Penalties

[reflexblue]

At the most critical times.

Thats what made them stand out. It reminds me of the officiating the year after deflate gate when brady was appealing godells sanctions.

 

[DaBruinz]

I have seen it called before but it is rare.

The only time I've seen it called on a RUN play has been when it's against the Patriots. The call on Malcolm was bogus. Completely and utterly bogus.

Just as the call on Shaq Mason was bogus. His arm wasn't even around the guy nor was he holding any part of the guy. His upper arm was in the guy's gut..

I watched the Steelers O-line do exactly the same thing that Trent Brown did on damn near every running play they had. And several times I watched Antonio Brown do it against a DB several times and no calls.

When the Ref tells Brady "we're calling it tighter" and it's clear that it's only being done one way, then the team has no chance..

 

[Silver Blue&Red]

this was such a poorly called game that i eventually stopped watching.

Like the look at a steeler? that's a pass interference

Tackle a patriot before the ball gets there? no flag.

There was a homefield bias last night so i hope that ref group isn't part of the playoffs.

There were many holds by Pitt that were not called.

I hate b!tching about the refs, but I saw Pitt O-linemen strangling our Defenders. Vertical holds......
The same things, and more of what we're called on the Pats.

Not why we lost, but a little one sided.
It is what it is.

Can't expect to win when you play so bad and keep it too close.

 

[TN patriot fan]

I agree with pretty much everything everyone has written in this thread, but will go further and say the officiating absolutely made the difference in the outcome of the game. Just three plays are all it takes to see this:
1) the PI on Jonathan Jones in the first half led to a Steelers touchdown - take away that one call that was openly questioned by the commentators, a call that gave the Steelers twenty-six yards and put them in the red zone, and you have a possible three- to seven-point swing.
2) holding called on Cannon when we had first and goal from the 5 - another call openly questioned by the commentators. Two plays later Brady threw the interception - another three- to seven-point swing.
3) holding called on Mason when we had first down at the Pittsburgh 11. We ended up giving up the ball on downs. Another three- to seven-point swing.

Twice in one half the refs called holding penalties when we were within eleven yards of the goal line. Odds alone tell one, even with the inconsistency of our offense this year, that we would have scored a touchdown on at least one of those two possessions without the penalty; even if we only scored field goals each time, we still would have won the game.

If you take away the TD given to the Steelers with the corrupt PI in the first half and take away both corrupt holding penalties against us in the red zone, we win by between nine and seventeen points.

The fact that Brady specifically stated that the refs were told to call holding tighter, combined with the lopsided way in which said penalty was called (along with the lopsided way penalties across the board were called), is pretty damning against Goodell. It's relatively common for NBA players and coaches alike to openly criticize officiating even knowing they'll be fined; at least from my perspective, it's exceedingly rare in the NFL. For a player as high-profile as Brady, whom I can't ever recall mentioning officiating previously, to even mention the officiating, is not just notable, but indicting.

I fully realize some will say I'm exaggerating. More than a couple games since Deflategate have been officiated in an egregiously one-sided manner against the Pats; just in the most recent Super Bowl, though our defense was historically bad, we still would have won the game had the officials merely called a catch as it was defined at that moment in time by the rule book, and called an illegal formation penalty on the play when their QB lined up off the line of scrimmage before catching a touchdown.

I am no lawyer but it seems to me that if the right questions were asked under oath to enough people, it would be possible to get proof that Goodell had a hand in some of these games being crookedly officiated. Again, I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that if such proof could be made, that he would be guilty of collusion.

A simple play-by-play analysis of the entire game to see how many holding penalties were committed by the Steelers but not called, for one example, or how many PI/defensive holding penalties were committed by their secondary (but not called) for another, would be difficult at best, I would think, for the league to defend.

Considering the billions of dollars generated annually by this league, and how many hundreds of millions of people around the world partake of it, and how many thousands of hours the players and coaches on all thirty-two teams put in in hard work each season hoping just for an honest outcome based on the fruit of their work and not the whims of an egomaniacal commissioner, it seems to me not okay that this is happening.

 

[Koma]

The reffs could call penalties on every play, yesterday and for the last 4-5 weeks they've chosen to call the vast majority on the patriots. Yesterday was the latest example.

I can’t argue with the delay of game or false start penalties. Those are pretty clear. I thought, though, if a defensive player encroaches and an offensive player reacts to that, it’s a penalty on the defense. I could have sworn on one of the false starts, a Pittsburgh defensive lineman moved toward the line, an o-lineman came out of his stance and it was a penalty on NE.

With the holding penalties, I was thinking of Trent Brown’s that wiped out a good run by Michel. Michel was running past a Steelers lineman that Brown was engaged with. Brown had a grip on the guy’s shoulder pads and prevented him from lunging or diving at Michel. What I wonder is, the Steelers ran that toss play that started to the offense’s right and then the runner cut back left maybe 10 times. Each time, the Patriots defenders would follow the initial direction of the play and then try to reverse field to follow the RB. Is it believable that holding by a Steelers lineman didn’t occur on any of those plays?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I thought, though, if a defensive player encroaches and an offensive player reacts to that, it’s a penalty on the defense. I could have sworn on one of the false starts, a Pittsburgh defensive lineman moved toward the line, an o-lineman came out of his stance and it was a penalty on NE.

The defender has to actually cross the LOS. “Moving toward the line” isn’t encroachment.

The old rule was that if the defense jumped over the line (but didn’t make any contact) the offense still couldn’t move and if they did it would be a false start. And if the defender got back before the snap there was no penalty.

The new rule (can you call it “new” if it’s what? 15? 20 years old?) is that if the defense goes over the line and the offense moves then it is a penalty on the defense. If the offense doesn’t move and the defender can get back before the snap then there is no penalty. And if the defender goes over and makes contact then it’s a penalty whether the offense moves or not.

 

[Soliel]

It’s obvious the refs were in Rooney’s pocket

 

[Kontradiction]

It’s obvious the refs were in Rooney’s pocket

That would be the biggest sports scandal of all time and would dwarf the Black Sox scandal.

 

[reflexblue]

I can’t argue with the delay of game or false start penalties. Those are pretty clear. I thought, though, if a defensive player encroaches and an offensive player reacts to that, it’s a penalty on the defense. I could have sworn on one of the false starts, a Pittsburgh defensive lineman moved toward the line, an o-lineman came out of his stance and it was a penalty on NE.

With the holding penalties, I was thinking of Trent Brown’s that wiped out a good run by Michel. Michel was running past a Steelers lineman that Brown was engaged with. Brown had a grip on the guy’s shoulder pads and prevented him from lunging or diving at Michel. What I wonder is, the Steelers ran that toss play that started to the offense’s right and then the runner cut back left maybe 10 times. Each time, the Patriots defenders would follow the initial direction of the play and then try to reverse field to follow the RB. Is it believable that holding by a Steelers lineman didn’t occur on any of those plays?

I remember the play your talking about eg the pitt defensive play moves foward and the pats 0-lineman came out of his stance and i agree with you.. i can't remember the term for the penalty, but in that case the defense should have been called for the penalty , not the offense. I agree also that its almost impossible for the pitt offense not to have committed a penalty on those tosses. Ive come to the conclusion that the league is sick of seeing the pats in the afccg or the sb.

 

[maineman209]

 

[catent]

I was a big fan of Steratore, thought he generally officiated very well.

Recently I've liked Ron Torbert. He's articulate, calm, and seemingly in control of the game. His calls seem fair, consistent and sensible. Wish he called more games for the Pats.

 

[Gumby]

I agree with pretty much everything everyone has written in this thread, but will go further and say the officiating absolutely made the difference in the outcome of the game. . . .


I am no lawyer but it seems to me that if the right questions were asked under oath to enough people, it would be possible to get proof that Goodell had a hand in some of these games being crookedly officiated. Again, I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that if such proof could be made, that he would be guilty of collusion.

A simple play-by-play analysis of the entire game to see how many holding penalties were committed by the Steelers but not called, for one example, or how many PI/defensive holding penalties were committed by their secondary (but not called) for another, would be difficult at best, I would think, for the league to defend.
. . .

The other thing you and others don't mention is that once they learned the ref's level of tolerance for squeelers "rule breaking", they kept doing it to that level: evidence is the block in the back in consecutive punts. The second one was blatantly obvious and IIRC the same guy. The holding was ridiculous and the face masking that was going on was particularly disgusting (rapistburger even hot into it).

Careful about throwing around term collusion. I don't think "collusion" is a CRIME, in and of itself. Media today wants to use it that way to make select individuals sound like they are being accused of criminal acts, without identifying anything criminal. You have to be colluding to fix prices or limit competition (commerce) or fix games (sport and gambling) or some other crime.

 

[Angelpats]

If the Pats could pressure Big Ben, then maybe their O linemen might need to hold....but...as we have watched for the past several years, NE's front 4 likes to lock up with their counterpart and look busy. Don't need to hold when there is no legit threat.

It is absurd really if that is what they are taught. It got to the point where some of them were just burying their heads in the OLs chest for no other reason than to engage. At least keep your head up and try to bat a ball once in a while, or be ambitious and try to disengage and get to the Qb.

 

[TN patriot fan]

The other thing you and others don't mention is that once they learned the ref's level of tolerance for squeelers "rule breaking", they kept doing it to that level: evidence is the block in the back in consecutive punts. The second one was blatantly obvious and IIRC the same guy. The holding was ridiculous and the face masking that was going on was particularly disgusting (rapistburger even hot into it).

Careful about throwing around term collusion. I don't think "collusion" is a CRIME, in and of itself. Media today wants to use it that way to make select individuals sound like they are being accused of criminal acts, without identifying anything criminal. You have to be colluding to fix prices or limit competition (commerce) or fix games (sport and gambling) or some other crime.

I agree 100% about players on the team that's not being called for penalties adjusting and taking advantage, i.e. intentionally ignoring the rules. I would add that anyone with any common sense at all can understand that when a game is officiated thusly, it's nearly impossible for the team at the short end of the bias to win.

Regarding my use of the term collusion, if Goodell, or someone working for him, instructed the refs to call the game tighter on us than on the Steelers, that in and of itself is an attempt to fix the game, and an attempt that is usually going to succeed, as it did Sunday. I think, too, that a pattern of fixing games would be more damning than just one instance; the latter can be explained away as accidental or by chance, the former not so much. Considering that this has happened a few different times now just in the last three years, I personally believe there's ample evidence, if only someone took the time to uncover it, to put Goodell in the pen for a while. I think it was the Denver game in 2015 when multiple national commentators that normally never mention officiating at all were commenting openly the next day that the refs had been working for the Broncos - Bayless said as much if I recall correctly, and I think Cowherd did as well.

If this were church league softball that involved a couple dozen people, no judge would even hear the case; but this is billions of dollars and hundreds of millions of people that are in play. Goodell is arrogant enough to think he can do anything he likes and no one will dare question him on it; odds are that sooner or later it will come to light; we can only hope it might be sooner.

 

[Soliel]

I agree 100% about players on the team that's not being called for penalties adjusting and taking advantage, i.e. intentionally ignoring the rules. I would add that anyone with any common sense at all can understand that when a game is officiated thusly, it's nearly impossible for the team at the short end of the bias to win.

Regarding my use of the term collusion, if Goodell, or someone working for him, instructed the refs to call the game tighter on us than on the Steelers, that in and of itself is an attempt to fix the game, and an attempt that is usually going to succeed, as it did Sunday. I think, too, that a pattern of fixing games would be more damning than just one instance; the latter can be explained away as accidental or by chance, the former not so much. Considering that this has happened a few different times now just in the last three years, I personally believe there's ample evidence, if only someone took the time to uncover it, to put Goodell in the pen for a while. I think it was the Denver game in 2015 when multiple national commentators that normally never mention officiating at all were commenting openly the next day that the refs had been working for the Broncos - Bayless said as much if I recall correctly, and I think Cowherd did as well.

If this were church league softball that involved a couple dozen people, no judge would even hear the case; but this is billions of dollars and hundreds of millions of people that are in play. Goodell is arrogant enough to think he can do anything he likes and no one will dare question him on it; odds are that sooner or later it will come to light; we can only hope it might be sooner.

I’ve suspected a plot like this for about four years now. I mean, sometimes a ref team will make calls a little different but when you have so many instances of really blatant bias in the way penalties are called, it makes you wonder.

I mean that and the fact the nfl would rather reinvent physics in order to steal draft picks and suspend and humiliate our goat qb. That was kinda my first clue that something in Denmark is rotten. I refuse to believe that people with far more education than me making 30 million a year would not understand these concepts. So, by defenition, there’s a conspiracy of some kind.

 

[Silver Blue&Red]

Fvk Goodell and the scum on Park Ave.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I was a big fan of Steratore, thought he generally officiated very well.

Recently I've liked Ron Torbert. He's articulate, calm, and seemingly in control of the game. His calls seem fair, consistent and sensible. Wish he called more games for the Pats.

I like Voinovich.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

The other thing you and others don't mention is that once they learned the ref's level of tolerance for squeelers "rule breaking", they kept doing it to that level:

Always cracks me the hell up when NE fans whine like that.

Because we won THREE EFFIN' CHAMPIONSHIPS that way. In 2001, 2003, and 2004 NE would clutch and grab receivers all over the place and dare the refs to call it all the time, knowing that they wouldn't.

 

[Soliel]

I wonder what’s wrong, boger not available?

 

[TN patriot fan]

I’ve suspected a plot like this for about four years now. I mean, sometimes a ref team will make calls a little different but when you have so many instances of really blatant bias in the way penalties are called, it makes you wonder.

I mean that and the fact the nfl would rather reinvent physics in order to steal draft picks and suspend and humiliate our goat qb. That was kinda my first clue that something in Denmark is rotten. I refuse to believe that people with far more education than me making 30 million a year would not understand these concepts. So, by defenition, there’s a conspiracy of some kind.

You make a great point that somehow no one high up in the NFL could have enough of a basic understanding of science to comprehend that gases are affected by temperature.