League admits ANOTHER mistake

[Gnu314]

Wheres Ed Hockule (sp) when you need him? I love that guy.

[biju]

Wheres Ed Hockule (sp) when you need him? I love that guy.

Uh, wasn't he the one that made the final call on this?

[Gnu314]

You're right he was.

I don't care though! hes my favorite official. (also it was the back judge that convinced the other guys there was no foul).

[HskrPwr13]

Until they find a way to rectify the situation after an official makes a mistake that significantly changes the game, it really doesnt matter if the league admits a mistake or not since it wont actually change anything. The NFL needs to dumb down the rule book so that officials can use more common sense and not worry about the technicallity (word?) of the rule.

[gogogadget]

How long until they have fouls called automatically? For example, crossing the goal line while jumping out of bounds or stepping out of bounds during a play, or jumping offsides, delay of game...etc Some fouls just wouldn't work out that way, but maybe if the refs weren't always looking for so much it would make calling the ones they were responsible for easier.

[Redskins Win]

1) THIS GUY is the head of NFL officials, and the plays in question were deemed wrong in "official" statements, not just on the Total Access segment.

I know who this guy is and i'm not sure saying it on total access quaifies as the league officialy admiting a mistake. Was a formal letter sent? I havn't heard.

2) Whether you mean to or not, contact is contact and is a foul. There is no stipulation in the rules with something like. "Any contact in the back, or hold during a kick is a 10 yard penalty from the spot of the foul....unless it was an accedent, then all's cool"

Yeah from the looks of the guy in front on the kicking was slowing and the other guy was trying not to run him over, though he really looked like he was trying to avoind contact. Did he touch yeah a little. By the letter of the rule could bee seen as illegal contact or block in the back. But I just think it was a good no call.

3) Agree with you about the Refs. I've seen WAAAAY to much of the refs during the playoffs. They've been injecting themselves way too much into the game. Just let the players play! Don't worry the small stuff. Just worry about the blatant fouls.

Right on

[jayday]

Anyone know who's reffing the Super Bowl?

Here's my inside info again...keep in mind that I have no way of truly confirming this as no link was given by the poster, but I'd bet my pants that it's right. I would think the official story should be on Superbowl.com within the next few days.

Here's your Super Bowl XL Crew:

R- Bill Leavy #127
2nd Super Bowl

U- Garth DeFelice #53
1st Super Bowl

HL- Mark Hittner #28
3rd Super Bowl

LJ- Mark Perlman #9
1st Super Bowl

FJ- Steve Zimmer #33
1st Super Bowl

SJ- Tom Hill #97
1st Super Bowl

BJ- Bob Waggoner #25
1st Super Bowl

Alternates:

R- Tony Corrente #99
U- Undrey Wash #96
HL- Tom Stabile #24

-In Tony Reali voice-..."Inside Information!" beep beep beep...+3 points for MB

Hopefully the refs will remain anonymous during the game...which will mean they did their jobs...

[biju]

Yeah from the looks of the guy in front on the kicking was slowing and the other guy was trying not to run him over, though he really looked like he was trying to avoind contact. Did he touch yeah a little. By the letter of the rule could bee seen as illegal contact or block in the back. But I just think it was a good no call.

Now I'll be honest and say I wasn't exactly sober when this happened so I'm going off a fairly blurry memory, but when you say the guy was "slowing down" don't you mean he was trying to essentially stop because the play was behind him? And the guy that "accidentally" ran into him prevented him from getting to Steve Smith, right?

Wouldn't that constitute an illegal block in the back? And not just in a "kinda" way...

[Free Bagel]

If they had called that ticky tack "block" a block in the back at the time, there would probably be a thread about them apologizing the other way nonetheless. The only difference is then we'd have to listen to a handful of Panther fans saying they would've won otherwise.

Careful what you wish for.

[Redskins Win]

[Now I'll be honest and say I wasn't exactly sober when this happened so I'm going off a fairly blurry memory, but when you say the guy was "slowing down" don't you mean he was trying to essentially stop because the play was behind him? And the guy that "accidentally" ran into him prevented him from getting to Steve Smith, right?

Wouldn't that constitute an illegal block in the back? And not just in a "kinda" way...

If i rember correctly the play started heading up field and the panthter guy was slowing to change direction as the play passed him.

If they had called that ticky tack "block" a block in the back at the time, there would probably be a thread about them apologizing the other way nonetheless. The only difference is then we'd have to listen to a handful of Panther fans saying they would've won otherwise.

Careful what you wish for.

You're exactly right FB. Game over move on.