#redskins - 8 Penalties - 63 Yards.vikings - 1 Penalty - 7 Yards.

[Bang]

if that's true then the officials are being directed to watch for plays that can be turned into FINES that goes into the league office's bank accounts.  As always, follow the money.

 

Did anyone already mention that obvious punt catch interference in the first half?  Morgan was hit in the legs before catching the ball and nearly fumbled.  No flag.  Thing is, this stuff has been happening all season.  Remember the Broncos game?  Block in the backs on screen plays to Moreno, both TDs, no calls.  Helmet to helmet on Cousins at the end.  No call but that Denver player was later fined for the hit.  Remember the Cowboys game?  BOTH Harris long returns, one for a TD, were both full of block in the backs and blind side blocks.  No call.  Butt punt fumble call that was the complete opposite of what the rule book says.  Etc etc etc etc.  Something is rotten in Denmark.  Fans will have various opinions of why we're getting shafted on calls so much this year but I think most people realize something isn't right here.

To make a point of fact.. the fines go to NFL Charities.

Bad calls happen all the time, even back in the goold ol' days. But back tghen about the only real subjective call they had to make were pass interference calls. now they have so many options to throw personal foul flags, it is indeed what they're after.

And, it is probably by direction from above.. the NFL wants to clean up, and the heavy hand of the refs this year is likely to send a message and set a precedent for seasons to come.

BUT.. they've gone about it in ways that gives the very human refs many many many more ways to make mistakes and sway games. And given that they're judgment calls,, they can't be considered mistakes unless they're egregious.

i refuse to believe a guy like Ed Hochuli is going to sway games because he doesn't like Shanahan.

he's a pro, he's been doing it for years. That sort of thing is exactly what the NFL can't have.. so they'd likely weed out ANY refs who show any actual biases. I think they did throw one out last year for a tweet he made?

I DO think he calls the game like a lawyer, and has a nice opinion of himself that means he feels he is part of the GAME, and not the FIELD.. which is what he is in the rulebook

A guy like him.. he's a lawyer already, so his head is already polluted with legal interpreting and knowitallism.. rather than provide the balance he's supposed to, his crews typically interfere,, whether by a VERY heavy flag hand like he did with us in the Lions game, or a VERY inconsistent hand like last night.. he's always got to influence the game.. and that is NOT why he's there.

I really think that the bigger the play, the bigger the chance his crew will throw a flag.

~Bang

[s0crates]

http://www.thefixisin.net

[s0crates]

Really the thread title says it all.

I do not think it is necessarily an agenda against us, but I would not be at all surprised if there was some agenda at work. A lot of money depends on keeping games close.

[s0crates]

Or try this experiment: check the stat line. How often do you see a team with such a big statistical advantage in so many categories lose? How does that happen?

We had more passing yards, more rushing yards, and more first downs. We won the time of possession and the turnover battle. How on earth did we lose?

About the only statistical category we lost was penalties.

[Tarpon75]

The jets have won multiple games this year with double digit penalty. In fact they won one when they had more than 20 penalties. But  because of their front 7 they can get away with it sometimes even though they have one of the worse group of skill players on offense. 8 penalties is nothing.

Did the team the Jets were playing have 1 penalty? How often do you see a game where a team only has 1 penalty,how many calls should have  gone against Minnesota? Often it's not so much a matter of how many penalties but more so when the penalties are called in a game. The hold on Reed in the end zone stopped the Redskins from tying the game. As most people are saying the penalties didn't cause the Redskins to lose but the Refs should not figure in the outcome as heavily as they did. The officials were either very incompetent or they had an agenda. Been watching football for 40 years plus, have never seen a ball moved forward by a ref after he had already set the mark.  

Or try this experiment: check the stat line. How often do you see a team with such a big statistical advantage in so many categories lose? How does that happen?

We had more passing yards, more rushing yards, and more first downs. We won the time of possession and the turnover battle. How on earth did we lose?

About the only statistical category we lost was penalties.

Goop point,hard to figure.

[War Paint]

The most important thing to look at is the timing and situation when a penalty is called.  It only takes one penalty or non-call in a close game to swing the outcome.  I'm still pissed at what I saw last night.  I think possibly one reason why it was so easy to see last night's corruption was because of the production quality of Thursday night football.  The production is pretty poor, almost like a preseason vibe.  Other network games can cut away to another game for a sec and show some shiny graphic or tv show advertisement after a shady call, which distracts the viewer from what just happened.  Thursday night football lacks that, so we got to see first hand what altering a game looks like without getting distracted by the bells and whistles other networks have.

[SkinsGuy]

Goodell wants the Redskins to change the name, but he can't force anything. You think he wants to entire world looking at the NFL and seeing a "racist" team succeed? Yeah, right. 

 

 

You just don't grasp how ridiculous you sound at all, do you?

 

Show me where Goodell has said he wants them to change the name.

 

Also, you still haven't answered my question... if Goodell and the NFL Front Office want the team to change their name so bad, why are they constantly using the term "Redskins" on their very own network?

[campbellcooleyconnection]

That was a sickening display of officiating!i am still livid and disgusted that nothing can be done about it! Never seen more flags picked up vs an opponent than Skins!goodell Mara FU!!

[wysknz1]

Dumb penalties committed by us kept them in the game

Dumb penalties committed by us kept them in the game

I thought it bared repeting

[devil421]

You just don't grasp how ridiculous you sound at all, do you?

 

Show me where Goodell has said he wants them to change the name.

 

Also, you still haven't answered my question... if Goodell and the NFL Front Office want the team to change their name so bad, why are they constantly using the term "Redskins" on their very own network?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/redskins-watch/2013/sep/11/nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell/

 

 

“We’re always sensitive to what impacts the league in general, and that includes our 32 teams, and making sure that we’re doing what’s right here,” Goodell said. “And that’s why I think, again, we have to do everything that’s necessary to make sure that we’re representing the franchise in a positive way, and that rich history and tradition. And if we are offending one person, we need to be listening and making sure that we’re doing the right things to try to address that.”

moreifclick

Goodell then goes on to say that it's Dan's decision.  That's like the Don telling the Family what he thinks but then saying it's up to his Capos to do what they think is right.

[Riggodrill44]

I thought it bared repeting

I hate when idiots say stuff like that. It's only a penalty if they call it. If the don't call it it's not a penalty. They CHOOSE to call penalty's on the Skin's. I can't believe everyone doesn't see this. It's the Ref's choice and he chooses to call MORE ON THE SKIN"'S !!!

[Bang]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/redskins-watch/2013/sep/11/nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell/

 

 

Goodell then goes on to say that it's Dan's decision.  That's like the Don telling the Family what he thinks but then saying it's up to his Capos to do what they think is right.

The Don here works for the capos, of which Dan is one of the most influential.

Understand the major flaw in your argument is that Dan is Goodell's boss, one of 32, and of those other 31, Dan puts more money in their collective bargaining pockets than all of them, save maybe jerry Jones.

You know what they say talks, and you know what they say walks.

~Bang

[G1]

To me the worst were the 2-step planting of Robert on the safety blitz.. that was a flag ten years ago, and has always been called, and last night they could hit the QB like it was 1974 again.

 

WORST non-call...  Jared Allen straight LAUNCHED himself from the ground at Robert's knee.

This is illegal, and is easily seen,, he isn't blocked into anyone, and even if he IS, thast is specifically stated in the rules to NOT BE AN EXCUSE.

The BRADY rule.. the CARSON PALMER rule, ..  you cannot launch at or HIT the QB below the waist.

 

That was blatant, and is exactly the situation that that call was invented for, and is a hallmark penalty in this new era of "protect the QB at all costs".

 

 

~Bang

They were diving at Robert's knees all night long. Appalling.

 

But we just took it. The coaches took it and the players took it. Heck, we give away dumb unsportsmanlike penalties all the time anyway but why can't one of our linemen shows some spirit and punch Allen or whoever in the face when they see that? That would be one 15 yard penalty I could live with.

[SkinsGuy]

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/redskins-watch/2013/sep/11/nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell/

 

 

Goodell then goes on to say that it's Dan's decision.  That's like the Don telling the Family what he thinks but then saying it's up to his Capos to do what they think is right.

 

 

No where in there does Goodell say he wants the name changed. Not to mention the fact that, as Bang pointed out, Goodell works for Snyder, not the other way around.

 

And it still doesn't answer the question that if the NFL Front Office wants to get rid of the word "Redskins", why are they constantly using that word over and over and over and over again on their own network.

 

Try again.

[wysknz1]

I hate when idiots say stuff like that. It's only a penalty if they call it. If the don't call it it's not a penalty. They CHOOSE to call penalty's on the Skin's. I can't believe everyone doesn't see this. It's the Ref's choice and he chooses to call MORE ON THE SKIN"'S !!!

The penalties were deserved abd they were stupid and at a bad time. I'm an IDIOT because I don't see a conspiracy behind every tree??

[BuhBuhBiggie]

Didn't even feel like 63 yards.  Don't blame the refs, they didn't give the Vikings the last 20 points of the game; that was our defense that did that one...

 Actually a few of their bad calls did give the Vikes points. Baker did not hit Ponder in his helmet, but they gave him 15 yards, and that gave them points. That ball placement gave them a first down, but the ref clearly spotted the ball half a yard ahead of where he placed his foot. On another of their big plays, AP held Kerrigan (I believe), then as the play got beyond him, AP shoved him in the back to the ground---no call. 

[RiverboatGambler]

 Actually a few of their bad calls did give the Vikes points. Baker did not hit Ponder in his helmet, but they gave him 15 yards, and that gave them points. That ball placement gave them a first down, but the ref clearly spotted the ball half a yard ahead of where he placed his foot. On another of their big plays, AP held Kerrigan (I believe), then as the play got beyond him, AP shoved him in the back to the ground---no call. 

Exactly. They gave points to the Vikings by extending drives with phantom roughing and unsportsmanlike conduct calls. They gave points to the Vikings by allowing blatant hold to go unchecked all night long. They took points from us with bogus penalties turning some of our big gainers on first down into 1st and 20s. They took points from us by not calling the blatant hold on Reed in the endzone or the uncalled PI on Garcon and Moss on 2nd 3rd and 4th down respectively. Our putird defense played well enough for us to win but the inconsitent penalties did us in.

 

If you are going to call a game tight, THEN CALL IT TIGHT FOR BOTH SIDES.

[RandyHolt]

I think we all now recognize the choke hold / sleeper hold, is not going to be called holding.

 

I am not sure it is holding by the book; regardless - they do not call it but once every few games. The odd thing is, I don't see our OL do it often. Maybe we should start. 

 

One thing that surprises me about Mike, it seems like he runs a tight ship, but we seem to have an awful lot of undisciplined penalties.

[devil421]

No where in there does Goodell say he wants the name changed. Not to mention the fact that, as Bang pointed out, Goodell works for Snyder, not the other way around.

 

And it still doesn't answer the question that if the NFL Front Office wants to get rid of the word "Redskins", why are they constantly using that word over and over and over and over again on their own network.

 

Try again.

"And if we are offending one person, we need to be listening and making sure that we’re doing the right things to try to address that.”  Im not sure how much more you need to hear.  Other than telling that one person to read the polls and STFU, what else could Goodell mean about "addressing that"?

 

Admittedly my mafia analogy wasn't perfect.  Fwiw, refs are Goodell's capos for on-field action.  We are talking about on-field action here.  Owners have no impact on the field during a game but refs sure do.  The Skins are repeatedly getting shafted in various (but seemingly consistent) ways by refs over and over and there's gotta be a reason for it. 

[MrJL]

remember that call when they claimed the Viking player was blocked into Griffin.  Yeah, that was what made him sweep his legs

[srtman04]

You just don't grasp how ridiculous you sound at all, do you?

 

Show me where Goodell has said he wants them to change the name.

 

Also, you still haven't answered my question... if Goodell and the NFL Front Office want the team to change their name so bad, why are they constantly using the term "Redskins" on their very own network?

 

You ever heard of rubbing salt in the wound?   Or adding fuel to the fire?   Both of those expressions apply to this situation....IMHO.

[SkinsGuy]

You ever heard of rubbing salt in the wound?   Or adding fuel to the fire?   Both of those expressions apply to this situation....IMHO.

 

I'm not following you on your logic here.

[emor09]

You just don't grasp how ridiculous you sound at all, do you?

 

Show me where Goodell has said he wants them to change the name.

 

Also, you still haven't answered my question... if Goodell and the NFL Front Office want the team to change their name so bad, why are they constantly using the term "Redskins" on their very own network?

 

He can't say he wants Dan to change the name, because it's not his decision to make. He did, however, change his tune from "It's honoring Native Americans" or whatever to saying "If one person is offended we have to think about it." In the direction he's going, change is the next step. 

 

And as long as it's the team's name, the NFL isn't going to boycott it. But that doesn't mean they have to like it. 

[TSO]

http://www.thefixisin.net

 

Thanks for posting this, very interesting. 

[Butters]

The officiating the past couple of weeks has left a bad taste in my mouth, and it's not just Skins' games.