Mike Perreira - Official Review (NFL Network)

[SoCal Bong]

I'm staying at a relatives house this week so I get to watch NFL Network and just saw the Official Review segment where they look back at controversial calls and the head of officiating explains it.

I'm curious to know whether they ever admit a blown call. Does Perreira find a way to justify every call made to defend the officials? Or maybe they don't even address the ones that were clearly wrong? Could be very annoying as a viewer to always hear that officials are human and will make mistakes but no one will ever own up to it.

 

[mgcolby]

I'm staying at a relatives house this week so I get to watch NFL Network and just saw the Official Review segment where they look back at controversial calls and the head of officiating explains it.

I'm curious to know whether they ever admit a blown call. Does Perreira find a way to justify every call made to defend the officials? Or maybe they don't even address the ones that were clearly wrong? Could be very annoying as a viewer to always hear that officials are human and will make mistakes but no one will ever own up to it.

Yes he does admit when the ref's are wrong. The most notable was the Polamolu (sp?) interception against the colts. Judgment calls such as PI and roughing the passer are the one's he usually skirts and/or defends the ref unless it is blatant.

 

[BradyManny]

The segment is both interesting and grossly self-indulgent. It's basically a way of saying "we're right all the time and here's why". And yes, he will only talk about controversial calls which he can justify the call.

Sometimes the justifcation still stinks. Take the Vick TD a few years ago when he basically leaped out of bounds and waved at the pylon. I believe Pereira said that the "goal line extends universally". Of course, while maybe this is in the rule book (I'm not sure if it is), it would be the first I've heard of it, and probably the first most refs have heard about it. If it were true, then Champ Bailey's fumble would've obviously been a touchback as the goal line would've extended out of bounds anyway. But, the truth is, I doubt many officials view the goal line as extending infinitely, but that in the Vick case, the refs just gave Vick a TD b/c as they sometimes do, refs get caught up in the moment and make stupid decisions. They're human, they make mistakes, I don't see why Pereira has to justify all the mistakes.

EDIT: The Polamolu (spelling??) INT was a case in which the controversial call did not negatively affect the game. That is why Pereira apologized for the bad call. If the Colts had gone on to win that game, I absolutely guarantee that they would've found a way to justify the call - or ignored the issue - but they NEVER would've apologized for the call. Frankly, who can blame them, you can't be telling a team, "oh, sorry, you lost a playoff game b/c the refs sucked".

 

[PatsDeb]

[/COLOR]

Yes he does admit when the ref's are wrong. The most notable was the Polamolu (sp?) interception against the colts. Judgment calls such as PI and roughing the passer are the one's he usually skirts and/or defends the ref unless it is blatant.

It was easy to admit that one because the Steelers still won the game. I wonder if he ever admits a mistake where the wronged team lost the game?

 

[QuiGon]

Did they mention the horrible "Roughing the Passer" call against Cincy that cost them the game versus Tampa Bay...? That was atrocious.

 

[mgcolby]

It was easy to admit that one because the Steelers still won the game. I wonder if he ever admits a mistake where the wronged team lost the game?

I'm not sure I haven't really payed attention to it in that way, I just find it interesting to watch. Did any of you watch last season's special on Pipes and how he prepares for a game and what happens during the week? It was a great show and it gave great insight into how the league measure a referee's performance as an individual and as a crew.

IMO last year was the worst season of officiating I can remember. It wasn't just isolated incidents it was league wide throughout the entire season.

 

[BradyManny]

IMO last year was the worst season of officiating I can remember. It wasn't just isolated incidents it was league wide throughout the entire season.

It's not specific to the NFL either - NBA officiating has become downright awful in the past few years. Without getting into too much social commentary, I think the increasingly litigious nature of society is rubbing off on sports. We're seeing more and more rule changes and additions and more and more whistles being blown. NBA games are getting tough to watch b/c refs just don't let them play. I have no data to back this up, this is just what I'm seeing.

 

[Bella*chick]

Did they mention the horrible "Roughing the Passer" call against Cincy that cost them the game versus Tampa Bay...? That was atrocious.

That's the call they are discussing now. OMG, what a HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE call. I have never seen such a BS call and every Bengal fan has the right to be furious.

Yes, he's definitely trying to justify it. Tool.

 

[Murphys95]

The segment is both interesting and grossly self-indulgent. It's basically a way of saying "we're right all the time and here's why". And yes, he will only talk about controversial calls which he can justify the call.

Sometimes the justifcation still stinks. Take the Vick TD a few years ago when he basically leaped out of bounds and waved at the pylon. I believe Pereira said that the "goal line extends universally". Of course, while maybe this is in the rule book (I'm not sure if it is), it would be the first I've heard of it, and probably the first most refs have heard about it. If it were true, then Champ Bailey's fumble would've obviously been a touchback as the goal line would've extended out of bounds anyway. But, the truth is, I doubt many officials view the goal line as extending infinitely, but that in the Vick case, the refs just gave Vick a TD b/c as they sometimes do, refs get caught up in the moment and make stupid decisions. They're human, they make mistakes, I don't see why Pereira has to justify all the mistakes.

EDIT: The Polamolu (spelling??) INT was a case in which the controversial call did not negatively affect the game. That is why Pereira apologized for the bad call. If the Colts had gone on to win that game, I absolutely guarantee that they would've found a way to justify the call - or ignored the issue - but they NEVER would've apologized for the call. Frankly, who can blame them, you can't be telling a team, "oh, sorry, you lost a playoff game b/c the refs sucked".

Great post. The NFL circles its wagon well.

As for the goal line extending across the globe - that's true. In fact Belichick talked about it a few years ago. Technically, by rule a player can cross the goal line inside or out of the pylon and the result will be a touchdown (as long as a part of the player's body isn't out of bounds first). This exact scenario occurred in the Pats/Colts divisional playoff game in '04. Dillon technically scored a touchdown by diving across the infinite goal line outside of the pylon. Belichick just chose not to challenge the ruling and remarked in 3GTG that by rule Dillon scored a touchdown.

 

[Isaac]

Sure, he admits mistakes, but that's not really the focus of the segment. One admitted mistake that is near-and-dear to us all is the PI call on Samuel against Denver, he basically said that he had wished the ref hadn't called that one.

Rather, the segment is more about explaining the rules to folks who think that the refs made a bad call when in fact it was correct. Unfortunately many people think that they know better than the refs, when in fact many "bad calls" are really "I don't really understand the rules" (see Vick example from response above). The offensive PI call in the endzone during the SuperBowl is a case in point, that call will and should be made every time the refs see it, and yet you will still hear people talking about it as a "bad call". I suppose people should be complaining about the rule book instead, but I guess that's not as satisfying.

 

[satz]

Its a great segment to watch as most times the call you think is bad turns out be a perfect call and you learn more about the rules.
Most weeks he does have atleast 1 call he says is bad .But it does cement a recent study where shots of few ball calls were shown with no context of game or teams and the viewers were asked to decide if the call was right or wrong,I think 80% called the same as refs .

 

[Keegs]

i think it sucks.

everytime it's on i've never seen them admit they were wrong.

It's like the refs make bullshlt calls, and then they sit down with Mike and try to find something that could possibly be a penalty and use that for their justification.

I'm sure in almost every play you could find a questionable "unsportsmanlike conduct" call.

what a buncha crap. I will NEVER buy this garbage.

 

[SoCal Bong]

That's the call they are discussing now. OMG, what a HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE call. I have never seen such a BS call and every Bengal fan has the right to be furious.

Yes, he's definitely trying to justify it. Tool.

Basically said that they trust the ref's judgement as to whether the QB's head was being driven into the ground, regardless of whether there was any intent to pass.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

It's not specific to the NFL either - NBA officiating has become downright awful in the past few years. Without getting into too much social commentary, I think the increasingly litigious nature of society is rubbing off on sports. We're seeing more and more rule changes and additions and more and more whistles being blown. NBA games are getting tough to watch b/c refs just don't let them play. I have no data to back this up, this is just what I'm seeing.

Huh. Sometimes it's really interesting how two people can view the same thing totally differently. I hate the "let them play" mentality... I'd rather the players stop committing fouls/penalties than have refs turn a blind eye to them.

The problem I see is that enforcement is too sporadic and the penalty is too light. About the only sport out there which properly penalizes its players is hockey: losing a player for two minutes really hurts and never makes it worth it to take a penalty. Basketball is on the other end where you can foul a guy 5 times, it gets called once, and when it does get called either the play starts again with no penalty or the the guy fouled gets at most 2 points when he can easily get 2 or 3 if he weren't fouled.

Now imagine if in football, when caught holding, that player must sit out the next 5 snaps. All of a sudden it doesn't seem like such a good idea to try to get away with it. This isn't at all thought through and probably isn't a good idea, but it leads to the type of penalties I'd like to see.

BTW, basketball is easy. All fouls are treated like college technicals. At worst the team still has the ball, has missed both free throws, and has a new clock. More often a foul gives up two free points and a new clock. There'd be a lot less thuggery going on and no more "final two minutes takes an hour" crap. I'd start watching basketball again. While I'm at it, 3 or 4 fouls and you're tossed. Give these guys incentive to change the way they play.

 

[BradyManny]

BTW, basketball is easy. All fouls are treated like college technicals. At worst the team still has the ball, has missed both free throws, and has a new clock. More often a foul gives up two free points and a new clock. There'd be a lot less thuggery going on and no more "final two minutes takes an hour" crap. I'd start watching basketball again. While I'm at it, 3 or 4 fouls and you're tossed. Give these guys incentive to change the way they play.

Wow. Have you ever played basketball? Either pick up or any kind? The touch fouls they call nowadays are terrible, if a star with any kind of reputation (Kobe, Wade, etc.) goes up for a shot and there is a player in his vicinity that at all challenges the shot, that star is getting to the free throw line.

As for football, they are going severely overboard with protecting the QB calls, pass interference calls & taunting/celebratory calls.

In all sports, I'd rather err on the side of a little more contact and letting them play.

 

[BelichickFan]

The Polamalu call was the only one I've ever seen him say was bad - as others have said, probably only because the Steelers won anyway. He almost always falls back on the "judement" call excuse. That's what he did with Samuel's BS PI call against Lelie last year and also on the hit on the TB QB this week. I watched him a lot last year but don't really bother this year as it's fairly clear is just CYA crap.

 

[Pats726]

I wonder if the mentioned the non call on James's fumble...I think the whistle was swallowed..and he was clearly NOT moving forward,,and he was quite in the grasp of a few defenders..the play wasn't even reviewable...and it also swiung the momentum of the game..

 

[Oswlek]

Sure, he admits mistakes, but that's not really the focus of the segment. One admitted mistake that is near-and-dear to us all is the PI call on Samuel against Denver, he basically said that he had wished the ref hadn't called that one.

Rather, the segment is more about explaining the rules to folks who think that the refs made a bad call when in fact it was correct. Unfortunately many people think that they know better than the refs, when in fact many "bad calls" are really "I don't really understand the rules" (see Vick example from response above). The offensive PI call in the endzone during the SuperBowl is a case in point, that call will and should be made every time the refs see it, and yet you will still hear people talking about it as a "bad call". I suppose people should be complaining about the rule book instead, but I guess that's not as satisfying.

It is the inconsistency in which calls are made that get me. Sure I get upset any time a call is made against the Pats immediately afterward, but usually I see it on the replay and calm down...... a little.

However, when I see Samuel get called for PI when it was clearly the offensive player initiating contact and the very next day a Colt DB literally tackles ARE before the ball gets there without a flag, that is what drives me nuts.

When one team is allowed to hold without end, but the other keeps getting called for the most ticky-tack of offenses.

When a WR pushes off over and over again free of flag, but the minute the DB uses his hands to counter the force he is called for PI.

These are the types of things that drive me nuts. I would be willing to accept calls that are consistent in any one game, let alone week after week. Teams can adjust if things are called the same, but it just isn't so.

I realize that sometimes the camera has a better angle than a ref and sometimes this are hard to see in live speed, but that doesn't justify even half of the crap that goes on.

 

[zippo59]

Sometimes the justifcation still stinks. Take the Vick TD a few years ago when he basically leaped out of bounds and waved at the pylon. I believe Pereira said that the "goal line extends universally". Of course, while maybe this is in the rule book (I'm not sure if it is), it would be the first I've heard of it, and probably the first most refs have heard about it. If it were true, then Champ Bailey's fumble would've obviously been a touchback as the goal line would've extended out of bounds anyway. But, the truth is, I doubt many officials view the goal line as extending infinitely, but that in the Vick case, the refs just gave Vick a TD b/c as they sometimes do, refs get caught up in the moment and make stupid decisions. They're human, they make mistakes, I don't see why Pereira has to justify all the mistakes.

This is a legitimate rule, it is in the rule book. Even if you don't agree with it it is still a rule and should be called so by the refs. And the rule does not apply to the Bailey fumble because the ball has to be in someone's possession for the "universal goaline" thing to come into play. Also as someone already said, a part of the persons' body who possesses the ball has to break the plain of the actual endzone.

 

[letekro]

The Polamalu call was the only one I've ever seen him say was bad - as others have said, probably only because the Steelers won anyway. He almost always falls back on the "judement" call excuse. That's what he did with Samuel's BS PI call against Lelie last year and also on the hit on the TB QB this week. I watched him a lot last year but don't really bother this year as it's fairly clear is just CYA crap.

A referee who makes a judgment call that blows, like that BS roughing the passer call, has bad judgment, and is therefore a crappy referee. I think this is what Pereira is trying to say.