This ****ing league (That Jeff Fisher challenge)

[convertedpatsfan]

Isn't a verbal challenge part of the rule?

I still think the challenge was ok. The rule is there for a reason.,.to make a challenge known to an official and to let them know in an alloted time. If a coach asks for a time out and doesn't give the timeout signal I've seen refs grant time outs. Same kind of thing

Timeouts are not comparable. The rules state a coach or player can initiate a timeout "upon request," while the rule on challenges states "The Head Coach will initiate a challenge by throwing a red flag onto the field of play before the next legal snap or kick."

As for the rest, there's no mention of verbal challenges in the rule book. I understand this is extremely picky and unpopular because it reeks of red tape and procedural ********. But there's a larger point that people are missing.

Watch the video closely. Fisher clearly tells the Line Judge he wants to challenge. The Line Judge does NOT grant him the challenge immediately. He points to the ground and asks Fisher to throw his flag. Fisher says he has the flag somewhere and keeps looking for it. 8 or 9 more seconds elapse where the Line Judge waits for the flag and Fisher keeps searching, and only then does the Line Judge blow the whistle to call the play arbitrarily.

If all it took was the head coach verbally saying it, the Line Judge should have whistled the play dead immediately. Instead the Line Judge asked to see the flag right after. He still waits to see the flag. Then he decides to call the play dead on his own.

The larger point is the Line Judge knew the rule, even tried to get Fisher to honour it initially, then decided, "Nah, it's fine." This wasn't about ignorance of the rule, nor was it about tolerance for certain violations of rules (like letting certain types of holding go for OL or some contact from DBs on WRs).

This was an official who clearly knew the rule, clearly expected it to be followed, then just letting one go for Fisher. And it cost us 17 yards, which is more than a major penalty, as well as 3 points, all because a Line Judge did a favour for Fisher.

 

[robbomango]

The ref probably looked over at Fisher rummaging around in his pockets, looking like a hobo desperately clawing for his last nip of Jack Daniels, and granted the sorry sack a challenge out of sympathy knowing his team didn't have a chance...

 

[PatsWSB47]

Timeouts are not comparable. The rules state a coach or player can initiate a timeout "upon request," while the rule on challenges states "The Head Coach will initiate a challenge by throwing a red flag onto the field of play before the next legal snap or kick."

As for the rest, there's no mention of verbal challenges in the rule book. I understand this is extremely picky and unpopular because it reeks of red tape and procedural ********. But there's a larger point that people are missing.

Watch the video closely. Fisher clearly tells the Line Judge he wants to challenge. The Line Judge does NOT grant him the challenge immediately. He points to the ground and asks Fisher to throw his flag. Fisher says he has the flag somewhere and keeps looking for it. 8 or 9 more seconds elapse where the Line Judge waits for the flag and Fisher keeps searching, and only then does the Line Judge blow the whistle to call the play arbitrarily.

If all it took was the head coach verbally saying it, the Line Judge should have whistled the play dead immediately. Instead the Line Judge asked to see the flag right after. He still waits to see the flag. Then he decides to call the play dead on his own.

The larger point is the Line Judge knew the rule, even tried to get Fisher to honour it initially, then decided, "Nah, it's fine." This wasn't about ignorance of the rule, nor was it about tolerance for certain violations of rules (like letting certain types of holding go for OL or some contact from DBs on WRs).

This was an official who clearly knew the rule, clearly expected it to be followed, then just letting one go for Fisher. And it cost us 17 yards, which is more than a major penalty, as well as 3 points, all because a Line Judge did a favour for Fisher.

Perhaps it should be one of those ephasis rules this year. It didn't cost us anything if the challenge showed Fisher was correct. As a matter of fact it would have meant we got away with one and only because of red tape if he didn't allow the challenge.....not by the rule but by what actually happened in the play. Of course a ref should follow the rule book but in this case this is a nic-pic. Let it go.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

Perhaps it should be one of those ephasis rules this year. It didn't cost us anything if the challenge showed Fisher was correct. As a matter of fact it would have meant we got away with one and only because of red tape if he didn't allow the challenge.....not by the rule but by what actually happened in the play. Of course a ref should follow the rule book but in this case this is a nic-pic. Let it go.

The rules are complex. If the referee did not understand the rule or made a mistake in interpreting it, I would be more forgiving.

But my point is the referee knew the rule, even pointed it out to Fisher, then eventually did a favour for him. This should not happen in pro sports under any circumstances.

It's not about red tape or procedure or rule interpretations. It's about an official who fully understood the rule, planned on enforcing it, then let it go.

If the referee did their job, then maybe, as you say, we would have "got away" with one. Or maybe Fisher and the Rams would have been penalized for not executing properly, for not doing his job properly. Which is how competitive sports should work.

It's a stupid thing, but so are things like kneeldowns at the end of the game. But you still have to go out there and do it and if you **** it up, you don't get the referees to help you out.

Players are expected to be ready for a variety of game situations, why wouldn't coaches be expected to do the same?

 

[aluminum seats]

I sort of see both sides here. There is a rule in place, but I also understand the idea of intent. Not a bad discussion really.

With Fisher, what strikes me is how much first impression stick. I remember when they played that playoff game back in what, 2003? And the announcer, I think it was Phil Simms, said, "we asked Jeff Fisher before the game, and he said, 'we got this,'" regarding a game plan for the Pats, and it actually seemed legitimate, he seemed like a sharp guy.

And he's been able to somewhat keep that association for years. For me, the reverse would be someone like Jack Del Rio, who struck me as a preening moron, but if he continues to have success with the Raiders, maybe he's not? Just using him as an example, but it's interesting how first impressions stick.

 

[neuronet]

I still think the challenge was ok. The rule is there for a reason.,.to make a challenge known to an official and to let them know in an alloted time. If a coach asks for a time out and doesn't give the timeout signal I've seen refs grant time outs. Same kind of thing

Exactly this kind of thing happens all the time with timeouts and challenges. Coach talks to refs, ref says "OK" and a timeout or challenge is called. Gotta learn not just the rulebook, but which rules are actually followed to the letter and which aren't, come gametime.

Oh, and F Goodell.

 

[Galeb]

Gettin some mileage out of this pic lately.

 

[neuronet]

Mind you, if this were Belichick, we would have lost a first-round pick by now and the ref would have been fired.

That's how this works.

 

[XLIX]

The ref probably looked over at Fisher rummaging around in his pockets, looking like a hobo desperately clawing for his last nip of Jack Daniels, and granted the sorry sack a challenge out of sympathy knowing his team didn't have a chance...

I think that's exactly what happened. The ref wanted to see the flag then when he saw the incompetent Fisher fumbling around, decided he would stop play since it was clear Fisher was desperately trying to challenge.

Seriously, this is making a mountain out of a molehill. It was the right call and the Patriots went on to win the game by a couple TD's anyway.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

The ref probably looked over at Fisher rummaging around in his pockets, looking like a hobo desperately clawing for his last nip of Jack Daniels, and granted the sorry sack a challenge out of sympathy knowing his team didn't have a chance...

The ref did demand that Fisher ultimately show him the flag, though. I'm guessing that if for some reason Fisher hadn't been able to ultimately produce the flag, the challenge wouldn't have been considered.