If there have been two constant threads in the NFL in the last 72 hours, one of them has been hand-wringing over Player Safety (Ndakumong Suh, Clay Matthews, etc.).
The second is a stream of erroneous calls which seem to indicate we might well have done better with the replacements, as it appears several of the calls (at least by what the NFL is saying about it's own Rule Book) may have had significant impacts on Week 1 results.
#1: Green Bay vs. San Francisco
Back to the Clay Matthews incident. (I posted the video in an earlier Super Fraud post. (And I see what you did there, NFL -- you pulled the other YouTube video. So I found another one. Nyah.)
According to USA Today on Monday, the "offsetting penalty" on San Francisco's Joe Staley should not have been called.
This would, in effect, make THREE refereeing errors in the same incident:
- First, Matthews should've been ejected from the contest. If the penalty itself (the late hit/clothesline on Kaepernick) was not sufficient for disqualification, it instigates a fight. Right when the video cuts off, you see Matthews throw a punch at the face at (what appears to be) Staley.
- Second, the call on the offsetting penalty, at least according to the NFL. How SOMEBODY on the 49ers doesn't get one of those classic "offsetting fouls" that always used to come from these scrums, though... But if the call on Staley is believed to be in error, it should've been first-and-goal to San Francisco.
- And third, the re-spot of the ball (whether or not the fouls offset). All fouls were after Kaepernick was out of bounds, dead-ball fouls.
This one, you have to go, more, to the play-by-play of the game on. (I was doing a study on the penalties in Week 1 (and might do what Brian Tuohy did last year on his Penalty Watch, since he does not have the time.)
Late first-half. Atlanta is called for Intentional Grounding. Referee doesn't know how to count to 10 -- only marks off 9 yards.
On the VERY NEXT PLAY (a punt), the Saints are given three yards on a spot foul for Holding, as the foul should've been taken from where the ball was caught (the 23), instead of at the 26, where they got it.
The calls ended up irrelevant, but still.
#3: San Diego vs. Houston
This is the worst of the three. New Orleans harmlessly went to the half, San Francisco got the touchdown anyway on that sequence...
The big call that was made to aid the Texans in their "incredible Monday Night Football comeback" on that field-goal attempt?
The NFL vice-president of officiating says it should never have been called, because it was never the intent of the new rule.
And, as a result, Houston wins the game on the botched call, and San Diego can't do a freaking thing about it.
With the score 28-14, Houston was attempting a 35-yard field-goal.
The attempt was made, but, on the play, a new flag came in.
San Diego's Cam Thomas was penalized half the distance (for a Houston first-down at the 9) for, effectively, Roughing the Snapper.
There's a new rule in the NFL this year, in that contact to the long-snapper on field goals and punts is restricted.
However, Dean Blandino, the VP of officials, said that, in his opinion, the call was excessive. The intent of the rule is to deal with contact to the head and neck (again, the "Defenseless Player" rule), but Blandino feels that did not occur here.
---
What's my point on this post?
Does anyone not see the NFL's agenda here?
Let's take the third case, because it basically is an open manipulation for ratings AND result:
Houston is a preferred franchise.
The San Diego Chargers are one of those teams who only exist to pad the stats of the other teams. They are one of the NFL's bitches.
And, of course, this is the (second) national ESPN game. With 10:42 to go in the third quarter, San Diego leads 28-7.
By this time, it is past midnight on the East Coast.
In much the same way that even Ray Lewis himself now asserts the possibility that the NFL engineered San Francisco's comeback in the last Super Bowl for ratings purposes, can one not see how such a mis-application, especially in a situation where the team aggrieved has NO RECOURSE against the league, can be used to openly rig a game?
There was no way San Diego was going to be allowed to blow out Houston (really, on MNF, to blow out anybody, for ratings).
-------
And, now, I'm going to give you one on the players' end:
In a classic "Who The Hell Cares?" game, the Jets and Buccaneers filled a place on the NFL's schedule last week.
There are 15 seconds to go in the fourth quarter, and the Buccaneers lead by two points, 17-15.
Seeing no receivers open, Geno Smith of the Jets runs to the far sidelines. He is clearly surrendering himself.
Why does Lavonte David even THINK of touching Geno Smith unless the whole design is for the Jets (and Smith) to win the game?
The resulting 15 yard penalty gives the Jets field-goal range, which they convert..
And why Lavonte David is still in the NFL (he's only in his second year) indicates how bone-headed some of these players are.
Or are they...
(For the record: This would've been simply for game result. The Jets were four-point underdogs.)
No comments:
Post a Comment