If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Jim Schwartz: I knew the rule, I threw the challenge flag anyways   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 141
    More: Dumbass, Jim Schwartz, Detroit Lions, Texans, Kyle Vanden Bosch, Jason Hanson, Jake Delhomme, Justin Forsett, Arian Foster  
•       •       •

2772 clicks; posted to Sports » on 23 Nov 2012 at 11:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



141 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-23 04:50:21 PM  

SilentStrider: Its a stupid rule that cost the team the game. The refs blew the call, and this rule prevented them from correcting their mistake. Assess the penalty yards maybe, but to say the play can't be challenged is asinine.


It did not cost them the game. This was in the third quarter, and the Lions never trailed the Texans until that final FG was kicked in OT. Hell, this didn't even tie the game.

The Lions had plenty of chances to put them away, and they blew them all.
 
2012-11-23 04:59:38 PM  
The problem with the rule as written, is while this play was obvious that the runner was down to everyone except the officials, there may be some play out there were only the head coach sees the runner was down. Does the head coach really want to put all his trust into some booth official to examine the entire play, snap to TD, before the extra point is snapped? This is the head coach's way of saying that he wants to force the head official to review this thing.

Consider that the Lions could have had a player fall down feigning an injury, and that is not considered delay of game no matter how much the defender is faking it (short of the defender standing up and declaring to all that he is in the process of faking an injury.)
 
2012-11-23 05:07:37 PM  

poughdrew: Does the head coach really want to put all his trust into some booth official to examine the entire play, snap to TD, before the extra point is snapped?


They don't have to conduct the entire review prior to play being stopped for the review, and no one's reviewing the 70+ yards of no contact by anyone. If there are two places of contention, then it's MORE likely to be reviewed, not less likely. Again, in college, every play is reviewed and I don't think I've ever seen someone get a snap off before they buzz down to the field for the review. Hell, I'm pretty sure a couple times, when they do beat the whistle, the whistles blow anyway and they say that the previous play is under review.

poughdrew: Consider that the Lions could have had a player fall down feigning an injury, and that is not considered delay of game no matter how much the defender is faking it (short of the defender standing up and declaring to all that he is in the process of faking an injury.)


Could've. But irrelevant situations are irrelevant.
 
2012-11-23 05:09:45 PM  

poughdrew: Does the head coach really want to put all his trust into some booth official to examine the entire play, snap to TD, before the extra point is snapped? This is the head coach's way of saying that he wants to force the head official to review this thing.


The head coach doesn't get to force the head official to review anything, because THE ENTIRE SCORING PLAY IS REVIEWED. They will not allow an extra point attempt to take place without confirming that the replay official has looked at the entire play and deemed it legitimate. If there is ANY doubt, the on-field official will go under the hood and review it.

It's the procedure. The coach has no role whatsoever.
 
2012-11-23 05:29:45 PM  
Whar anigif??? Whar???
 
2012-11-23 05:44:12 PM  

libranoelrose: Whar anigif??? Whar???


heh
 
2012-11-23 05:51:38 PM  

jaylectricity: libranoelrose: Whar anigif??? Whar???

heh


I missed most of the first half. When did it happen?
 
2012-11-23 05:53:27 PM  

jaylectricity: zamboni: jaylectricity: I thought he manned up pretty well. Just said he was fired up, didn't even wait for the play to be over before he pulled the challenge flag out.

A lot of people in the Fark football thread were complaining (and a lot of them got the interpretation of the rule completely wrong) but essentially the rule is to keep coaches from being jackasses. It's like saying, "Listen, this is going to be automatically reviewed, so shut your yap and let the process begin. Stop trying to be an attention whore."

If you can't follow that simple rule, you'll lose your right to due process.

Yeah... but a 5 yard delay of game penalty, maybe even a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty would be appropriate.

Awarding a touchdown to a player that neither earned it nor deserved it because you failed to do your job in the first place, plus a 15 yard penalty seems... excessive.

I mean the runner was looking around waiting for someone to say "Stop running, jackass! You were down. It was obvious to everyone... including you!"

Go back to what I was saying about the delaying the delay. If you waste time throwing a challenge flag, forcing the refs to come over and explain to you that they were already planning on reviewing the play, you're just wasting everybody's time. And now that you've used up the time that the refs were going to use to check out the video, the decision is to skip the review.

Maybe in that situation the refs could just ignore the flag, ignore the coach and just do what they were already going to do.

Also, sometimes these coaches are throwing the flag just for a chance to yell at the refs. AGAIN...a waste of time.


I approve of a new signal.

Referee points at red flag, points in the general direction of head coaches ass with an upward motion of the clenched right hand... thumb extended, beginning at the right knee... then assesses a 15 yard penalty.

As in, take that red flag, shove it up your ass... 15 yards.
 
2012-11-23 05:55:45 PM  

libranoelrose: jaylectricity: libranoelrose: Whar anigif??? Whar???

heh

I missed most of the first half. When did it happen?


Oops, I thought I was in the Suh thread, lol
 
2012-11-23 06:04:31 PM  
Although I think this rule is asinine, and there is no way the right call should not be allowed to be made, people need to stop saying the refs blew this call. The RULE blew the call. The refs got it right in regards to the rule book, its just an unfortunate rule. Review the play, charge the coach with a time out and some yardage and call it a farking day.
 
2012-11-23 06:08:55 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: SnarfVader: I understand why the rule was put into place, but I do believe the no review part is pretty harsh. I'd like to see that part changed. Keep the penalty yards, though. That should be enough of a deterrent.

Not in the case of yesterday's play. Kickoffs are already all likely to result in touchbacks anyway, so a 15-yard penalty on the kickoff isn't much of a deterrent.


Except if you're kicking off from the 50 instead of the 35, why not try an onside kick? Worst case, you give up 20 yards or so.
 
2012-11-23 06:14:48 PM  
It's annoying that the most severe in-game penalty in football -- in this case, the penalty was awarding a touchdown to the opposition plus a 15 yard penalty -- should be reserved for a technical infraction that doesn't affect safety of the players or the sanctity of game.
 
2012-11-23 06:18:41 PM  

meanmutton: It's annoying that the most severe in-game penalty in football -- in this case, the penalty was awarding a touchdown to the opposition plus a 15 yard penalty -- should be reserved for a technical infraction that doesn't affect safety of the players or the sanctity of game.


Call it karma for Suh's unpenalized kick to Schaub's dick.
 
2012-11-23 06:46:46 PM  

Shadow Blasko: chuggernaught: Also, if you're the ball carrier, why wouldn't you just run it into the end zone every play? Just keep going, even if tackled, get up and run into the end zone. Apparently there are refs out there stupid enough to reward you.

I think the issue is that there was no whistle to say he was down. If there WAS a whistle, and he got up and ran into the end zone, that would be "bad".


Actually, I think it's be a "delay-of-game" penalty.
 
2012-11-23 06:47:42 PM  

jaylectricity: I thought he manned up pretty well. Just said he was fired up, didn't even wait for the play to be over before he pulled the challenge flag out.

A lot of people in the Fark football thread were complaining (and a lot of them got the interpretation of the rule completely wrong) but essentially the rule is to keep coaches from being jackasses. It's like saying, "Listen, this is going to be automatically reviewed, so shut your yap and let the process begin. Stop trying to be an attention whore."

If you can't follow that simple rule, you'll lose your right to due process.


It's an idiotic rule, but Schwartz knew it, knew it was his fault that he lost his cool and broke the rule, and is taking responsibility for it. Hopefully the rule will be changed in the off-season to something that isn't utterly moronic.

Case in point:

Olympic Trolling Judge: Here's how you fix it:

If a coach throws an otherwise legal challenge flag on a play subject to official review, the review proceeds as requested, but the coach's team is charged as though they had lost the challenge even if the ruling on the field is overturned. The bad call is corrected, fans point and laugh at the stupid coach for wasting a challenge and a timeout, everyone wins.


I would have gone with something less harsh, like just picking the flag back up, but that would require a bit more complexity as you have to deal with the issue of stopping the clock. Simply calling it a failed challenge simplifies things greatly.
 
2012-11-23 06:53:21 PM  
I thought the regular refs were going to fix all the blown calls from the replacement refs!
 
2012-11-23 06:53:54 PM  

Leader O'Cola: his decision to settle for a 47 yard FG on 3rd down was far more egregious. it was calculated, not spur of the moment emotion.


It is a bad call in retrospect. But when you have one of the best kickers in the history of the NFL, you're in his range, and one kick will win the game, it's not a bad call to make at the time, particularly when the game is really getting out of hand - two turnovers in OT and the Lions have had troubles this year with turnovers. I don't find fault with him for this call even though I think he should have done one more running play, tried to get a few extra yards, then gone for it on 4th down. If they had run and lost yards, maybe people would be wondering why he didn't use Hansen when he got into Hansen's range? Or if they had fumbled? It's not hard to turn that situation right around to make it look like going for it on 3rd down was the better way to go about it.
 
2012-11-23 07:01:49 PM  

jaylectricity: marfar: Football is a trillion dollar business, there were 60,000 people in the stands, untold amounts of money had been bet on this game, and they completely destroy the integrity of the game because a guy threw a tiny yellow flag on the field. That is ridiculous.

Sure, but we're in a transition period. It's also the fact that a review delays the game. Delays are not good for football and by extension, for the revenue stream. So to delay the delay by throwing an unnecessary challenge flag is not good for business.


The delay is happening anyway because of the review. It doesn't take them any longer because they have to tell the coach he didn't need to throw his flag.
 
2012-11-23 07:17:27 PM  

On the Side: Although I think this rule is asinine, and there is no way the right call should not be allowed to be made, people need to stop saying the refs blew this call. The RULE blew the call. The refs got it right in regards to the rule book, its just an unfortunate rule. Review the play, charge the coach with a time out and some yardage and call it a farking day.


Oh, I believe that the referees interpreted the rule correctly.... that's not a problem. They did completely blow the call by not noticing what everyone else in the stadium and in the free world did... that the player was obviously down.
 
2012-11-23 07:33:02 PM  
Lifelong Lion fan here. Schwartz is a pompous ass and I am sure that his humiliation is the cause of much satisfaction throughout the NFL. However, truth be told, this is not even the biggest boner committed by a Lions coach in the last ten years. That honor still belongs to the half-wit Marty Morningweg, who elected to kick off to the Bears in sudden death overtime so he could "take the wind." You can guess the rest.
 
2012-11-23 07:37:16 PM  
If I am going to call him a half-wit I should at least spell his name correctly: Mornhinweg.
 
2012-11-23 07:52:07 PM  

zamboni: On the Side: Although I think this rule is asinine, and there is no way the right call should not be allowed to be made, people need to stop saying the refs blew this call. The RULE blew the call. The refs got it right in regards to the rule book, its just an unfortunate rule. Review the play, charge the coach with a time out and some yardage and call it a farking day.

Oh, I believe that the referees interpreted the rule correctly.... that's not a problem. They did completely blow the call by not noticing what everyone else in the stadium and in the free world did... that the player was obviously down.


Well, sure, if you're going to consider two elbows and a knee or two making contact with the ground when contact with a defender is made as "down".

But the refs are busy looking at so much during each play, I don't blame them for missing something like this.
 
2012-11-23 07:52:15 PM  

legion_of_doo: I thought the regular refs were going to fix all the blown calls from the replacement refs!


Aw, isn't that cute.

You think the refs messed up.
 
2012-11-23 08:17:51 PM  

marfar: The delay is happening anyway because of the review. It doesn't take them any longer because they have to tell the coach he didn't need to throw his flag.


OK, so you have no ability to understand the concept of time.
 
2012-11-23 08:24:27 PM  

jaylectricity: I thought he manned up pretty well. Just said he was fired up, didn't even wait for the play to be over before he pulled the challenge flag out.

A lot of people in the Fark football thread were complaining (and a lot of them got the interpretation of the rule completely wrong) but essentially the rule is to keep coaches from being jackasses. It's like saying, "Listen, this is going to be automatically reviewed, so shut your yap and let the process begin. Stop trying to be an attention whore."

If you can't follow that simple rule, you'll lose your right to due process.


What I don't get is the same thing happened in the next game and the ref still reviewed the score, I agree its should keep the coaches quiet but the non review and fark you penalty is just too much.
 
2012-11-23 09:11:34 PM  
The word is discipline.

You can't be a championship team without it. The Lions players don't have it. They won't ever get it because the coach doesn't have it. They won't ever get a coach that has it because Ford can not abide coaches who teach it. The Lions will never be championship contenders while a Ford owns the team. The end.

You know who I feel bad for? I feel bad for N'donkeyKong Suh. Tremendously talented kid who had the potential to become the best defensive player in history. But instead of putting him under a proven championship caliber coach to maximize his potential, they send him to Detroit. He has now developed all the worst habits imagineable, habits that will take years of intense coaching by someone who actually knows what they are doing to break. And that just isn't going to happen. Like the Lions do with so many other really talented football players, he has been effectively ruined. He will never be in a Superbowl. He will never hold an NFL record. He won't even be a footnote. It is a shame.
 
2012-11-23 09:39:04 PM  

zamboni: Oh, I believe that the referees interpreted the rule correctly.... that's not a problem. They did completely blow the call by not noticing what everyone else in the stadium and in the free world did... that the player was obviously down.


This.

Somehow, people neglect to see this fact. The guy was stuffed, completely stopped, down, knee on the ground.

In bizarroworld, that means he gets a 75-yard touchdown because Suh is an asshole, and Schwartz is a dipshiat. Correct call was made, or something.
 
2012-11-23 10:12:12 PM  

legion_of_doo: zamboni: Oh, I believe that the referees interpreted the rule correctly.... that's not a problem. They did completely blow the call by not noticing what everyone else in the stadium and in the free world did... that the player was obviously down.

This.

Somehow, people neglect to see this fact. The guy was stuffed, completely stopped, down, knee on the ground.

In bizarroworld, that means he gets a 75-yard touchdown because Suh is an asshole, and Schwartz is a dipshiat. Correct call was made, or something.


Again...it's not like Schwartz needed to do ANYTHING for justice to be served. All he had to do was do NOTHING. If he had done nothing, he would have saved his energy, the refs energy, and our energy.

Instead he chose mode: raving lunatic.
 
2012-11-23 10:48:54 PM  

jaylectricity: Again...it's not like Schwartz needed to do ANYTHING for justice to be served. All he had to do was do NOTHING. If he had done nothing, he would have saved his energy, the refs energy, and our energy.

Instead he chose mode: raving lunatic.


Instinctively challenging an obvious horrible call, in the heat of the moment, in a close game, against one of the leagues best teams, in front of an nationally televised audience of millions, makes one a "raving lunatic"?

I don't blame Schwartz for not having an obscure rule in mind at the time. I blame every official on the field for missing the obvious.
 
2012-11-23 11:01:47 PM  

R5D4: Instinctively challenging an obvious horrible call, in the heat of the moment, in a close game, against one of the leagues best teams, in front of an nationally televised audience of millions, makes one a "raving lunatic"?


OK, I think I might be spoiled. The coach of my favorite team would understand all those scenarios that you brought up. The coach of my team doesn't even tell anybody which of his players are too injured to play the game.

Maybe you can tell me how the coach of YOUR favorite team would have handled that play.
 
2012-11-23 11:33:20 PM  

R5D4: jaylectricity: Again...it's not like Schwartz needed to do ANYTHING for justice to be served. All he had to do was do NOTHING. If he had done nothing, he would have saved his energy, the refs energy, and our energy.

Instead he chose mode: raving lunatic.

Instinctively challenging an obvious horrible call, in the heat of the moment, in a close game, against one of the leagues best teams, in front of an nationally televised audience of millions, makes one a "raving lunatic"?

I don't blame Schwartz for not having an obscure rule in mind at the time. I blame every official on the field for missing the obvious.


You do realize that only one ref missed that call, right? They all have areas of responsibility and they focus there, maybe two guys should have caught that play but let's not act like all refs missed the call.

Also your Detroit butt hurt is in over drive today....
 
2012-11-23 11:38:31 PM  

steamingpile: Also your Detroit butt hurt is in over drive today....


Big time. I admitted that in my very Boobies today.

I almost don't even want to watch football anymore.

/long suffering lions fan.
 
2012-11-23 11:42:42 PM  

jaylectricity: Maybe you can tell me how the coach of YOUR favorite team would have handled that play.


I think we all saw.

However, I'm not prepared to equate being less-than-perfect on an obscure rule in the immediate moment with being "a raving lunatic".
 
2012-11-23 11:57:00 PM  

R5D4: steamingpile: Also your Detroit butt hurt is in over drive today....

Big time. I admitted that in my very Boobies today.

I almost don't even want to watch football anymore.

/long suffering lions fan.


I think we are all in our very Boobies today.
 
2012-11-24 12:05:34 AM  

steamingpile: R5D4: jaylectricity: Again...it's not like Schwartz needed to do ANYTHING for justice to be served. All he had to do was do NOTHING. If he had done nothing, he would have saved his energy, the refs energy, and our energy.

Instead he chose mode: raving lunatic.

Instinctively challenging an obvious horrible call, in the heat of the moment, in a close game, against one of the leagues best teams, in front of an nationally televised audience of millions, makes one a "raving lunatic"?

I don't blame Schwartz for not having an obscure rule in mind at the time. I blame every official on the field for missing the obvious.

You do realize that only one ref missed that call, right? They all have areas of responsibility and they focus there, maybe two guys should have caught that play but let's not act like all refs missed the call.

Also your Detroit butt hurt is in over drive today....


Well, since the play was over, and the ball and the person holding it was down, their focus should've been there. Unlikely that anyone needed to be monitoring other things... since the play was over. I guess they could've been checking for pass interference downfield, or offsides, or an illegal formation... but they probably wouldn't since... the play was over.

But hey... I'll remember that the next time five flags get thrown for the same infraction. It will comfort me.
 
2012-11-24 01:54:59 AM  

R5D4: steamingpile: Also your Detroit butt hurt is in over drive today....

Big time. I admitted that in my very Boobies today.

I almost don't even want to watch football anymore.

/long suffering lions fan.


I don't blame you, if I had a dirty player like Suh I wouldn't watch either.
 
2012-11-24 05:01:52 AM  

Shadow Blasko: jaylectricity: Shadow Blasko: If he had been down at the one... So not scoring..

Would the challenge still be disallowed?

If there is no flag, if there anything TO challenge? Can you challenge the run in general for not being called down?

/Honest question, as I thought he threw the challenge flag before the score actually happened, but after the HOU player got up from the failed (sorta) tackle.

If he had been tackled at the one (or even given himself up, like at the end of the Redskins game) it would not be automatic review, Schwartz's flag would have been legitimate and yes they could see that the runner was down and call the ball back to the spot he was down.

So if the challenge flag was thrown before the score (thus automatically reviewed) was it not a legal challenge call?


I think if you throw a flag while the play is live you also get a penalty I'll find out.
 
2012-11-24 06:30:13 AM  

Ed_Severson: IAmRight: Let's say it this way: the team committing the infraction cannot benefit from the review.

What infraction? If you're talking about the illegal challenge, then nobody is benefitting from a review because the review never happened. And how would Houston have "benefitted" from the illegal challenge? They already had a touchdown, the end result of the challenge would have been the nullification of the review, resulting in a touchdown -- no change in outcome, no benefit.

Either there is a rule that prohibits it or there isn't. I don't see it.


Ok Houston would have benefited by throwing a flag to negate the possibly of a booth review.
 
2012-11-24 11:24:31 AM  

R5D4: I don't blame Schwartz for not having an obscure rule in mind at the time. I blame every official on the field for missing the obvious.


Schwartz is paid millions to know every obscure rule in the book. That's his farking job. It's also not obscure when Mike Smith had the same thing happen to him this month. It may be a stupid rule, but he's stupider for not following it.
 
2012-11-24 05:10:07 PM  

dentalhilljack: It's also not obscure when Mike Smith had the same thing happen to him this month.


Four days earlier, in fact. And it happened to Mike McCarthy (within his own division) in preseason.

legion_of_doo: The guy was stuffed, completely stopped, down, knee on the ground.


Um, his knee maybe grazed the top of the turf, but it didn't even pause while moving forward. His elbows were down, yeah, but there's no way you could've said his knee was down without the zoom angle. His body didn't even react to any contact with the ground (typically the knee would stop and pop up if it hit the ground, or at least there would be a ripple up the leg...none of that happened.

Also, there's nothing saying the Lions stop the Texans if he's ruled down there. The refs didn't force the Lions to fail to score a single point on two consecutive drives that started at midfield in the fourth quarter while up 7 points. The refs didn't force the Lions to kick a 47-yarder on 3rd down.
 
2012-11-25 01:39:43 AM  

IAmRight: dentalhilljack: It's also not obscure when Mike Smith had the same thing happen to him this month.

Four days earlier, in fact. And it happened to Mike McCarthy (within his own division) in preseason.

legion_of_doo: The guy was stuffed, completely stopped, down, knee on the ground.

Um, his knee maybe grazed the top of the turf, but it didn't even pause while moving forward. His elbows were down, yeah, but there's no way you could've said his knee was down without the zoom angle. His body didn't even react to any contact with the ground (typically the knee would stop and pop up if it hit the ground, or at least there would be a ripple up the leg...none of that happened.

Also, there's nothing saying the Lions stop the Texans if he's ruled down there. The refs didn't force the Lions to fail to score a single point on two consecutive drives that started at midfield in the fourth quarter while up 7 points. The refs didn't force the Lions to kick a 47-yarder on 3rd down.


Well an elbow down is as good as a knee
 
Displayed 41 of 141 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report