Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Let's stop pretending that the NFL isn't fixed (Josh Norman holding call)

normal_gymnasium

By normal_gymnasium
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

normal_gymnasium

normal_gymnasium

Posted
Posted

A few years ago, I noticed a pattern. Illegal contact or defensive holding was very frequently called in very specific situations. Usually, it happened on third downs, when a team needed to be bailed out one way or the other. And more often than not, it happened late in games to give a team new life, usually to extend potential game winning drives.

 

I would really like to see statistics on defensive back penalties as regards to when they occur, to confirm what my eyes and gut feelings already tell me.

 

It's not just the Redskins either, in case this post is coming across like sour grapes from an overly-emotional fan after a loss. It has happened to plenty of teams. I watch a lot of football and I've noticed this happening on a good 20-25 occasions by my best estimation.

 

On nearly every occasion, when the replay is shown, the "penalty" is either one of two things:

 

  • It's something that happens on nearly every single play but mysteriously only gets called in the most crucial, game-influencing situations, or;
  • As with the one called on Norman when the Redskins stopped the Texans on 3rd down, there simply is no penalty. There's nothing that occurs at all that even comes close to resembling a penalty. The announcers see the replay and say "Gee Jim, I don't know about that one" or something to that effect.

 

Now, I can only theorize – if this theory has any merit at all – why this happens, or how the “fix” is decided upon, or how it’s implemented. As I try to come up with such an explanation, I admit that I sound like some idiot wearing a tinfoil hat who that believes the earth is flat or that crisis actors exist.

My best explanation is that the league wants close, exciting games for ratings purposes, and the refs who “get it” know to call (and when to call) phantom illegal contact/defensive holding penalties to extend games.

 

Perhaps in other cases, there are “preferred” teams, i.e. teams that are deemed to have a bigger excitement factor, specifically a more marketable quarterback, which the league can exploit to hype late-season games with playoff implications (to say nothing of the playoffs themselves).

 

The refs who “get it” get the coveted playoff and Super Bowl assignments.

 

This has been an inkling I’ve had for some time now. I know I’m not the only one. The phantom call on Norman has changed this from a strong inkling to a virtually certain belief.

 

Anyone else think there is something to this? Or should I loosen the tinfoil hat a bit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tsailand

Tsailand

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, normal_gymnasium said:

My best explanation is that the league wants close, exciting games for ratings purposes, and the refs who “get it” know to call (and when to call) phantom illegal contact/defensive holding penalties to extend games. 

 

Perhaps in other cases, there are “preferred” teams, i.e. teams that are deemed to have a bigger excitement factor, specifically a more marketable quarterback, which the league can exploit to hype late-season games with playoff implications (to say nothing of the playoffs themselves).

 

This is an eight billion dollar a year business.  Of course they will do what it takes to keep revenue up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PortisBetts

PortisBetts

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Springfield said:

It’s not fixed but holy **** that was an awful call that one could argue, cost us the game.

 

It wasnt the holding that cost us the game. Its the no call on Doctson that was MUCH more egregious than the "holding" on Norman.

1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

It’s not fixed, it was a bad call.

 

The Texans got jobbed a couple times today also.

 

 

When?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegade7

Renegade7

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Springfield said:

It’s not fixed but holy **** that was an awful call that one could argue, cost us the game.

The only thing more terrible then that is that it felt like a corner of the eye call and those unchallengable.  They won't look at a camera to make sure, someone else has to have a clear view of it which I don't believe anyone else did and that's why that happened.  The conspiracy is the NFL showing a bias towards offense.

 

Honestly, that "fumble" we took from Hopkins was sketchy as hell, and once ruled in our favor there was no way to have enough evidence to overturn it.  I'd say they cancel out and we lost because we went for a bomb on third down instead the 7-10 yards we needed for a FG Hopkins would of nailed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigDibbs31

BigDibbs31

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

The only thing more terrible then that is that it felt like a corner of the eye call and those unchallengable.  They won't look at a camera to make sure, someone else has to have a clear view of it which I don't believe anyone else did and that's why that happened.  The conspiracy is the NFL showing a bias towards offense.

 

Honestly, that "fumble" we took from Hopkins was sketchy as hell, and once ruled in our favor there was no way to have enough evidence to overturn it.  I'd say they cancel out and we lost because we went for a bomb on third down instead the 7-10 yards we needed for a FG Hopkins would of nailed.

Definitely not a fumble and wish I knew what they said when they decided the play stood as called.  No way to overturn an INT either since you couldn't see the ball but they didnt call an INT.  Also, not clear enough to call it an INT based on the review.  Think they just let it stand because they didnt know what else to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegade7

Renegade7

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, BigDibbs31 said:

Definitely not a fumble and wish I knew what they said when they decided the play stood as called.  No way to overturn an INT either since you couldn't see the ball but they didnt call an INT.  Also, not clear enough to call it an INT based on the review.  Think they just let it stand because they didnt know what else to do. 

Exactly, that was an absolute bailout call if ever I have seen one, so Mara may hate our guts but the NFL doesn't.  Otherwise they would've made us change the name by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vanguard

Vanguard

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Honestly, that "fumble" we took from Hopkins was sketchy as hell, and once ruled in our favor there was no way to have enough evidence to overturn it.  I'd say they cancel out and we lost because we went for a bomb on third down instead the 7-10 yards we needed for a FG Hopkins would of nailed.

 

And that was the ball game.  I feel like Gruden had a few questionable calls on offense when Colt came in too.  I'm not gonna have my second string qb running quarterback keepers, after my starter just got injured.  Especially when my next best option at quarterback is my tight end and slot receiver.  It worked, but it was risky, both times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bakedtater1

bakedtater1

Posted
Posted

Kind of funny the call came right after the cow pukes got the game winning field goal..jus saying..

22 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

The only thing more terrible then that is that it felt like a corner of the eye call and those unchallengable.  They won't look at a camera to make sure, someone else has to have a clear view of it which I don't believe anyone else did and that's why that happened.  The conspiracy is the NFL showing a bias towards offense.

 

Honestly, that "fumble" we took from Hopkins was sketchy as hell, and once ruled in our favor there was no way to have enough evidence to overturn it.  I'd say they cancel out and we lost because we went for a bomb on third down instead the 7-10 yards we needed for a FG Hopkins would of nailed.

The correct call would have been an incomplete pass... And as I said while we went to commercial break.. The sun shines on a dog's ass every now and then..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
normal_gymnasium

normal_gymnasium

Posted
  • Author
Posted
36 minutes ago, PotomacGator said:

Ok let's stop with the "fixed" thing as that would take a level of coordination so massive that it would be immediately unsustainable.

 

 

Why would it take such a massive level of coordination? It would take nothing more than referees understanding of what the NFL wanted from an internal organization standpoint. They want close games. They want sexy quarterbacks. All it would take would be a "nudge nudge wink wink" factor among referees.

 

Example: Referee A calls defensive holding in a close game between 2 teams. One is a big market team with a marketable QB. Their opponent is a small market team with a boring offense and good defense with a game manager QB. Big market sexy QB team gets the benefit of the call. The referee crew that makes the call finds themselves officiating playoff games. The crew that doesn't make such calls is watching the playoffs on TV (and not getting paid, incidentally).

 

How hard would it be for refs to figure out what's going on if this pattern was repeated over and over again over the course of years? How hard would it be for them to talk among themselves and "share notes", as it were?

 

But even if – IF – there was some kind of direct 'front-office-to-referee fix' going on, the coordination would not be massive at all, nor would it be unsustainable. It would take no more than a meeting between Roger Goodell and a handful of referees. And I am NOT saying that this is occurring! Obviously I have no way of knowing what is, or is not, happening behind the NFL's closed doors. This is all theoretical. All I'm saying is that it wouldn't take much coordination at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Springfield

Springfield

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, PortisBetts said:

It isnt fixed. Referees for the NFL are just the worst by far of any sport because there is no accountability for them and they make egregiously bad calls with games on the line

 

I don’t think they are the worst of any sport even.  There is just A LOT going on in any given play in football, compared to baseball, basketball or hockey.  Not only that, but there are more players being watched on any given play so there is more room for opportunity.  Not only that, there are simply more penalties and silly rules to apply to any given play.

 

So in the NFL, it’s just simply more likely to have a foul or broken rule on any given play. Which also leads for more opportunity for error.

 

I just made all that up but it sounds good to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nerm

Nerm

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said:

Kind of funny the call came right after the cow pukes got the game winning field goal..jus saying..

 

Well, in the last Cowboys -Skins game a penalty was called on the Cowboys long snapper who had done the same thing for 14 years and was never considered a penalty before... This happened on the last play of the game...Just saying.

 

Why did the NFL want the Skins to win that one... But wanted them to lose a non conference game today?  Because they favor Dallas?  Is that the same reason Philly did not get even one penalty when they played Dallas last week?

 

Penalties are not consistent, but there is no conspiracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GoDeep81

GoDeep81

Posted
Posted

Can't say it's fixed, but that ref was looking for a penalty to call on the Norman play.. Then they mysteriously swallowed their flags when Doctson got mugged at the end.. The fumble I think they just "called" wrong. Looked like an interception to me, but they called it a fumble.. Either way, didn't see any evidence the ball touched the ground, so whoever came up with possession should of got it, imo. Regardless, we're on the wrong end of these game altering penalties a lot more often then not. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taylor 36

Taylor 36

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, bakedtater1 said:

Kind of funny the call came right after the cow pukes got the game winning field goal..jus saying..

The correct call would have been an incomplete pass... And as I said while we went to commercial break.. The sun shines on a dog's ass every now and then..

The ball never hit the ground.  It wasn't caught by the receiver, and therefore not a fumble, but it didn't hit the ground before be possessed by the defender.  The correct call would have been an interception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bakedtater1

bakedtater1

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Taylor 36 said:

The ball never hit the ground.  It wasn't caught by the receiver, and therefore not a fumble, but it didn't hit the ground before be possessed by the defender.  The correct call would have been an interception.

The ball hit the ground clearly..should have been an incomplete pass..go ahead and Google it..it's worth a Google

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...