Zebra Report: Controversy Swirls Once Again

FanHouse's resident referee will chime in weekly with thoughts on major topics relating to officiating. We call it The Zebra Report. Matt Snyder is a high school official with eight years experience. While this is like a third-year resident critiquing the work of a world-renowned surgeon, it's still better than someone who has never worn the stripes.

Wow, this was a long weekend to those who support the boys in stripes. That group may only consist of myself at this point, but I still do. Those people who like to call the officials "blind" -- which, by the way, is incredibly uncreative and lame -- or believe they are out to screw a team out of a game, really don't have any idea what it takes to officiate at that level. Hell, I don't. I do know what it's like to be on the field and be a constant scapegoat for people who aren't accountable for themselves and/or their favorite team.

For example, if people really think the officials cost the Ravens the game, that is patently absurd. The Ravens allowed the Steelers to drive all the way down the field when it mattered most. The Ravens allowed Santonio Holmes to get open enough at the front portion of the end zone to make a catch. I do have to respect Ray Lewis for being accountable, in saying that the call didn't cost them the game.

Anyway, there's a long list of things to hit this week. Let's get to it.

- Ryan Wilson asks: "In CIN-WAS game, Mike Sellers was stuffed at the goal line, his forward momentum was stopped, he then fumbled in the end zone and the Bengals recovered. Isn't the play supposed to be over when forward momentum is stopped? At least that's what an official said last week. Did they changes the rules this week?"

Well, no, but it's an incredibly difficult judgment call and we covered the quest to whistle at the most perfect time last week.

- Joey Porter ripped off his helmet in celebration after sacking Shaun Hill on fourth down. The officials got this one correct. The Dolphins were penalized, but the penalty was marked off after the change of possession. That's because this is a dead-ball foul and would always be marked off after the play. Think about a celebration penalty on a touchdown. It doesn't negate the score.

- Tom Mantzouranis asks: Can you explain to me (and the FH audience) why Andre Gurode was penalized for illegal hands to the face on Antonio Pierce when it was essentially a facemask. The difference was a 10-yard penalty instead of the facemask's 15-yard penalty. What's the distinction between the two and why was Gurode's specifically illegal hands to the face?

Illegal hands to the face is the call when a guy is pushing a guy in the face but doesn't grasp the facemask. While it certainly appeared that Gurode did grasp the facemask for about a nanosecond in the slow-motion replay, we have to remember the penalizing official had a fast-motion view, and probably not the exact same angle we had as a viewing audience. I don't think this was an egregious error in the least, if it was one at all.

- Torry Holt is quite miffed about an offensive pass interference which was called, negating a big gain for the Rams in the second half. I try to avoid getting into judgment calls because the officials on the field know a lot more about their job and what they saw than I do. I'll say that on the slow-motion replay -- which, again, those officials don't have the luxury of seeing -- it didn't really appear to satisfy the pass interference qualifications. I don't believe he gained an advantage, but that's just the opinion of someone much less qualified to offer a ruling than the man who called it. Anyway, that's not really why I wanted to include this. Here's why:

"To take that from us was not fair. They get paid to do what they do and we get paid to do what we do."

That was Holt's take on the call, and, boy, what a farcical statement. I don't even know if I need to go more in depth than simply saying this is clearly an apples and oranges comparison, but I will anyway. Torry Holt is making $7 million this season, which makes him the fourth highest-paid wideout in the league. He's 43rd in receiving yards, 36th in receptions, 52 players have caught more touchdown passes, and his team is 2-12. If we want to start talking about money, let's start with you, Mr. Holt. You are one of the most overpaid players in football right now. The officials aren't paid nearly this much, people don't pay to watch them, and they deal with much more scrutiny than you do. To bring up money under these circumstances is quite irresponsible.

If you disagree with the call, you have every right to complain about it. Receiving complaints from players, coaches, and fans is part of the job of an official. Everyone who does this from elementary leagues all the way up to the NFL knows and accepts this, but when people start mentioning money they need to get a grip. If you want to say the officials should never make mistakes since they get paid, I'd like to see someone find an NFL player who never makes a mistake on the field or a perfect coach. Maybe they should start fining Holt for dropped passes, or not blocking as well as he should. Incomplete pass to an open receiver from Peyton Manning? Hey, he gets paid, that's unacceptable! Accountability should be for everyone, not just the guys in stripes.

- Josh Alper writes: During the Giants-Cowboys game they were talking a lot about an arm-bar pass interference call on, I think, Terence Newman who was covering, I think, Domenik Hixon or Steve Smith. The ball looked to be uncatchable and the contact seemed to be very incidental, but Al Michaels and John Madden were both making a big deal of the arm bar. Is that a particular point of emphasis?

Not that I know of. It's just as much a part of the pass interference qualifications as the other points. I have a feeling Madden became obsessed with a discussion point and just couldn't let it go. Which would be weird, because he, you know, never does that. Right?

- John Madden thought the holding call against Jason Witten on Dallas' last drive was "baloney" -- or "bologna," depending upon your preferred spelling.

Absurd on Madden's part. Witten hooked his arm around the waist of a defender right at the point of attack. That's a textbook holding call at every single level, in every single instance. I don't know what he was looking at. Maybe he was distracted by a turducken.

- And finally, what no one can stop talking about -- the Steelers score a late touchdown against the Ravens. Controversy surrounding referee Walt Coleman ensues.

Ryan Wilson already covered the wide variety of opinions across the media on this call. It's obvious with such polarizing thoughts thus far from well-known places that we can't get to the point where everyone is satisfied about the call. I'm fine with people leaving comments telling me how stupid I am, so I'll proceed with my opinion.

It was the correct call.

After the Sunday night game concluded on NBC, Cris Collinsworth showed an on-screen graphic where you could clearly see Santonio Holmes had both feet on the ground with possession of the football -- so we now have a catch. They graphically placed a yellow line across the front of the goal line and you could clearly see the line touching the ball. That's all that has to happen. The very point of the ball was touching the very edge of the goal-line for a split second -- and yes, I believe he had possession when the ball was touching the edge of the goal line. That's a touchdown, people.

One thing in the aftermath that clouded matters was how Coleman's explanation made it sound like the receiver only had to have his feet in the end zone. I don't care about that, really. The rules don't say anything about what an official is required to tell the crowd or viewing audience. Sure, it was confusing, but that doesn't mean the call was incorrect.

What really matters in the end, to me, is that the call was correct. I don't care about "indisputable evidence," the official's explanation, or what Ravens' fans think.

In regards to the "indisputable evidence" level of scrutiny, we do have a FanHouse roundtable where we discuss the state of NFL replay and whether or not it's doing the intended job.

That's all I've got for this week, so I will see you next week.

As always, this was not an all-inclusive list of calls which were whined about by fans. That isn't the aim of Zebra Report.

If you would like a rule or play reviewed (even if it's a local 8th-grade game), you may submit one to our mailbox.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

12-16-2008 @ 10:26PM

Buddy Toledo said...

I like the Zebra Report and respect the experience of you and the NFL officials, but I think your comments about Torry Holt are ridiculous.

First off, there are very real consequences for any NFL player who is underperforming on his contract. They can be cut. I don't know anything about any referee being disciplined or fired for poor performances.

Second, this line upset me -

If you disagree with the call, you have every right to complain about it. Receiving complaints from players, coaches, and fans is part of the job of an official.

If only that were true, Joey Porter would be $20,000 richer. Instead, players lose thousands of dollars if they are upset after the game and don't keep their mouth shut when five guys are sticking a microphone in their face. Millions of people pay to see the epitome of intensity that is football, but if the player can't turn that off as soon as he is in front of a microphone, he has to pay the league.

12-16-2008 @ 10:51PM

Matt Snyder said...

Thanks Buddy,

I wasn't specific enough. Holt has every right to berate the officials on the field and even off of it, as long as it's not a public forum like through the media.

12-17-2008 @ 8:49AM

eddie bee said...

Ravens fan here, so admittedly, I'm incredibly biased.

More than anything, I'm mad about the inconsistency of instant replay within the BAL-PIT game. We can debate the meaning of the "indisputable evidence" standard all day long. What's important is that we apply that same standard uniformly across the game. This was not the case during the Ravens-Steelers game.

During the 3rd quarter, the Ravens had CLEARLY stopped the Steelers on a third and 1 but the Zebras gave them the first down. The play was challenged but upheld by instant replay. Again, the instant replay CLEARLY showed that Parker was nowhere near the 30 yard line, yet the Zebras failed to overturn the spot. If that play wasn't indisputable I'm confused as to how that same standard could be applied to the "final" play and it be considered a TD.

That said, you're definitely right. The Ravens should have stopped them on the drive. I'm not entirely sure why the ravens stopping blitzing. That's three games now where they've let a team tie or win the game in the last 2:00 by slacking pressure on D. The Steelers also benefitted from an injured Fabian Washington who had completely shutdown Holmes for most of the game.

12-17-2008 @ 10:16AM

Ted said...

I am also a Ravens fan here. My question is not about the final call. I was confused by three other calls durring the game. The previous post about the 3rd and 1 stop is the obvious one. The other two, might just be my ignorance of some of the rules, but twice durring the game the Steelers were called for offencive holding. On both of those plays the 10 yards were assessed at the end of the run so it ened up being 1st and 13 instead of 1st and 20. Can you explain the rule to me so I can understand these calls please?

12-17-2008 @ 10:31AM

In your examples, holding is penalized ten yards from the spot of the foul. If you end up with a first and 13, that means the holding occurred at a spot three yards from the first down.

Interesting you mention that, because nearly every time this ever happens in high school, the entire crowd goes ballistic on us for "not knowing the rules." And it's really, really funny.

Thanks for the question.

12-17-2008 @ 6:20PM

They call offensive holding in the NFL?! I thought lineman were allowed to tackle defensive players. That's what has been happening to James Harrison all year, including in the Ravens game. (Even Simms pointed it out, so it must be true, huh, Andy?) But we haven't seen an offensive holding call when the Number 1 Defense has been on the field for at least the last five games.

Oh, you were talking about calls that helped out Ray Ray. That makes sense. The NFL will do what it has to do to keep an over-the-hill player with a primetime mouth in the spotlight.

There's your inconsistency, Eddie Bee.

12-19-2008 @ 11:41PM

Dave said...

Buddy Toledo...it appears that all you do is surf the internet looking for opportunities to post your "whiny" little comments about Harrison being held in the trenches! Get a life, will ya?You are forbidden to post anything else until you're able to display some intelligence, i.e., banned for life!

Your an embarrassment to all Stillers fans.

12-17-2008 @ 10:32AM

Andy said...

Not so fast buckaroo with your comments........while it is very true the Ravens let the Squealers drive 90 yards for the winning drive, the call was blown but it should not have come to that anyway. The Ravens challenge on the first down was obviously one of the worse calls made this year. If all the fans are wrong, also Jim Nantz and Phil Simms are. They were astounded by that call not being reversed.
It's obvious the NFL is not using the instant replay correctly. Or maybe they should add vision care to the benefit package of some of the grey haired officials who really have stunk it up this year!!

12-17-2008 @ 10:33AM

You're taking the word of a former QB with no officiating experience and an announcer who came up a golfer over the league head of officiating?

Next thing I know you'll start using John Madden's opinion as "evidence."

12-17-2008 @ 12:05PM

Hubie Abel said...

Number 1 rule when betting on sports.... Bet the same way the refs bet.
You can't lose..... ; )
Don't we all wish we knew how they were betting...or how their family or friends are betting.

12-17-2008 @ 1:52PM

Cameron said...

That’s a touchdown? Perhaps. But, if so, it was called so out of sheer luck.

True, there’s no requirement for a review explanation. But, for Coleman to state that the receiver had “2 feet down” although true, is just as irrelevant as is he had said “My cat’s breath smells like cat food.”, and should equally call into question his competence. It’s not just confusing. It’s clearly what mattered to him while making his ruling.

Maybe the correct result was achieved, but it should matter to football fans if refs are making the right call for the wrong reasons.

12-17-2008 @ 7:44PM

brandon said...

In the Ravens Steelers game that may have been a touchdown after puting the yellow line there but on the field the refs couldn't do that so it was clearly to hard to see if it was a touchdown and since the ruling on the field was not a touchdown there was not enough conclusive evidence looking at the replay to over turn the call on the field.

12-18-2008 @ 10:29AM

Buddy Lee, Ray Lewis didn't look over the hill when he was breaking your RB's shoulder this year.

Isn't there holding in every single play in every single NFL game? I'm sure Harrison is the only player in the NFL to ever get held without a penalty. Somehow I doubt that.

12-18-2008 @ 1:26PM

IRONMAN said...

Just to be clear/add specifically to the comments regarding the officiating this year.......Steelers have been getting "jobbed" all season long. How is it possible that the #1 ranked defense and specifically, James Harrison has not been held in the last 23 quarters????!!! That's the LAST time a Steelers opponent was called for offensive holding. During Sunday's game against the Ravens, anyone not legally blind could see that play after play, Harrison was rode down with a variety of holds, by the "dedicated holder" the Ravens placed on Harrison's side of the line.....The difference is that the Steelers have been able to overcome this obstacle with determined and unrelenting effort.

12-19-2008 @ 11:25PM

Steve said...

Matt... here's a question regarding the Ravens / Steelers touchdown / no touchdown. At what point does a receiver have possession of the ball? Is it the point at which the football touches any part of the receiver's skin, or, is it when the receiver has control of the ball? If it's a matter of touching the skin, then it was a touchdown. If that's the rule, then how can a catch be incomplete when a player gets both feet in bounds and the ball is just getting into the receiver's hands a micro second before he loses contact with the ground in bounds? The refs always say that he did not have control of the ball, therefore, no catch, even though he held onto it the whole way. When is possession or control of the ball determined?

1-19-2009 @ 4:56PM

Hubert39 said...

Hey sports fans. As long as you have humans calling the games you are going to have errors.
Live with it. Usually one bad call don't win or lose a game. What I see every game, pros and college? HOLDING on offense. No wonder QB's are breaking all kind of records. The old saying. The refs could call holding on every play, but think of the time a game would last.