Mini-Zebra Report: Dwight Freeney Not Happy About Officiating In Colts' Loss

I should have known I couldn't stay away for long before having to weigh in on another batch of controversial calls. The power of the Zebra Report lives on. Dwight Freeney discussed things with Michael Silver of Yahoo! -- or, not really discussed, more like vented -- as the two walked towards the Colts' team bus following the game.

"Those were the worst [expletive] calls I've seen in a long time," he said. "To have a game of that magnitude taken out of your hands, it's just disgusting. It's not like they made one [expletive] bad call – it's three calls, in overtime. On one the ball's 50 feet over [Chambers'] head. And they have the nerve to call defensive holding? When they can't even call one friggin' offensive holding the whole game? What's going on? They need to start investigating some other [expletive]."

I would make a tell me how you really feel, Dwight comment here, but he has every right to be upset considering the Colts went 12-4 and lost in the first round of the playoffs. I'd be a bit incensed, too.

Here are the calls, and my thoughts:

1. Darren Sproles is stopped for no gain on a running play, but Colts' defensive tackle Eric Foster is called for defensive holding. My initial thought was that it is very odd and quite rare to call this on an interior lineman, however, this was an easy call. Foster tackled an offensive lineman who was trying to get to a linebacker and block. You can't do that, and it's probably why the Colts ended up stuffing the Chargers on the play. It was a stupid thing to do.

2. Tim Jennings was called for defensive holding on Chris Chambers as the ball sailed well out of Chambers' reach. It was third and eight, so the Colts would have likely gotten the ball via punt if no penalty was thrown. First of all, Freeney's assertion about the pass being well out of Chambers' reach is irrelevant. If the ball was already in the air, pass interference would be the call. In this case it would have been waved off because the ball was obviously uncatchable. The official, by calling defensive holding, was saying the hold took place before the ball was thrown and , thus, we'll never know if the ball was catchable or not.

That being said, I didn't think it was egregious enough to get called here. I know the official has a ton more experience than I do, and I know he only saw it in fast motion. I'm sure when Chambers couldn't turn his shoulders for that split second it looked bad. I'm just saying I don't think it was an actual hold for long enough to warrant a call in a situation of this magnitude. Anyone from an unbiased point of view is saying just let them play. I agree. It was a very close and tough call, but I'd like to see the boys in stripes let them play on this one. But, hey, I'm a lowly high school official. We're stupid, remember?

3. The ensuing play saw Sproles stuffed in the backfield by Clint Session, only Session was called for a facemask. I'm sorry, but how in God's name can anyone question this call? He turned Sproles' head about a quarter of the way to the side with a firm grasp of the mask. You could even see in the slow-motion replay that Session immediately looked up towards the official. Like a kid with his hand in the cookie jar, he was checking to see if he got caught. He did. Case closed.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

1-07-2009 @ 9:34AM

Wade said...

Listen up you young whippersnapper, are you an NFL ref? No111!1!!

Ha. Actually agreed with your take on the holding, but live, I probably would have thrown the flag.

1-07-2009 @ 9:35AM

Sandy said...

So much for the Colts being the classiest team in the NFL.

Freeney, you lost. We know you love to spin, but this spin ain't working.

1-07-2009 @ 10:37AM

Chad said...

I saw at least a couple Chargers plays throughout the game where there was clear offensive holding.

I don't think the refs were too far off the mark on these last few plays, but they blew other parts, earlier in the game.

1-07-2009 @ 11:03AM

Dodger Dave said...

You made the comment that the defensive holding call on the pass to Chambers shouldn't have been called in a situation of this magnitude. I disagree...officials are taught to call the play the same way in the opening minutes of a game as they would in the closing minutes (or in OT)....

Bring on the Chargers...Go Steelers!!!

1-07-2009 @ 11:10AM

Matt Snyder said...

That's not necessarily true. For example, do you see the officials scrambling to spot the ball as quickly as possible in the opening minutes? Yet you do when a team is in the two-minute drill.

On the call in question ... I could see it being called on the opening series if the officials are trying to establish that they are going to call it tight on the outside, or early in the season if defensive holding is a specific point of emphasis by the league office.

Overtime in the playoffs is one of those times where I believe you have to -- a phrase we are taught in clinics with collegiate officials -- "make it be there on film."

Now, I ask you: When watching that replay, was it definitely "there?"

In my opinion, it was not.

That's what I'm saying.

1-07-2009 @ 11:24AM

RP said...

On the face mask penalty an offensive lineman for the Chargers actually had a hold of Sessions face mask if you look at the replay which was not called. I think Dwight Freeney should be upset considering he is either getting held every time he rushes or the left tackle is shoving hands to his facemask which was not called either. You can tell me the umpire doesn't see him getting held as he is one of the more dominant pass rushers in the leage. On one of the plays the Chargers had Freeneys facemask shoved down to where Freeney probably couldn't even see. Don't worry Dwight the Chargers will get waxed next week. Doesn't any one find it odd that no team covered their respective spreads in week 1 of the playoffs.

1-07-2009 @ 5:24PM

Barrett said...

You're dumb, half the teams covered their spread. Half the teams cover the spread in every game. When one team DOESN'T cover the spread, the other team DOES cover. Get how that works?

As for the Steelers "waxing" the Chargers....Get real, the first matchup was decided by 1 point. Chargers are a better team now. I'll be sure to find you when the Chargers win and I am counting my money and laughing at you.

1-07-2009 @ 11:43AM

Matt,
I understand your point and I do agree that the officiating has been way too inconsistent throughout the league this whole year. When so much is riding on each of these games, both on the field and in the casinos, you'd like a lot more consistency.
The AZ Cardinals got ripped on what should have been a holding call in the end zone late in the game, giving them a safety AND the ball. If that also comes under the heading of what you called "a situation of this magnitude," then I continue to disagree with you. As it turned out, it didn't matter, but...it could have.

1-07-2009 @ 6:22PM

Dean said...

Matt, being a Charger fan its tough for me to have an unbiased opinion but your assessment of the 3 penalties is pretty much how I saw them. #1-good call. #2-50/50. #3-good call.

The Chargers held the Colts to 17 pts. (including 7 cheap ones on that quick snap) and left 14 points out on the field themselves with those 2 end zone turnovers.

The Chargers outplayed the Colts, plain and simple.

1-07-2009 @ 2:19PM

GreatR said...

There were multiple, obvious Charger penalties not called. And all marginal Colt penalties were called. It was obviously a case of the Zebras providing a make up win for the Chargers because of their previous errors that cost the Chargers Game 2. Either that or someone had $ on the Chargers. I've been a Charger fan since the Balboa Park, but the truth is the truth.

1-07-2009 @ 2:26PM

DQ said...

I agree that the holding call should have been a no call in my mind but as I was always told as an athlete you have to play above the refs. I agree with RP about the facemask call because if the ref was in position to see Session facemask Sproles how do you miss the big fat hand across Session's face they should have been offsetting.

1-07-2009 @ 3:50PM

Robert said...

Ron Winters' crew called the most penalties of any crews in the NFL this year. It seemed to me that they were intent on inserting themselves into the outcome of this game. On any given play, it seems there are several calls that could be made but aren't. To get 3 calls on the first and only drive in overtime seems a bit odd.

FWIW, I'm a Colts fan but in all honesty the Chargers deserved to win this game regardless.

1-08-2009 @ 1:48PM

Tom Tescher said...

I believe this is the first post season game in 3 years for Winters Crew, seems they don't rate very high. My guess is it will be there last game for quite some time to come. 3 penalties in overtime is almost unheard of particularly the one on defensive holding. The dual facemasks should have offset.
Freeney should be angry, he was held continually with no offensive holding call the entire game on SD. 9 penalties on Indy, 7 of which occurred in the closing minutes and overtime and 3 on SD.
Mike and Mike in the morning, ESPN radio, Greenie summed it up pretty well, "The officials handed that game to San Diego"
Winters crew should be relegated to Raider and Lions game for the entire season next year. They are a sad bunch.

1-08-2009 @ 7:44PM

DM said...

As a longtime Chargers fan, it is hard for me to have too much sympathy for another team that claims to have been wronged by the officials. The Chargers have easily been the victim of the officials more than any other team the last few years. So when we finally get a few calls that go our way, it seems like a miracle. I think the Colts should thank their lucky stars that they weren't totally embarrassed and humiliated by losing by the 3 or 4 touchdowns which they should have lost by. There's always next year Peyton.

1-09-2009 @ 9:18AM

Jeremy said...

3. The face mask call... See Image; you can't call face mask on one player and not the other...

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/55803/2mbs5j_medium.jpg

Clearly shows a face mask by a Colt player on a Charger player.
Clearly shows a face mask by a Charger player on a Colt player.

How is one right and the other wrong?

1-09-2009 @ 10:23AM

You think that clearly shows a facemask on the Chargers? I see a Chargers hand in front of Session's mask, possibly touching it. There doesn't appear to be a grasp and he's most certainly not turning Session's head.

It's not a penalty to touch it. It's a penalty to grasp it, as Session is clearly doing in the picture. If anything, this picture proves they did the right thing by not calling it on the Chargers.

1-17-2009 @ 4:35AM

Matt said...

Listen, #3 was a facemask on both Sessions and the OLineman from SD. How can it not be? That still picture doesn't really do it enough justice, because on the video replay, you can obvioously tell the OL was grasping Sessions facemask.

I don't know how people can sit here and tell me the Chargers dominated the Colts...If we would have converted on 3rd and 2, the game would have been over. Plus, Darren Sproles and Scifers(Punter) had the best games of their career...it was quite possibly the best display of punting in the history of the NFL. Not to mention, Dungy should have thrown the red flag on the play where I think either Chambers or Jackson caught it on the sideline and failed to get both feet inside the lines.