Skip to main content

There's no other way to put it, the Detroit Lions got screwed

While, at the end of the day, the Dallas Cowboys came back from 14 points down to defeat the Detroit Lions 24-20 on Sunday, all the talk is about the phantom flag (phantom flags would be more appropriate).

With 8:25 left in the 4th quarter and the Lions up 20-17, Detroit faced a 3rd-and-1 from the Dallas 46-yard line. Quarterback Matthew Stafford then threw a pass toward tight end Brandon Pettigrew near the 25-yard line. Cowboys linebacker Anthony Hitchens had his back to Stafford as the pass was coming in toward Pettigrew and appeared to make contact with Pettigrew as the pass hit Hitchens in the back. Almost immediately, a flag was thrown for pass interference on Hitchens. In the NFL, if a defender "face-guards" a receiver, but doesn't make contact with him, it's not a penalty. However, if contact is made, then it constitutes as pass interference, according to Rule 8, Section 5, Article 2 (1) of the NFL rule book (prohibits "contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent's ability to make the catch"). So, up by three points midway through the 4th quarter, Detroit would have been set up at the 25-yard line, with a chance to both drain some clock and extend their lead to at least six, if not ten points. However, that's not what happened. The refs then decided to pick up the flag, which led to Detroit punting the football. The punt was shanked and Dallas wound up scoring the go-ahead and eventual winning touchdown on the succeeding drive.

In response to the flag that was picked up, NFL officiating insider Jim Daopoulos tweeted, "Wow why would they pick up that flag...it was pass interference!"

NFL replay/rule book guru, Mike Pereira, tweeted, "I am out of here. Biggest call was the DPI (defensive pass interference) pickup. It was DPI and it was defensive holding as well. Not good. Flying back to Sac tonight."

That's another thing. Before Hitchens interfered with Pettigrew, he tugged on his jersey, which would constitute as holding (a 10-yard penalty, which would have given the Lions a 1st-and-10 from the Dallas 36-yard line).

Following the complaints about the DPI pickup, as well as the missed defensive holding call, several Cowboys fans pointed out that it appeared as if Pettigrew grabbed Hitchens' face mask on the play. Okay, if we want to go that route, all of those penalties would offset and we'd have to replay 3rd-and-1 from the Dallas 46-yard line. However, those weren't the only penalties the refs missed on the play. After the flag was initially thrown, Dallas Cowboys receiver Dez Bryant stormed off the sideline onto the field without his helmet on and complained about the call. According to Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1 (j), he can't do that (prohibits "removal of a helmet by a player in the field of play or the end zone during a celebration or demonstration or during a confrontation with a game official or any other player"). This constitutes as unsportsmanlike conduct and should have resulted in a 15-yard penalty (setting Detroit up at the Dallas 31-yard line with a 1st-and-10).

So, let's go through all of the possible scenarios here:

1) The refs stick to their pass interference call and Detroit winds up with the ball at the Dallas 25-yard line with a 1st-and-10, up 20-17 midway in the 4th quarter

2) The refs call defensive holding and Detroit ends up with the ball at the Dallas 36-yard line with a 1st-and-10, up 20-17 midway in the 4th quarter

3) The refs pick up the pass interference flag, but call Dez Bryant for unsportsmanlike conduct, which results in Detroit having the football at the Dallas 31-yard line, with a 1st-and-10, up 20-17 midway in the 4th quarter

4) The refs call defensive pass interference, defensive holding, and hands to the face on the offense, which cancel one another out. Detroit then has to replay the 3rd-and-1 from the Dallas 46-yard line, up 20-17 midway in the 4th quarter.

5) The refs call defensive pass interference, defensive holding, and hands to the face on the offense, which cancel one another out. After the play, they call Bryant with unsportsmanlike conduct, and Detroit ends up with the ball at the Dallas 31-yard line, with a 1st-and-10, up 20-17 midway in the 4th quarter.

6) Pick up the flag for defensive pass interference, not call anything else, and force Detroit into a 4th-and-1 from the Dallas 46-yard line, up 20-17 midway in the 4th quarter

Four out of these six scenarios would have placed Detroit in field goal range. One of the remaining two, odds have it, would likely have resulted in a key third-down conversion, where the Lions would only have needed another ten yards to have gotten into field goal range. Yet the one scenario the referees decided to go with was the one where Detroit was forced to make a decision on whether to try and pin Dallas back deep with a punt or risk going for it near midfield, only up a field goal midway in the 4th quarter. Even if the refs wanted to cancel all three penalties during the play (defensive pass interference, defensive holding, and hands to the face on the offense), they still had a responsibility to stand by the NFL rule book and call Dez Bryant with unsportsmanlike conduct. Detroit would then have had the ball at the Dallas 31-yard line, up a field goal, with a chance to drain some clock, and at worst, attempt a field goal, which would have put them up by six points fairly late into the final quarter.

At the end of the day, did the refs ultimately win the game for the Dallas Cowboys? Not necessarily. Sure, Detroit could have not shanked the punt, could have stopped Dallas on their scoring drive, and could have scored on their final drive. However, that blown call did change the entire complexion of the game. There's a huge difference between Detroit leading by three points with Dallas at their own 40-yard line midway in the 4th quarter and Detroit leading by six or ten points with Dallas at their own 20-yard line late in the 4th quarter. The refs may not have technically won the game for the Dallas Cowboys, but however one wants to look at it, the Detroit Lions got screwed.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/157504/inside-slant-referee-pete-morelli-had-four-potential-penalties-on-key-lions-cowboys-play

http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2015/1/4/7491899/cowboys-pass-interference-lions-refs-call-overturned

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!"