NFL VP Mike Pereira on Steelers/Chargers call (1 Viewer)

[Islanders rule]

VP of NFL officials Mike Periera will be ESPN Sports Center in about 10 minutes to give his "official" explanation of what happened. I'm sure it will be just a re-hash of what has already been said by refeere Green that they made a mistake.

 

[Islanders rule]

VP of NFL officials Mike Periera will be ESPN Sports Center in about 10 minutes to give his "official" explanation of what happened. I'm sure it will be just a re-hash of what has already been said by refeere Green that they made a mistake.

Periera refused to comment on the betting aspect of the call. How surprising, NOT

 

[tombonneau]

Heard him on Dan Patrick ... biggest takeaway from this debacle is sounds like they might modify replay rules in offseason to allow them to go under the hood for a second look, as Pereira said that was the problem with what happened here.

 

[Islanders rule]

Heard him on Dan Patrick ... biggest takeaway from this debacle is sounds like they might modify replay rules in offseason to allow them to go under the hood for a second look, as Pereira said that was the problem with what happened here.

Actually, Pereira said that the rules comittee will review whether or not refs can take a 2nd replay look before the playoffs.

 

[tombonneau]

Heard him on Dan Patrick ... biggest takeaway from this debacle is sounds like they might modify replay rules in offseason to allow them to go under the hood for a second look, as Pereira said that was the problem with what happened here.

Actually, Pereira said that the rules comittee will review whether or not refs can take a 2nd replay look before the playoffs.

Even better. That's one good thing about the NFL: if something is wrong, they will act to fix it. Quickly.

 

[NoFBinLA]

Heard him on Dan Patrick ... biggest takeaway from this debacle is sounds like they might modify replay rules in offseason to allow them to go under the hood for a second look, as Pereira said that was the problem with what happened here.

Actually, Pereira said that the rules comittee will review whether or not refs can take a 2nd replay look before the playoffs.

Even better. That's one good thing about the NFL: if something is wrong, they will act to fix it. Quickly.

And this is what has completely been lost in other threads calling for the TD to be given back to the Steelers. The best the league can do - and they often do this - is correct the ability of the refs to make the right call in the future.I can see them worrying about a ref going under the hood five or six times and getting too caught in the minutia or being hammered by coaches to give it one more look, but they have to be able to get the call right. This is the only - and best - outcome of this debacle.

 

[JuniorNB]

Let's not forget one simple fact. A bettor should win because he played a hunch as to the way a game should go, whether it be the winner or loser or teh over and under.

I'm sure there are a lot of upset gamblers out there, but the bottom line is, that would have been such a BS touchdown if it were allowed to stand. All of a sudden, it's an eight point win? That was no eight point game, so the ones who lost because they called the TD back, really were wrong to begin with.

 

[Sheriff66]

Let's not forget one simple fact. A bettor should win because he played a hunch as to the way a game should go, whether it be the winner or loser or teh over and under.

I'm sure there are a lot of upset gamblers out there, but the bottom line is, that would have been such a BS touchdown if it were allowed to stand. All of a sudden, it's an eight point win? That was no eight point game, so the ones who lost because they called the TD back, really were wrong to begin with.

Ya, it would have been and should have been, you're logic is flawed here.

 

[PosterNutBag]

The thing that I find so inexcusable about the ref's final decision is that when you think about the replay review, think about what he was reviewing. He obviously went under the hood to look at whether either lateral was an illegal forward pass. So, I would expect that he was looking very closely at the first one and then the 2nd one. So, one would expect that he looked at them VERY closely and was pretty much an expert on what happened once he left from under the hood and returned to the field..... THEN once the refs reconvened as the PAT attempt was being set up, they changed their minds and got confused about which lateral attempt was actually an illegal forward pass? I still can't believe that this would happen after a review.

I am all for getting it right, but it seems very hard to believe a ref could mess this up after just witnessing the replays for 90 seconds.

 

[Buffaloes]

No talk about the penalty disparity? There toward the end, SD had been penalized 5 yards and Pits had been penalized 115, If I recall correctly.

 

[PosterNutBag]

No talk about the penalty disparity? There toward the end, SD had been penalized 5 yards and Pits had been penalized 115, If I recall correctly.

Yea... it was 13 penalties against PIT and only 1 against SD before they incorrectly enforced that final play against SD to give them their 2nd penalty of the day.

 

[biggamer3]

Let's not forget one simple fact. A bettor should win because he played a hunch as to the way a game should go, whether it be the winner or loser or teh over and under.I'm sure there are a lot of upset gamblers out there, but the bottom line is, that would have been such a BS touchdown if it were allowed to stand. All of a sudden, it's an eight point win? That was no eight point game, so the ones who lost because they called the TD back, really were wrong to begin with.

Um they would have covered the spread if the Parker TD stood, so it wasnt like they had no chance of covering

 

[JuniorNB]

Let's not forget one simple fact. A bettor should win because he played a hunch as to the way a game should go, whether it be the winner or loser or teh over and under.I'm sure there are a lot of upset gamblers out there, but the bottom line is, that would have been such a BS touchdown if it were allowed to stand. All of a sudden, it's an eight point win? That was no eight point game, so the ones who lost because they called the TD back, really were wrong to begin with.

Um they would have covered the spread if the Parker TD stood, so it wasnt like they had no chance of covering

One of Pittsburgh's linemen cheated and decided to hold the guy he was supposed to be blocking. There'd be a lot of touchdowns if that were alowed to happen.

 

[bjabrad]

Should this have been automatically reviewed upstairs in the booth since it was under two minutes on the clock?

If there was no whistle blowing the play dead why can't they get it right today?

The NFL makes changes to the official scorebook all the time in terms of crediting yards, tackles, fumbles, etc during the week after a game so why can't they still make the correction now?

If points scored against conference opponents are a part of the 7th tie breaker then why do they sometimes decide not to kick the "meaningless" extra point on game ending TD's?

Edit to add that I don't have a dog in this fight other than I hate to see mistakes, inconsistencies and errors that can be corrected.

 

[Super King]

 

[Mr.Pack]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.

Was the PAT kicked?

 

[PosterNutBag]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.Was the PAT kicked?

You are correct. The PAT was not attempted. They were in formation and seemingly about to snap the ball when the officials blew the whistled, reconvened and then made the subsequent mistake call to end the game on the prior play.

 

[Mr.Pack]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.Was the PAT kicked?

You are correct. The PAT was not attempted. They were in formation and seemingly about to snap the ball when the officials blew the whistled, reconvened and then made the subsequent mistake call to end the game on the prior play.

OK then, as long as they got the call correct, which after seeing some replays they did, what's the problem here?

 

[Dragon1952]

I believe this will explain it all. Makes perfect sense now.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AtaY...t&type=lgns

 

[Tau837]

Heard him on Dan Patrick ... biggest takeaway from this debacle is sounds like they might modify replay rules in offseason to allow them to go under the hood for a second look, as Pereira said that was the problem with what happened here.

Actually, Pereira said that the rules comittee will review whether or not refs can take a 2nd replay look before the playoffs.

Even better. That's one good thing about the NFL: if something is wrong, they will act to fix it. Quickly.

Yet we still have the tuck rule.

 

[Buffaloes]

Heard him on Dan Patrick ... biggest takeaway from this debacle is sounds like they might modify replay rules in offseason to allow them to go under the hood for a second look, as Pereira said that was the problem with what happened here.

Actually, Pereira said that the rules comittee will review whether or not refs can take a 2nd replay look before the playoffs.

Even better. That's one good thing about the NFL: if something is wrong, they will act to fix it. Quickly.

Yet we still have the tuck rule.

 

[apalmer]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.Was the PAT kicked?

You are correct. The PAT was not attempted. They were in formation and seemingly about to snap the ball when the officials blew the whistled, reconvened and then made the subsequent mistake call to end the game on the prior play.

OK then, as long as they got the call correct, which after seeing some replays they did, what's the problem here?

The call (forward lateral) was correct. The result (dead ball, no TD) wasn't. Apparently, somewhere along the line, the entire officiating crew forgot that the lateral that was deflected and hit the ground was the second one, which was legal. The illegal forward lateral was the first one, which was caught. The rule is that an illegal forward lateral that hits the ground is treated like an incomplete pass and can't be advanced. A legal backwards lateral that hits the ground is treated just like a fumble and can be advanced. They used the forward pass rule to keep Pittsburgh from advancing the legal backwards lateral.

 

[PosterNutBag]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.Was the PAT kicked?

You are correct. The PAT was not attempted. They were in formation and seemingly about to snap the ball when the officials blew the whistled, reconvened and then made the subsequent mistake call to end the game on the prior play.

OK then, as long as they got the call correct, which after seeing some replays they did, what's the problem here?

The call (forward lateral) was correct. The result (dead ball, no TD) wasn't. Apparently, somewhere along the line, the entire officiating crew forgot that the lateral that was deflected and hit the ground was the second one, which was legal. The illegal forward lateral was the first one, which was caught. The rule is that an illegal forward lateral that hits the ground is treated like an incomplete pass and can't be advanced. A legal backwards lateral that hits the ground is treated just like a fumble and can be advanced. They used the forward pass rule to keep Pittsburgh from advancing the legal backwards lateral.

I couldn't have explained it better myself.

 

[Random]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.

Was the PAT kicked?

You are correct. The PAT was not attempted. They were in formation and seemingly about to snap the ball when the officials blew the whistled, reconvened and then made the subsequent mistake call to end the game on the prior play.

OK then, as long as they got the call correct, which after seeing some replays they did, what's the problem here?

The call (forward lateral) was correct. The result (dead ball, no TD) wasn't. Apparently, somewhere along the line, the entire officiating crew forgot that the lateral that was deflected and hit the ground was the second one, which was legal. The illegal forward lateral was the first one, which was caught. The rule is that an illegal forward lateral that hits the ground is treated like an incomplete pass and can't be advanced. A legal backwards lateral that hits the ground is treated just like a fumble and can be advanced. They used the forward pass rule to keep Pittsburgh from advancing the legal backwards lateral.

I couldn't have explained it better myself.

So an illegal forward lateral is legal as long as its caught?

 

[tombonneau]

Heard him on Dan Patrick ... biggest takeaway from this debacle is sounds like they might modify replay rules in offseason to allow them to go under the hood for a second look, as Pereira said that was the problem with what happened here.

Actually, Pereira said that the rules comittee will review whether or not refs can take a 2nd replay look before the playoffs.

Even better. That's one good thing about the NFL: if something is wrong, they will act to fix it. Quickly.

Yet we still have the tuck rule.

Actually, the fact it is still a rule seven years later should tell you that there is nothing wrong with it.

 

[PosterNutBag]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.

Was the PAT kicked?

You are correct. The PAT was not attempted. They were in formation and seemingly about to snap the ball when the officials blew the whistled, reconvened and then made the subsequent mistake call to end the game on the prior play.

OK then, as long as they got the call correct, which after seeing some replays they did, what's the problem here?

The call (forward lateral) was correct. The result (dead ball, no TD) wasn't. Apparently, somewhere along the line, the entire officiating crew forgot that the lateral that was deflected and hit the ground was the second one, which was legal. The illegal forward lateral was the first one, which was caught. The rule is that an illegal forward lateral that hits the ground is treated like an incomplete pass and can't be advanced. A legal backwards lateral that hits the ground is treated just like a fumble and can be advanced. They used the forward pass rule to keep Pittsburgh from advancing the legal backwards lateral.

I couldn't have explained it better myself.

So an illegal forward lateral is legal as long as its caught?

haha...No ... but the point is that if it doesn't touch the ground, the play should be allowed to continue ... if it does touch the ground then the play should stop immediately and it is ruled a dead ballso, on the play in question, the play should have continued (like it did) and the penalty should have been called on SD with PIT eventually declining it in favor of the TD they scored on the play

 

[Dragon1952]

I have watched that part of the video about 20 times. It was absolutely not a forward lateral. At the very worst it was exactly even. It wasn't called that way on the field. And if it had been, the video replay in no way imaginable is conclusive evidence. Good effin' grief. I don't know what some of you people are looking at.

 

[Dt's Mules]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.Was the PAT kicked?

You are correct. The PAT was not attempted. They were in formation and seemingly about to snap the ball when the officials blew the whistled, reconvened and then made the subsequent mistake call to end the game on the prior play.

OK then, as long as they got the call correct, which after seeing some replays they did, what's the problem here?

They sort of got it right. The recognized that there was a penalty, but didn't allow the play to stand once the penalty was declined (i.e. pitt touchdown should have stood).As Junior NB, as far as that score accurately representing the game, there are lots of backdoor covers the other way...E.G. Meaningless touchdown in the last seconds to go from a 14 point loss to a 7 point loss. Do those games accurately represent the game? <---lost a 5 way parlay because of the officials messed this one up

 

[Islander]

I'm sure there are a lot of upset gamblers out there, but the bottom line is, that would have been such a BS touchdown if it were allowed to stand. All of a sudden, it's an eight point win? That was no eight point game, so the ones who lost because they called the TD back, really were wrong to begin with.

So those who were on the Chargers were right to begin with?Let's see.

One TD that should have counted was wiped off completely at the end

One TD called back by incorrect penalty ended with FG

13-2 in penalties

410-213 in total yards for PIT

I ask again, those on the Chargers were right to begin with?

Those on the Steelers probably had not made their most brilliant bet ever, but to say they were wrong to begin with and that those on the Chargers were right ...

And yes, when a team scores a garbage TD to make the final score by 14 instead of by 7 is part of the game. Refs should not cancel that TD.

 

[apalmer]

I thought a play could only be reviewed BEFORE the PAT, and once it's kicked they can't go back.

Was the PAT kicked?

You are correct. The PAT was not attempted. They were in formation and seemingly about to snap the ball when the officials blew the whistled, reconvened and then made the subsequent mistake call to end the game on the prior play.

OK then, as long as they got the call correct, which after seeing some replays they did, what's the problem here?

The call (forward lateral) was correct. The result (dead ball, no TD) wasn't. Apparently, somewhere along the line, the entire officiating crew forgot that the lateral that was deflected and hit the ground was the second one, which was legal. The illegal forward lateral was the first one, which was caught. The rule is that an illegal forward lateral that hits the ground is treated like an incomplete pass and can't be advanced. A legal backwards lateral that hits the ground is treated just like a fumble and can be advanced. They used the forward pass rule to keep Pittsburgh from advancing the legal backwards lateral.

I couldn't have explained it better myself.

So an illegal forward lateral is legal as long as its caught?

No it's illegal as I said, meaning it results in a penalty. However, play continues because penalties can be declined, remember? If an illegal forward lateral is intercepted, it can be run back by the defense and the penalty declined. Or, as in this case, if there is a later fumble on the play, the defense can recover and decline the penalty. It only ends the play and results in a dead ball if it (the illegal forward lateral) hits the ground (because it is then technically an incomplete pass).

 

[PosterNutBag]

I have watched that part of the video about 20 times. It was absolutely not a forward lateral. At the very worst it was exactly even. It wasn't called that way on the field. And if it had been, the video replay in no way imaginable is conclusive evidence. Good effin' grief. I don't know what some of you people are looking at.

It clearly looks like an illegal forward pass to me. I just watched it again after reading your post. Tomlinson catches the ball and then tosses it to Chambers. When the ball is being released from Tomlinson's hand, the ball is just a hair across the 25 yd line. Chambers catches the ball right at what appears to be the 26 yd line. At best, it seems like the ball was caught at least one foot forward from it's release point.....and at worst it seems like the ball might have traveled 3-4 feet forward b/w release and catch.

 

[Tau837]

Heard him on Dan Patrick ... biggest takeaway from this debacle is sounds like they might modify replay rules in offseason to allow them to go under the hood for a second look, as Pereira said that was the problem with what happened here.

Actually, Pereira said that the rules comittee will review whether or not refs can take a 2nd replay look before the playoffs.

Even better. That's one good thing about the NFL: if something is wrong, they will act to fix it. Quickly.

Yet we still have the tuck rule.

Actually, the fact it is still a rule seven years later should tell you that there is nothing wrong with it.

The past application of the rule is water under the bridge, obviously. But I think that is the worst rule in the NFL rule book. It would be a shame if any future games, especially playoff games, are ever decided by that rule.

 

[Islander]

Has there ever been a play call overturned after the ref looked at the replay and announced his review conclusion? I think not.

 

[Bossman]

I wonder it the ref''s combined the rules thinking that if the ball touches the ground at any point after an illeagal forward lateral, thet it's a dead ball...

(rather than just the illeagal forward lateral hitting the ground being considered a dead ball)

----- My dog in this fight is that I had Polamalu starting in my IDP dynasty league. I lost about 10 points on that non-play.

 

[PatsFanCT]

No talk about the penalty disparity? There toward the end, SD had been penalized 5 yards and Pits had been penalized 115, If I recall correctly.

What does penalty disparity have to do with anything? You want to penalize a team for being disciplined? If they aren't jumping offside's, false starting or holding, why should they get a penalty for it?

 

[PosterNutBag]

I wonder it the ref''s combined the rules thinking that if the ball touches the ground at any point after an illeagal forward lateral, thet it's a dead ball... (rather than just the illeagal forward lateral hitting the ground being considered a dead ball)----- My dog in this fight is that I had Polamalu starting in my IDP dynasty league. I lost about 10 points on that non-play.

No...actually the ref admitted after the game that the officiating crew (after he had completed his own instant replay review) had gotten the 2 laterals mixed up. He said that everyone agreed that the 2nd one was the forward one (it clearly was not) and since that one hit the ground, they reversed the call.It would appear that the ref forgot the rule when he viewed the instant replay and then in the discussion afterwards he must have been reminded of the rule and then just forgot which lateral was the forward one.

 

[Buffaloes]

No talk about the penalty disparity? There toward the end, SD had been penalized 5 yards and Pits had been penalized 115, If I recall correctly.

What does penalty disparity have to do with anything? You want to penalize a team for being disciplined? If they aren't jumping offside's, false starting or holding, why should they get a penalty for it?

Just a large discrepancy is all I'm saying. Believe it or not, it's pretty hard to play a "perfect" game in terms of penalties. Just seems a little off when you combine that with the call at the end of the game.

 

[Dragon1952]

No talk about the penalty disparity? There toward the end, SD had been penalized 5 yards and Pits had been penalized 115, If I recall correctly.

What does penalty disparity have to do with anything? You want to penalize a team for being disciplined? If they aren't jumping offside's, false starting or holding, why should they get a penalty for it?

It depends on whether or not you believe the conspiracy theory or not. Officials call the penalties. Just because none are called does not necessarily mean they never occurred. Kind of like if the tree falls in the forest does it make a sound?

 

[Irish]

-- Blown Call in Steelers-Chargers Game Benefits Bookies by $64M --Mon Nov 17, 2008 --from FFMastermind.com#The San Diego Union Tribune reports Pittsburgh Steelers SS Troy Polamalu's disallowed touchdown at the end of yesterday's 11-10 win over the Chargers helped bookies across the world. Pregame.com, a site that provides information to sports bettors, estimated that $100 million was wagered worldwide on the game. Approximately 66 percent of that money was on the Steelers, according to the site. "If the touchdown was properly upheld, Steelers bettors would have won about $32 million instead of losing big," Pregame.com President R.J. Bell said. "This admittedly incorrect call resulted in a $64 million swing in favor of the bookies." Polamalu's touchdown at the game's end was incorrectly taken away, meaning the Steelers won 11-10 and did not cover the point spread.

 

[AcousticNut]

"NFL to modify rules after bizarre finish to Sunday's Steeler game" according to Chuck Finder at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08322/928658-100.stm

NFL Vice President of Officiating Mike Pereira said today that league officials are taking steps to convene the Competition Committee in a special meeting so they can modify rules interpretations and avoid a recurrence of the bizarre touchdown-or-no situation that concluded the Steelers' historic victory over San Diego in Heinz Field Sunday.

Pereira admitted that referee Scott Green and his crew misinterpreted the rules and incorrectly disallowed a Troy Polamalu fumble return for a touchdown that would have given the Steelers a 17-10 triumph rather than an 11-10 score that was the first in the league's 12,000-some game history.

He hopes the Competition Committee that oversees rules can meet by telephone and alter the rules so the replay official, who buzzes officials once to review a play, may now be allowed to alert the referee a second time to ensure officials apply rules properly after such a review.

"It's safe to say it's already in the process of being reviewed," Pereira said today "If we let the replay guy say, 'Hey, wait a minute, they're talking about the wrong pass ..., then we can correct an egregious mistake like that. I think that's something the Rules Committee [i.e. Competition Committee] has to look at, and look at soon, how we administer the replay. This is just one instance. Could we put it on the wrong 45-yard line? Could we put it on the wrong hash? Could we put it at the wrong clock time?"

The Competition Committee includes two head coaches in the midst of their seasons, Cincinnati's Marvin Lewis -- whose team plays the Steelers Thursday -- and undefeated Tennessee's Jeff Fisher. Also, Matt Millen's firing as Detroit's general manager earlier this season created a committee vacancy.

Green and crew not only misinterpreted the rules, they erased a touchdown that should have been permitted to stand, he added.

Pereira, who said he had an amiable discussion with Steelers chairman Dan Rooney this morning, added that he spoke with Green both Sunday night and this morning. Green was interviewed by a pool reporter moments after the game and admitted making a mistake. Pereira declined to say if the officials have been or would be penalized: "It's the normal process of how we review the game. Certainly, it's a mistake that has been made. He and the crew will be held accountable for that. It's the normal routine we go through to hold them responsible for mistakes like this."

When referee Ed Hochuli admitted erring in a Chargers-Denver game in September, NFL officials said he would be marked with lower evaluation grades that could affect not only his meriting playoff work, but whether he gets retained.

On the final play of Sunday's game between the Chargers and Steelers, Pittsburgh safety Troy Polamalu returned a loose ball 12 yards for a defensive touchdown.

After an instant replay review and crew conference, the on-field ruling of touchdown was incorrectly reversed to no touchdown due to an illegal forward pass by San Diego.

There were three passes on the play. The first was a completed forward pass from San Diego's Philip Rivers to LaDainian Tomlinson. The second, from Tomlinson to Chris Chambers, was initially ruled a legal backward pass but then reversed in replay to an illegal forward pass. The third, from Chambers, was a legal backward pass that hit the ground and was returned for the touchdown by Pittsburgh's Polamalu.

The incorrect reversal of the on-field ruling of touchdown was acknowledged immediately following the game by referee Scott Green in the pool report interview with a representative of the media.

If any forward pass, legal or illegal, hits the ground, the play is dead immediately. The officiating crew mistakenly determined that the backward pass that Polamalu legally recovered and returned for the touchdown was the pass that was reversed in replay to being forward and illegal. Therefore, the crew ruled that the ball was dead when it hit the ground and the play was over. (The actual illegal forward pass - Tomlinson to Chambers - did not hit the ground and therefore the play is allowed to continue.)

If the situation had been handled properly, the defense (Pittsburgh) would have declined the penalty for an illegal forward pass from Tomlinson to Chambers and taken the touchdown.

The rules relevant to this particular play are as follows:

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 1 (b) states "When any illegal forward pass is caught or intercepted, the ball may be advanced and the penalty declined." (page 49 of 2008 Official Playing Rules of the National Football League)

Rule 8, Section 1, Article 5 states "Any forward pass (legal or illegal) becomes incomplete and the ball is dead immediately if the pass strikes the ground or goes out of bounds." (page 50 of 2008 Official Playing Rules of the National Football League)

Rule 8, Section 4, Article 1 (b) states "A defensive player may catch a backward pass or recover it after the pass touches the ground and advance." (page 58 of 2008 Official Playing Rules of the National Football League)

The final score will remain Steelers 11, Chargers 10.

First published on November 17, 2008 at 4:36 pm

 

[Dragon1952]

And those are basic rules that any official ought to know right away. These kinds of plays happen often enough, where a ball is flipped to another player. It's not like it only happens once a decade. And there are how many officials out there? 6 or 7? And not one knows the rule? But then supposedly 'immediately after the game they noticed their error'? They have 10 minutes to talk about it and get it right and then once the game is in the books and can't be changed, it 'immediately' comes to them that they made the wrong call. I mean, anyone who doesn't think something stinks is extremely naive. And the other things just make it that much more fishy....the penalty disparity, and calls allowing a TD and taking away a TD, and oh..it just so happens that Vegas (and every other book in the world) was going to lose their asses if Pittsburgh covered. Boy....ha ha......gee, what a coincidence! But that's OK, cause we'll FIX IT....yeah, that's the ticket. Give me a freakin' break. I might have born at night, but not last night.

 

[tombonneau]

And those are basic rules that any official ought to know right away. These kinds of plays happen often enough, where a ball is flipped to another player. It's not like it only happens once a decade. And there are how many officials out there? 6 or 7? And not one knows the rule? But then supposedly 'immediately after the game they noticed their error'? They have 10 minutes to talk about it and get it right and then once the game is in the books and can't be changed, it 'immediately' comes to them that they made the wrong call. I mean, anyone who doesn't think something stinks is extremely naive. And the other things just make it that much more fishy....the penalty disparity, and calls allowing a TD and taking away a TD, and oh..it just so happens that Vegas (and every other book in the world) was going to lose their asses if Pittsburgh covered. Boy....ha ha......gee, what a coincidence! But that's OK, cause we'll FIX IT....yeah, that's the ticket. Give me a freakin' break. I might have born at night, but not last night.

I think a full-fledged conspiracy is a bit wack-o, but as others have said about this, I don't think it's out of the realm that a part-time NFL official might have a vested interest in one or two games a year. I recall an anonymous survey from a few years ago, where a not insignificant number of sports officials admitted to not only betting on games, but betting on games they officiate.On the surface Pitt-SD seems like a likely candidate, but my counter-argument would be if you are going to make some $$$ on a game by shading calls to one side, you're not going to pick a high-profile national game featuring two of the league's most popular teams. You're going to wait for a Bengals-Texans game or something like that.ETA: Also, like Donaghy, you're not going to bet teams, but bet totals. For the NFL, I'd think that would involve either betting unders and making a lot of holding calls etc. against both teams in the red zone, or bet the over and call lots of pass interference & other defensive penalties to advance the ball upfield faster.

 

[Raider Nation]

Jay Glazer just reported that Pereira is retiring.