Worst Playoff Officiating (Non) Call Ever

[Valmy77 13125]

7 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

I'll take a few commercials to have the correct team playing in the SB.  Otherwise what's the fucking point?

Failing to stop an opponent when trying to protect a lead and then turning it over in overtime are marks of a true champion in your mind? The refs did not lose that game, the Saints did.

Edited January 22, 2019 by Valmy77

[BradInATX 9208]

5 hours ago, Steamboat1874 said:

Was it so obvious no one should have missed it?

No.

Neither ref can tell exactly where that ball is when the contact happened and when you look at the replays from the angles the refs have you can't either. The ball is right there in real time.

 

It's obvious you're being intentionally obtuse. The screencap below I pulled from the video YOU posted upthread, as "evidence" that it was a "bang bang" play or whatever nonsense you were spouting. The ball is at least 5 feet from the WR, and you can see the referee at the bottom looking DIRECTLY at the play. There's also another ref offscreen (you can see it in other videos) who is equally as close, staring directly at the play.

Everything about your post is stupid.

Edited January 22, 2019 by BradInATX

[Vic Mackey 46939]

32 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

What I've found amazing is that every time using or extending instant replay is proposed in MLB or the NFL or wherever, you'll have a horde of people who show up railing against instant replay because "it will take the human element out of the game." 

I want to know where these people are now and if they're happy that "the human element" fucked the Saints?

I am. Fuck the Saints and their franchise and fanbase. They put a cash bounty on Favre in 2009. 

Any misery to that fanbase and team is hilarious. Had 2 chances to put the game away after this call. Didn't. Benefitted from a no call on Goff the drive before.

But now it's whining and crying about refs from them and it's absolutely hilarious.

[Valmy77 13125]

1 minute ago, Vic Mackey said:

I am. Fuck the Saints and their franchise and fanbase. They put a cash bounty on Favre in 2009. 

Any misery to that fanbase and team is hilarious. Had 2 chances to put the game away after this call. Didn't. Benefitted from a no call on Goff the drive before.

But now it's whining and crying about refs from them and it's absolutely hilarious.

It is pathetic and I am embarrassed for them.

[Guest]

so y'all embrace the WWE element in NFL officiating?

 

How bout they get the more obvious than hell calls correct?

[BradInATX 9208]

7 minutes ago, Vic Mackey said:

I am. Fuck the Saints and their franchise and fanbase. They put a cash bounty on Favre in 2009. 

Any misery to that fanbase and team is hilarious. Had 2 chances to put the game away after this call. Didn't. Benefitted from a no call on Goff the drive before.

But now it's whining and crying about refs from them and it's absolutely hilarious.

How many posts would I find on TOS with you crying about the Dez catch, if I went back and looked?

 

O/U 50

[4th&Five 41462]

the idea that the saints didn't play their best for 4 quarters so they didn't deserve to win is so dumb.  they took the ball down to the 13 with 1:40 left and if a penalty is called that would have been 99 out of 100 times then they are in the super bowl.  they played well enough to win and should have.  

i'm a saints fan so i'm obviously pissed but to say only saints fans are complaining is laughable.  i haven't heard anyone on any media outlet that agreed with the call.

Edited January 22, 2019 by 4th&Five

[Tex Pete 20196]

On ‎1‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 10:17 AM, JBJ said:

Faceguarding is sticking your hand in the opponents face and is only illegal at the highschool level.

You are allowed to play the receiver without playing the ball.

I'm assuming you mean faceguarding is legal in HS football.

And the play in question was not bang-bang. It wasn't even close. The DB wasn't looking at all, had no idea where the football was, and his team is going to the Super Bowl because the refs let the Rams get away with cheating.

[Saint Tacky 1610]

2 hours ago, hpslugga said:

Need more tangible evidence than my admittedly amateurish scientific take on it? 

You're entitled to your amateurish scientific [lengthy] opinion.  I see Tatum hitting Fuqua and the ball ricocheting backwards off Fuqua's hands. Fuck the Steelers.

[C-Man 27083]

5 hours ago, Steamboat1874 said:

There is no rule that says you have to make a play on the ball.

If you are at the receiver when the ball arrives you can make contact without looking for the ball. The helmet to helmet thing is something different however.

I think it was interference but I also can see how the ref would not call that. If a ref would have been at the exact spot of the two players it would probably be called but both of them were about 8 to 10 yards away on the sideline.

3 hours ago, Beau Vine said:

BTW, not the worst blown call in pro sports playoff history.  It has a ways to go to match this one:

Denkinger's blown call directly cost the Cardinals the World Series. In retrospect, I'm glad Brett got a championship and the Cards' fan-base is pretty easy to hate on.

1 hour ago, Trey3216 said:

Terribly egregious non-call.  The equivalent of this...

 

 

[Underdog 28460]

LMAO at Vic being butthurt over Favre.  Fuck that drama queen. 

[Llano Estacado 1257]

Denkinger's blown call directly cost the Cardinals the World Series. In retrospect, I'm glad Brett got a championship and the Cards' fan-base is pretty easy to hate on.

 

Vic and Valmy will be along in a moment to inform us that Orta was the leadoff in the bottom of the 9th of game 6, ergo fuck everyone playing by the same rules, the Cards should have played better and it’s on them to occasionally get 4 outs.

[Red Five 40696]

Eh it is a judgement call. I thought maybe the Ref thought it was uncatchable...who knows what he was looking at. But it is hardly the worst call ever.
But it is not like if it was called the Saints automatically win the game. They were not even ahead at the time. They should have stopped the Rams. Or not turned it over in overtime. The Rams won the game.

Everything you just said is wrong.

[Valmy77 13125]

4 minutes ago, Red Five said:

Everything you just said is wrong.

It wouldn't be the first time.

But I disagree. Rams won it. Gotta give them credit, they have some of the best kids in the country. Sean McVay is a good friend of mine.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 hour ago, Valmy77 said:

Eh it is a judgement call. I thought maybe the Ref thought it was uncatchable...who knows what he was looking at. But it is hardly the worst call ever.

But it is not like if it was called the Saints automatically win the game. They were not even ahead at the time. They should have stopped the Rams. Or not turned it over in overtime. The Rams won the game.

You need to buy glasses. Uncatchable ?  The hit was 4 yds before the ball was even in the vicinity of being deemed catchable or uncatchable.  The receiver never had an opportunity to even make a play on the ball, as his head was being smacked by the defenders helmet.

[JBJ 3649]

4 minutes ago, Tex Pete said:

I'm assuming you mean faceguarding is legal in HS football.

No.  Faceguarding is a penalty in high school football but not the NCAA or NFL.

[Valmy77 13125]

13 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

You need to buy glasses. Uncatchable ?  The hit was 4 yds before the ball was even in the vicinity of being deemed catchable or uncatchable.  The receiver never had an opportunity to even make a play on the ball, as his head was being smacked by the defenders helmet.

I was not aware that there was a vicinity requirement to referees deeming a pass catchable or uncatchable. In any case that was just my initial guess as to why they decided not to call it.

Pass interference, like so many other penalties, is ultimately an arbitrary judgement call. If you get the call, great. If not well that sucks but you still have to win the game. The refs blowing that call in no way excuses the Saints or takes anything away from the Rams.

Edited January 22, 2019 by Valmy77

[Tex Pete 20196]

12 minutes ago, JBJ said:

No.  Faceguarding is a penalty in high school football but not the NCAA or NFL.

Unless the rule has recently changed, faceguarding is not and has never been a penalty in Texas HS football. I can't speak to other states.

[hpslugga 4050]

1 hour ago, Saint Tacky said:

You're entitled to your amateurish scientific [lengthy] opinion.  I see Tatum hitting Fuqua and the ball ricocheting backwards off Fuqua's hands. Fuck the Steelers.

That’s not a matter of opinion. 

“Steak is better than seafood” is an opinion.

”Blue is the best color” is an opinion.

”Rock and roll is better than country” is an opinion.

”There is no chance in hell Jack Tatum didn’t touch that ball” is not an opinion. It’s a statement of verifiable fact and it’s corroborated by indisputable video evidence. The fact that you refuse to admit that speaks only to your bias and your willingness to play Make Believe and Pretend. You say that you “see Tatum hitting Fuqua and the ball ricocheting backwards off Fuqua's hands“ and that’s complete horseshit. You didn’t see that. You want to see that, but you don’t actually see it.

Edited January 22, 2019 by hpslugga

[Richard Kimball 1492]

2 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

I'll take a few commercials to have the correct team playing in the SB.  Otherwise what's the fucking point?

I hear you, but the non-call is not a reviewable play. Was it a bad call? Yes. Would the Saints have won if it had been correctly called? Yes. But there's no way you want to open up the Pandora's box of what would happen if coaches could issue challenges because a penalty wasn't called. Get off my lawn and all that, but high school is more enjoyable in a lot of ways because there's no replay. 

[Saint Tacky 1610]

22 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

That’s not a matter of opinion. 

“Steak is better than seafood” is an opinion.

”Blue is the best color” is an opinion.

”Rock and roll is better than country” is an opinion.

”There is no chance in hell Jack Tatum didn’t touch that ball” is not an opinion. It’s a statement of verifiable fact and it’s corroborated by indisputable video evidence. The fact that you refuse to admit that speaks only to your bias and your willingness to play Make Believe and Pretend. You say that you “see Tatum hitting Fuqua and the ball ricocheting backwards off Fuqua's hands“ and that’s complete horseshit. You didn’t see that. You want to see that, but you don’t actually see it.

Clearly you believe you're entitled to your own facts.  I disagree.  My current opinion is you are a self-righteous twat.  I actually see that.

[4th&Five 41462]

Hard to see any argument for a baseball call being worse when you have to lose 4 games to be eliminated. 

[AUinHsv 576]

5 hours ago, hpslugga said:

That's the view of the Make Believe and Pretend Raiders, one of whom admittedly concocted his own "conspiracy theory," his words, to "explain" how the NFL had a "vendetta," again his words, against the Raiders.

The reality is that there's no way in hell Jack Tatum didn't touch that ball. No ball bounces like that after a WR drops it while running in the opposite direction of where the ball goes flying like that. You don't need to be a Pittsburgh Steelers fan to believe that, you just need to understand basic laws of physics to understand it. When a ~10-pound leather football is thrown ~50-80 mph to the North to a WR running North-to-Northeast and when the ball hits him and only him, then bounces off his hands and travels fully 21 fucking feet to the fucking South, there's something else at play...like a DB who threw his forearm at the WR and in the process hits the ball as well.

Need more tangible evidence than my admittedly amateurish scientific take on it? Watch the video.

Go to 21:39 and you clearly see that Jack Tatum makes indisputably direct contact with the football. Now, it's quite true that it does look like after Tatum hits it that it then glances off of Fuqua's shoulder, but that's irrelevant because the double touch rule was deemed null and void the exact moment a defensive player touches the ball regardless of sequence (i.e. it doesn't matter who the last one to touch it was, just that the defensive player touched it at all). This is also why the correct call was made when, for example, John Mackey scored that long TD in Super Bowl 5: because while it was true that Eddie Hinton made contact with the ball, Mel Renfro very clearly made contact with it as well, which nullified the double touch rule (which never should have been a rule to begin with).

No, George Atkinson, Phil Villipiano and all those other whiny-assed Raiders are dead wrong to belittle that play as the "Immaculate Deception." Those are simply homerisms that have absolutely no truth in them whatsoever. And again, you don't need to be a Steelers fan to understand that. You just need to watch those 70's Raiders players in ANY of those Top 10 videos that the NFL Network shitted out like diarrhea in the past few years. They seriously believe that a Raider player should have topped EVERY one of those lists and they whine like crazy when they don't.

Exactly - someone did a special for I think 30 for 30 and proved from a physics view that the ball had to be hit by Tatum. Even if it hit Fuqua in the back it isn't changing directions. Now the real unanswered question on the play is did Harris catch it cleanly or off the ground? No photos or videos exist either way to my knowledge

[Beau Vine 54018]

3 hours ago, Richard Kimball said:

 

A non-called penalty is not a reviewable play, and I'm not aware of anyone who has suggested allowing coaches to challenge a non-called penalty. 

 

I've suggested it, because the Canadian League allows it, and it works fine.

[Richard Kimball 1492]

3 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I've suggested it, because the Canadian League allows it, and it works fine.

[Beau Vine 54018]

1 hour ago, Tex Pete said:

Unless the rule has recently changed, faceguarding is not and has never been a penalty in Texas HS football. I can't speak to other states.

UIL uses NCAA rules for nearly everything, so if it's legal in the NCAA, it's legal in UIL.  Perhaps he's taking about one of the nancy-boy private leagues. 

[Beau Vine 54018]

40 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

Hard to see any argument for a baseball call being worse when you have to lose 4 games to be eliminated. 

If the guy gets that call correct, a different team wins the World Series.

[hpslugga 4050]

1 hour ago, Saint Tacky said:

Clearly you believe you're entitled to your own facts.

It’s best that you not guess what I believe, and what you just posted there is a paradigmatic example of the pot calling the silverware black.

Edited January 22, 2019 by hpslugga

[Tex Pete 20196]

23 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

UIL uses NCAA rules for nearly everything, so if it's legal in the NCAA, it's legal in UIL.  Perhaps he's taking about one of the nancy-boy private leagues. 

I saw that some states do use some other set of rules, so I suppose that's where he's getting it from. I played 5A HS football in Texas and I faceguarded plenty because I could. 

 

[hookem48 4637]

On ‎1‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 6:30 AM, AUinHsv said:

I may be wrong but I remember it being Mark Washington.

yes.....you're wrong

[Eskimohorn 5621]

As a person who doesn't like replay, a couple of thoughts.
A non-called penalty is not a reviewable play, and I'm not aware of anyone who has suggested allowing coaches to challenge a non-called penalty. 
To me, it's not the matter of taking out the "human element," it's the fact that it delays the game, increases bickering, and most of the reviewed calls are so close, they could go either way. 
College basketball seems to have done a good job of implementing review without slowing down the game, but for the most part, I'd rather take a bad call every so often than have to deal with the five minute commercial breaks that happen with every review. 

I don’t see how you can use review for subjective calls and non-calls. Hate to break it to everyone, but there is a non-call on nearly every play.

While this was egregious PI, I’m not sure how they will open up the review process for subjective non-calls.

Maybe have a playoff appeal inside 2 minutes to right egregious calls that affect the outcome of games. Something that prevents the NFL from stopping the flow of most games

[Beau Vine 54018]

22 hours ago, CurlyDumps said:

My theory is that the would-be penalized action was so unusually egregious that the refs' brains just failed to process what they saw in time.  How often do we see a DB just violently take a receiver out like that - that early? This was not your father's pass interference infraction.

 

I think this is spot on.  Anyone who has ever officiated any sport knows that sometimes it's hardest to make a call when something completely unexpected happens.  (I always thought umpiring baseball got easier as the league got higher, because the older the players are, the less likely it is that someone is going to do something stupid that surprises you.)  It's kind of like catching a pass when you're just completely wide open.  Sometimes you just freeze up and clank it.  

[Beau Vine 54018]

34 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

I don’t see how you can use review for subjective calls and non-calls. 

 

The CFL has been doing for a couple of years now.  Works fine.  I don't think I've ever seen a coach challenge an offensive holding call, but PI and illegal contact calls (and non-calls) get regularly challenged.  

[BB65 476]

26 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I think this is spot on.  Anyone who has ever officiated any sport knows that sometimes it's hardest to make a call when something completely unexpected happens.  (I always thought umpiring baseball got easier as the league got higher, because the older the players are, the less likely it is that someone is going to do something stupid that surprises you.)  It's kind of like catching a pass when you're just completely wide open.  Sometimes you just freeze up and clank it.   

Beau is correct here. I officiated sports for over 20 years and the unexpected can get you in a lot of trouble but football is different than other sports officiating. In football you have other officials to help you out and it is not uncommon to have a meeting of the officials and throw a late flag.

[Tex Pete 20196]

1 hour ago, Eskimohorn said:

 

I don’t see how you can use review for subjective calls and non-calls. Hate to break it to everyone, but there is a non-call on nearly every play.

While this was egregious PI, I’m not sure how they will open up the review process for subjective non-calls.

Maybe have a playoff appeal inside 2 minutes to right egregious calls that affect the outcome of games. Something that prevents the NFL from stopping the flow of most games
 

 

Targeting is very subjective, and they may actually get it wrong more than they getnit right. Terrible rule and terrible review and ruling. 

[1bigtx 129]

The no call on holding against the Georgia tackle in the 1984 Cotton Bowl right in front of the SEC referee.  They used split crews in those days.  Most likely cost Texas the National Championship.  I never got over it.

[Mileslong 4718]

Great point.  Goleta is 100 miles from LA, so that would be like someone assuming a ref living in Waco, Tyler, Ardmore, or all the way out towards Wichita Falls might be a Cowboys fan.  Highly unlikely....

I agree that I doubt there was any influence due to this location but people in those towns you mentioned would all be cowboy fans

[Steamboat1874 4037]

19 hours ago, BradInATX said:

It's obvious you're being intentionally obtuse. The screencap below I pulled from the video YOU posted upthread, as "evidence" that it was a "bang bang" play or whatever nonsense you were spouting. The ball is at least 5 feet from the WR, and you can see the referee at the bottom looking DIRECTLY at the play. There's also another ref offscreen (you can see it in other videos) who is equally as close, staring directly at the play.

Everything about your post is stupid.

Yes that is great but tell me old wise one.....which ref had this angle ???

I will tell you...none.

Both refs are on the sideline...one about eight yards downfield and the other one about eight yards upfield.

[PencilPusher 454]

16 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

The CFL has been doing for a couple of years now.  Works fine.  I don't think I've ever seen a coach challenge an offensive holding call, but PI and illegal contact calls (and non-calls) get regularly challenged.  

Incidentally, if it were college football, the targeting piece of this discussion would have been reviewed, penalty would have been assessed, etc. etc. 

Discussion here has been pretty entertaining. Like the couple of Don Quixotes tilting at windmills with respect to suggesting the officials could be absolved of blame (bang-bang play et. al.) They are either Rams fans, contrarians, trolls, or trial lawyers in real life. Also like the declarative statements that the "right' or "better" team won. I'd counter with the "luckier" team since the the no call in favor of the Rams was the poker equivalent of receiving the only possible card in the deck you had to have to win on the river to beat a hand that would win 90+% of the time. To the Rams credit, they took advantage of the gift. The difference between championships and non championships many times has a huge luck element, but I'd rather see that element derived from a turn of a friendly/unfriendly card than inept human actions. 

Speaking of ineptitude, the NFL had a huge officiating problem this season that will probably be paid lip service to (despite the issue being discussed here) in the offseason because of the continued inept leadership of Roger Goodell and the owners who continue to support their "lackey" (which is why I am hoping for another "snowmageddon" or "ice bombing" to happen at this years Atlanta Superbowl to spite one of the biggest Goodell patrons, Arthur Blank). Yes the ratings have been better this year and that was largely due to the games being more entertaining than the past couple of years. But, the NFL isn't inevitable and if they can lose viewers from some guy taking a knee, imagine the fallout if the integrity of the game is in doubt because viewers/fans begin to believe the fix is in on officiating. 

[Born Burnt 6170]

24 minutes ago, 1bigtx said:

The no call on holding against the Georgia tackle in the 1984 Cotton Bowl right in front of the SEC referee.  They used split crews in those days.  Most likely cost Texas the National Championship.  I never got over it.

[BradInATX 9208]

1 hour ago, Steamboat1874 said:

Yes that is great but tell me old wise one.....which ref had this angle ???

I will tell you...none.

Both refs are on the sideline...one about eight yards downfield and the other one about eight yards upfield.

 

Jesus Christ, dude. He's staring right at it.

Edited January 23, 2019 by BradInATX

[Steamboat1874 4037]

36 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

 

Jesus Christ, dude. He's staring right at it.

Do you really not understand angles and perception?

[Huckleberry 32710]

2 minutes ago, Steamboat1874 said:

Do you really not understand angles and perception?

He does but apparently you don't.

What is the path of the ball relative to the pictured official's viewpoint?

[BradInATX 9208]

9 minutes ago, Steamboat1874 said:

Do you really not understand angles and perception?

I understand that there are people so dense and intellectually dishonest that they're unwilling to change the way they perceive things, despite overwhelming evidence proving their perception to be absurd and stupid.

[Irish Wrist Watch 1349]

4 hours ago, Eskimohorn said:

 

I don’t see how you can use review for subjective calls and non-calls. Hate to break it to everyone, but there is a non-call on nearly every play.

While this was egregious PI, I’m not sure how they will open up the review process for subjective non-calls.

Maybe have a playoff appeal inside 2 minutes to right egregious calls that affect the outcome of games. Something that prevents the NFL from stopping the flow of most games
 

I for one would love to see what affect reviewing calls (and non calls) in the last five minutes of a game would have - as long as it was at the point of attack. It wouldn't bother me at all if a running back breaks free for a TD and the review showed a hold that allowed that to happen - and the play is called back.

 

What would happen? The lazy fucks who hold and who hit late and who PI would, by and large stop doing it - at least in the last five minutes. And then a year or two down the road we can take a look at how the game flows without all that bullshit and decide whether or not to expand it.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Irish Wrist Watch

[JBJ 3649]

21 hours ago, Tex Pete said:

Unless the rule has recently changed, faceguarding is not and has never been a penalty in Texas HS football. I can't speak to other states.

Yes.  UIL football uses NCAA rules. 

Many (most?) states use the NFHS rulebook where faceguarding is illegal.

[Tex Pete 20196]

OK, so in Texas, faceguarding is legal in HS football.

[DigglerontheHoof 21082]

2 hours ago, Steamboat1874 said:

Do you really not understand angles and perception?

Serious question.  Are you legally blind?

[JBJ 3649]

2 minutes ago, Tex Pete said:

OK, so in Texas, faceguarding is legal in HS football.

Sure.  If you grew up in Texas and worked your way up to the NFL, at no point in your football life has faceguarding been illegal.  If you played a year in ~maybe~ Maryland that would be different.

I was just pointing out that the HS rule is probably what confuses people.

[Ghost of Shag 2585]

This thread.  Shit.  

This is why we are the Surly/Shag.  

If you don't believe that was clear and obvious pass interference AND if you don't think the Saints definitely win if that PI is called, AND if you think the Rams should be going to the Super Bowl, then you're just wrong.

You're wrong.  

And you should feel ashamed of yourself.  

I'm looking at you, Steamboat.  

Edited January 23, 2019 by Ghost of Shag