doesn't make much sense if you watched Green Bay's go-ahead TD drive.  The weak pass interference around the 50 on 3rd down, and the review at the 2 yard line that gave Rodgers the first down instead of having to kick the FG.

[smedindy]

Of course you're missing the other bungled calls on the last two Seattle drives, especially the phantom roughing-the-passer call. It was a disgrace on all fronts.

There is this article, too, where there IS confusion on what can and can't be reviewed until the NFL made it's Maoist after-the-fact statement. The NFL.com writer (house organ) said it wasn't. And before this season, it was the ref's call entirely.

http://deadspin.com/5946219/last-nights-missed-call-could-have-easily-been-overturned

[bashbrother]

It is good.

[smedindy]

Agreed, Bashbro.

I've seen some bad spots watching the NCAC but never saw them mark off a 27-yard personal foul!

[jknezek]

I think Bill Barnwell has done some analysis on this on Grantland, also some work was done on Football Outsiders.

There is nothing in that article about penalties called on home versus away teams.

[jknezek]

From an ESPN article located here:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8402489/nfl-replacement-officials-affecting-vegas-bets

"Penalties were skewed in favor of home teams during the first two weeks this year, with visitors getting 55.1 percent of 419 penalties. Last year began in a similar fashion -- visitors took 54.8 percent of 407 total penalties through the first two games -- before evening out over the rest of the season. Penalties were relatively even between home and road teams for all of 2010 and 2011, and it's anybody's guess how this year's penalties will split."

At least through the first two games, the replacement refs favored the home team no more than the usual NFL refs did the year before.

[smedindy]

I think Bill Barnwell has done some analysis on this on Grantland, also some work was done on Football Outsiders.

There is nothing in that article about penalties called on home versus away teams.

But plenty of grist for the mill about the types of calls the replacements bungled beyond repair.

[Pat Coleman]

From an ESPN article located here:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8402489/nfl-replacement-officials-affecting-vegas-bets

"Penalties were skewed in favor of home teams during the first two weeks this year, with visitors getting 55.1 percent of 419 penalties. Last year began in a similar fashion -- visitors took 54.8 percent of 407 total penalties through the first two games -- before evening out over the rest of the season. Penalties were relatively even between home and road teams for all of 2010 and 2011, and it's anybody's guess how this year's penalties will split."

At least through the first two games, the replacement refs favored the home team no more than the usual NFL refs did the year before.

Thanks. I apologize for not knowing the context either.

[smedindy]

In week three it was 51.3% towards the visitors. But also mangled challenge / TO issues, horrible spotting on penalties AND no penalty on one egregious hit.

[02 Warhawk]

You know it was a bad call when Vegas and other online betting agencies issuing refunds.

How often does that happen?

[AO]

You know it was a bad call when Vegas and other online betting agencies issuing refunds.

How often does that happen?

Whenever they want someone to continue betting.  I'm sure the NFL will make sure the gamblers are happy, that must be their top priority.