Skip to main content

The Houston Texans are thankful for referees

Down 24-14 midway in the 3rd quarter, the Houston Texans received an early Christmas present from the refs.

Tailback Justin Forsett was tackled after a 7-yard gain, but then got up and extended that for a club-record 81-yard touchdown run. The refs didn't blow their whistles and even though Stevie Wonder was rumored to having seen Forsett's elbow and knee touching the ground, the refs called it a touchdown.

Having seen quite clearly that Forsett was down, Detroit Lions head coach Jim Schwartz angrily threw out his challenge flag. Since every touchdown is reviewed upstairs, this was not necessary. In fact, due to a ridiculous rule, Schwartz's throwing of the challenge flag resulted in the play not being reviewed by rule and the team getting penalized 15 yards. This all resulted in the Texans closing the gap to 24-21 and with it, the entire complexion of the game. The Lions had trouble getting focused both offensively and defensively, and before they knew it, Houston had tied the game with a field goal at the very tail-end of the 3rd quarter. When all was said and done, Houston prevailed in overtime by the final score of 34-31.

People can try to spin it as much as they'd like, but the refs handed the game to the Houston Texans. Some have laid full blame on Schwartz for his throwing of the challenge flag. Others have stated that Detroit was given plenty of chances to win and failed to do so. They can try to convince themselves as much as they'd like, but there are not two ways about it - Detroit had the game taken from them.

Granted, Schwartz should have known the rules. However, that still doesn't take away from the fact that Forsett was clearly down and every single referee on the field missed the call. In the grand scope of things, it had to have been one of the worst calls I've ever seen in my life, perhaps right alongside the hail mary in the Seattle/Green Bay game earlier this year when the replacement refs were on the field. Not only was one of Forsett's elbows down, which by itself should have warranted a whistle, but one of his knees was as well. The second knee was even borderline touching the ground. There was good reason why most everyone from both teams stopped running around, because the guy was down. Schwartz should have known the rule and not thrown the challenge flag, but let's not look past who was truly at fault and that's the referees. Some people even tried defending the refs, saying, "Well, they weren't sure if he was down or not, so they did the right thing by not blowing their whistles. It was Schwartz's fault for throwing the challenge flag." Really? Why even have referees then? Just let the players garner advantages through committing penalties, while the refs stand around, and let the replay booth take care of things. Why do refs get paid again?

As for the other argument, it again is a weak one. If we just want to look at things in black and white terms, then the touchdown by itself lost the game for the Lions. The game did go to overtime, did it not? If the refs had done their jobs, chances are the Lions would have won 31-24 in regulation, or perhaps 31-27 if Houston had kicked a field goal on the Forsett-drive. If we want to look at things from more of a gray perspective, then we have to look at the tone of the game, the momentum, and how drastically things changed after this missed call. Detroit was up 24-14 at this point in the game and had total control of it. The momentum was very much on their side. The crowd was into it. At this point, the Lions appeared to be well on their way to victory. After that missed call, the game went from a two-possession difference to one, with Houston closing the gap to three at 24-21. The team was shaken. The coaches and fans were shaken. It took some time for both the offense and defense to retain their focus and this led to another field goal by the Texans, to tie the game at 24 a piece. In just a single play, the entire complexion of the game had altered greatly.

Yeah, I think it's safe to say that on Thanksgiving this year, the Houston Texas were indeed thankful for the referees.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"