Has this been posted yet? If so, I'm sorry for the double post. Interesting how the NFL jumps to rule changes within a few days after a New York team gets screwed in the playoffs. However when an obscure rule that had to be searched for in the back of the million page NFL rule book hurts the Raiders, the NFL twiddles their thumbs. Tagliabue: All officials to be in huddle from now on ESPN.com news services Upset with the developments at the end of the Giants-49ers game on Sunday, commissioner Paul Tagliabue said Wednesday that the NFL will implement changes in how playoff games are officiated. Tagliabue discussed the changes Wednesday in an interview with ESPN's Bob Ley, which aired Wednesday on all SportsCenter broadcasts. On calls in dispute, the commissioner said, all officials on the field will confer. On Sunday, after the final play of the Giants-49ers game, only those officials directly involved in the play were part of the on-field conference. This change will take place immediately, starting with this weekend's four divisional playoff games. Tagliabue also said the NFL is looking into changing what officials are looking for on field goal attempts. This change might be implemented later in the postseason. "We're also probably going to implement some changes as to how we'll officiate field goal attempts in terms of the responsibilities of the officials on the field with a greater focus on the potential that the kick can break down and there might be a running play or a passing play," the commissioner said. Tagliabue told Ley what happened in the Giants-49ers wild card game was the most disappointing moment involving officiating in his 13 years as commissioner. "It was a chaotic game, it was a chaotic second half," Tagliabue told Ley. "But it was such a critical game and obviously it was a critical play and the officiating seemed to be caught up in a little bit in the bedlam and in the chaos and with the benefit of hindsight it seems that the decisions were made with less than full information, and that's very disappointing." The league admitted Monday that the officiating crew failed to call a pass interference penalty against San Francisco on the final play of the game. If pass interference had been called, the Giants would have had another shot at a 41-yard field goal due to offsetting penalties. The Niners won 39-38. When asked what the officials' worst mistake was, Tagliabue told Ley, "I think it was just the breakdown of communication within the crew in the sense that flags were thrown, with respect to one player being an ineligible receiver downfield, and as I understand at this point, most of the crew conference if not all of the crew conference focused on those flags." A pass interference call against Niners defensive end Chike Okeafor would have created the offsetting penalties -- New York was flagged for an illegal man downfield -- and given the Giants another chance to try the kick. The Giants botched the first attempt because of a bad snap, which forced holder Matt Allen to throw a pass to guard Rich Seubert, who was eligible on the play. Tagliabue said the future of the officials involved in the play will be discussed after the Super Bowl. "The most important thing to do as a leader is to support your people and to reinforce your people and their confidence and their conviction -- in this case that means all of our officiating crews," Tagliabue told Ley. "And (John) Madden and (Bill) Parcells and other coaches have always told me, criticize your people when they do great and when they win, don't criticize your people when they lose or have a bad game. So we're going to put off those decisions and those discussions until after the Super Bowl." Tagliabue said Tuesday on Sporting News Radio there were plenty of mistakes in the game by all of the participants. "I'm sure that everybody feels that there were some breakdowns in that game and I'm sure Steve Mariucci feels that his club broke down in the first half and the Giants didn't perform in the second half like they did in the first and that's part of football," Tagliabue said. "On the officiating point, it shouldn't have happened and we are reviewing it thoroughly." Giants spokesman Pat Hanlon said the team really didn't care. "At this point, unless someone tells us to get on a plane and go to San Francisco to replay the final play or replay the game, what difference does it make?" Hanlon said Tuesday. "It's unfortunate the guys (officials) made mistakes at the end of the game, but that's not the reason we lost the game." Hanlon said the only thing the Giants would like to see come out of the error would be for the league to find a way to avoid future officiating mistakes at the end of games. Meanwhile, New Jersey Assemblyman Anthony Impreveduto wants the league to allow the state to host a Super Bowl by 2006 and called on the head of the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority, which runs Giants Stadium, to begin legal action against the NFL. "New Jersey taxpayers may have been cheated of tax revenue the state would have earned from players' income and other Giants-related enterprises had the team advanced in the playoffs," Impreveduto said in his letter to George Zoffinger, the sports authority president. Zoffinger said he could not comment until he speaks with Impreveduto.
Interesting how the NFL jumps to rule changes within a few days after a New York team gets screwed in the playoffs. However when an obscure rule that had to be searched for in the back of the million page NFL rule book hurts the Raiders, the NFL twiddles their thumbs. Keep in mind a couple of things: (1) In the Raiders game, the officials got the call right. (2) They aren't changing NFL rules (which would have been required in the Raiders case) - just the way referees discuss those rules. In the offseason, the owners got together and voted to leave that rule alone, by the way. No idea why - it seems truly stupid, but the teams all agreed on that.
The call was questionable-correct? I dont see any evidence to conclusively prove his arm was moving forward. Maybe yes, maybe no. In which case you stick to the call on the field which was fumble. Common sense should be applied to the rules. Walt Coleman made that call because he wasnt getting out of New England alive otherwise. The difference I do see is that Oakland did have a chance to still win where NY did not.
The call was questionable-correct? I dont see any evidence to conclusively prove his arm was moving forward. Maybe yes, maybe no. I was under the impression that the call was not at questionable. It was correct under the rules - people just didn't know about the "tuck rule". As such, they made the appropriate call. In the Giants game, it was the refs that didn't know the correct rules and didn't make the correct calls. That's why changes are instantly being made to ref policy. Changing the rules of the game is a whole different monster.
What I'm saying is that the NFL jumped head first into the mess in the aftermath of a Giants los, a New York team. However when injustice was screamed in Oakland, the NFL waited until the offseason to look into the rule, nevertheless sitting on their hands and screaming that it was legit rather than changing it. Tagliabue knows where his bread is buttered.
However when injustice was screamed in Oakland, the NFL waited until the offseason to look into the rule, nevertheless sitting on their hands and screaming that it was legit rather than changing it. And I'm saying the NFL had no choice. You can't make rules changes during the middle of the season. The NFL has to meet with all teams to make any changes of that nature. On the other hand, changing ref policy is easy and can be done by an order of the commissioner.
But to me this alteration in "referee policy" is simply window dressing to appease the city of New York. What good will it do to have referees and judges not directly involved in the play making a decision about the play itself? What good will it do to have a judge with no vantage point about the play in question to chime in on it? None. The ruling was done, in my opinion, just because the city of New York was affected.
What good will it do to have referees and judges not directly involved in the play making a decision about the play itself? It will make sure more rules are covered, in case a particular ref forgot / ignored one. Some other ref might have noted that the the guard had been reported as an eligible player beforehand and was allowed to be downfield. That would have made the pass interference call legal, and the down would have been replayed with offsetting penalties. The ruling was done, in my opinion, just because the city of New York was affected. Except that the ruling doesn't help New York.
If that game was Played in Oakland, There is no damn way Walt Coleman has the stones to make that call.
I think it helps out somewhat. I figure if your team is eliminated on a admitted bad call you can always say the refs cost you the championship. And your team is responsible for a rules change. Not too much solace but something is better than nothing.
