Refs Giveth and Refs Taketh away

by OBF on Oct 13, 2008 2:27 PM MDT Comment 53 comments

The title of this post is meant to be somewhat tongue in cheek :) There were three penalties that I thought really changed the course of the game, and in a way they changed the game more than our turnovers did. Lets take a look at them:

"Penalties": Quoted to show the dubiousness of the calls

1.) Holding on Clady. This one hurt mostly because it was Clady's first holding call of the year! Really this just shows how good the Rookie has been. Yeah it put us at 2nd and 7 instead of 1st and 10, but who is to say what happens in the rest of that drive, so I won't say this stopped us from scoring points or anything, it was just disappointing to see Clady get his first on what should have been a no call.

2.) Illegal Contact on Dre Bly mid way through the thrid quarter. This was a completely Bogus call. 3rd and a million for the jags, and Reggie Williams pushes Dre bly down to the ground, and that is somehow illegal contact on Bly, just unbelievable. Now unlike above where we can't assume points on a drive set back by a penalty, we CAN assume a punt by JAC on this play since it was 3rd and long and Garrards scramble came up way short. So that is seven points given to the Jags by the ref.

3.) Pass interference by Mcree at the end of the fourth quarter. We all saw it and we all saw it was the completely wrong call, even the announcers we incredulous about it. Yeah we can't assume we score when we get the ball back, but that call basically ended the game, we certainly didn't get the chance we should have gotten.

As for the turnovers we had three and the Jags had two so two of them cancel out and the other turnover we had was a long interception from cutler on 3rd and long which was better than a punt, so I see the penalties as being a much bigger difference maker than the turnovers. I would say that these penalties affected this game just as much if not more than Hocules bad call in the SD game, which one will get more attention though :)

Oh well, I guess the response should be that the Broncos should play well enough that these calls shouldn't matter. Those calls really were terrible though.

Poll

Who or what deserves the credit for the JAC loss?

The Offense (Turnovers and badd 3rd down conversion rates)

41 votes

The Defense (Allowed too many point, yards,and big plays)

2 votes

The Refs (Three terrible penalties)

3 votes

46 votes | Poll has closed

This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR

1 recs | Comment 53 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

What bothers me

is that the Broncos won against SD because of a blown call, yet the Jags won simply because they beat the Broncos, blown calls be damned.

The truth is, both teams were victimized by horrendous calls, yes, but both teams had their chances to stop the other team after that, anyway.

I would just like to see some consistency, is all. SD lost that game, and Denver lost this one. Period.

Never argue with a fool, lest you take on his appearance. - my daddy

by AZDynamics on Oct 13, 2008 2:36 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree on the first two calls, but as for the third call...

I thought it was bogus too until it was explained to me that putting your hand in front of the receivers face while your back is to the ball is considered “hand guarding” or some damn thing and apparently that IS a penalty. They called McCree, but it was actually Manuel.

In any case, our offense stank up the joint and deserves full responsibility for this loss. Our Defense played valiantly and in spite of the two horrible calls, only gave up 24 points. Keep in mind also that 2 of those “bad” defensive calls ended up leading to touchdowns…

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

by Tim Lynch on Oct 13, 2008 2:41 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think face-guarding is a rule anymore. It used to be, but they got rid of it several years ago.

by nburns on Oct 13, 2008 3:24 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was trying to find the official rules on it, but having trouble.

NFL.com has rules, but they aren’t the “official” rules and I couldn’t find any mention of face-guarding. But anyway, here’s a couple of articles from the Colts/Pats AFC championship game a couple of years ago regarding a PI call on Hobbs. Different views, but both state there is no penalty for face-guarding.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2007/01/28/nfl_hobbs_call_was_correct/

http://www.patriots.com/news/index.cfm?ac=latestnewsdetail&pid=23945&pcid=41

I’m not trying to point out how bad the call was or how it cost us the game, because I don’t think it did. Just seems there is a lot of confusion regarding this rule.

by nburns on Oct 13, 2008 3:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

The confusion is that...

it is still a rule in College Football, so you see called on Saturdays but not on Sundays. Plus if that was the call the ref would have said so (explained it) in his called, he didn’t it was called just straight Pass interference. And It was bogus, even Shanny thought it was a bad call.

Go M's

by OBF on Oct 13, 2008 3:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Then I retract my comment...the call was a bogus call.

Still doesn’t matter…we had a chance to drive the length of the field to tie it up. Our offense went three and out. So I choose to blame our offense for this loss. I still think our defense played valiantly and I definitely like what I have seen from our defensive unit over the past two weeks.

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

by Tim Lynch on Oct 13, 2008 3:46 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree.

The refs are under no obligation to explain a call. Either way, in the pros you can only interfere with the pass in such a manner as the defender is making a reasonable play for the ball. Whether it’s called face guarding or not, Manual wasn’t playing for the ball.

I think the ref made the right call. Even if we assume the premise is wrong that the call was an error, we played poorly and the Jags played better. We did not deserve to win this game, and I can’t understand pinning the game on the refs.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 13, 2008 4:13 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Though, I do agree with you that

the Jags outplayed us and deserved to win…I also think it is okay to discuss a couple of poor calls by the refs in the overall context of the game, so long as it is mostly reasonable and we acknowledge that we were outplayed and did not deserve to win. As you can see by the voting, almost everyone blames the offense for this loss…as I do, but I still think at least two of those calls up there were complete horse shit. ;-) I feel it is my right as a fan to say as much. lol

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

by Tim Lynch on Oct 13, 2008 4:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't have a problem with discussing calls.

All I’m saying is that they didn’t affect the game. I think we’re on the same page. That said, I don’t even think that the call was outrageous. It’s questionable at worst, but I’m fine with the call that was made.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 13, 2008 5:18 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

i admit bias...i am never fine with any call against the Broncos.

well, maybe on the rare occasion not even I can deny the penalty had occurred.

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

by Tim Lynch on Oct 13, 2008 9:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wasn't trying to pin the game on the refs at all.

I just wanted to address the issue of what is and isn’t pass interference. As I said before, the face guarding rule no longer applies to the NFL, so regardless of whether the defender is playing the ball or not there has to be physical contact. I wish I had access to the official NFL rule book instead of the “NFL Rules Digest” on nfl.com, but thats the way I understand it. I just think its important to understand this rule, because it comes into play frequently.

by nburns on Oct 13, 2008 5:35 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

For the record...

I don’t think that you are blaming the loss on the refs. You made that clear in your comments.

As to the rules, I don’t have my own copy of the rulebook. I could be entirely wrong, but it seems to me that a defending player is supposed to be making a play for the ball if he does anything to affect the offensive player’s chances for a reception.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 13, 2008 5:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I finally found something.

From the 2006 rule book.

http://blogmedia.thenewstribune.com/media/200620NFL20RULEBOOK.pdf

From Rule 8, Section 2, Article 5

“A.R. 38 Defensive player, beyond the line, has his back to the ball during a forward pass. He makes no attempt to catch it but waves his arms in close proximity to an eligible opponent, but there is no contact with the receiver. Ruling: No foul. Legal action by defender.”

By the way, hoosier, not trying to argue with you or prove you wrong. Mostly just trying to figure out the exact rules for myself, or anyone else who is interested.

by nburns on Oct 13, 2008 6:10 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm never one to think I'm always right.

Which is why I’m careful to preface many of my comments with statements such as “I could be entirely wrong…”

Was Manual’s back to the ball?

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 13, 2008 6:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

Manuel was chasing the receiver, with his back to the ball and kinda put his hands up when the receiver did. The ref who made the call was directly behind the receiver, so I can’t see how he would have had a good view of Manual anyway. Of course the number they called was McCree. So who knows.

Anyway, that stuff happens. I listened to MHR Radio briefly last night and guru was talking about the face guarding, so thats when I started double checking the rules.

by nburns on Oct 13, 2008 6:34 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

the call was a bad call, but we still lost. :(

and its not like we didnt have a chance to redeem ourselves at the end of the game. Instead we go 3 and out. Next week we shall get some revenge I think.

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

by Tim Lynch on Oct 13, 2008 10:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

excuses are like. . .

Pure and simple the Broncos lost. They had their chances. I wont even say it was the refs fault. I refuse to be poor sports like the SD whiners are

somethings wrong, Trying to conquer these fears i thought were gone. And it's been so long, I'm dying to live in a world i don't belong

by broncfanstuckinsd on Oct 13, 2008 3:00 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I didn’t see any of the calls, but to blame the refs just puts us in the same class as the SD “fans”. They continue to grouse about the bad call and won’t let it go. We need to show that we are better than them and accept the fact that though the calls may have been bad/wrong, they didn’t cost us the game, turnovers and poor offensive execution did.

I’ve never agreed with the sentiment expressed by some on MHR that the chargers had 3 chances to stop us after the blown non-fumble call by Hochuli. The fact is that we were lucky to get the call to go our way and it did cause San Diego the game (whether they deserved the fumble or not is not even relevant).

"It's all over Fat Man" - Tom Jackson to John Madden 1977 AFC Championship Game

"I love your analysis of our team. Its kinda like watching a spider monkey trying to figure out a jar of peanuts.. you know whats going on.. you know whats in there, but to actually figure it out, is just a bit beyond your mental skills..."
- Bronco Dano

by DesertBroncoFan on Oct 13, 2008 5:55 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I still

here about it. Yesterday I was watching the game and when the blanant offensive PI was called on Bly the SD"fans" were saying karma baby. It is so old and tiresome

somethings wrong, Trying to conquer these fears i thought were gone. And it's been so long, I'm dying to live in a world i don't belong

by broncfanstuckinsd on Oct 13, 2008 6:12 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

My thoughts on the Holuchi call.

The Chargers did have three more chances.

The point that Guru makes about the Chargers not deserving the fumble makes sense in the following context. Both teams made their chances to win or lose the game. The Chargers did nothing to stop our final drive, including the questionable fumble. It wasn’t as if the Chargers did something to win the game, but were robbed by the officials. The play was entirely outside of their efforts. As for our efforts, we scored, and SD failed to stop us despite have numerous opportunities.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 13, 2008 6:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

This has been bantied around ad infinitum

but I still believe that whether the chargers deserved it or not, they got hosed. I totally believe that we got lucky on that call because it did mean that had the opportunity to win versus having them kneel on the ball to win it.

And, yes, I believe that they shouldn’t have been in the situation where a ref’s call would make or break their game, we got incredibly lucky!

That’s all I’m going to say on this matter. It’s already received too much attention for something that happened several weeks ago.

"It's all over Fat Man" - Tom Jackson to John Madden 1977 AFC Championship Game

by DesertBroncoFan on Oct 13, 2008 6:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Denver had some bad calls go against them vs SD also

the knife cuts two ways, but nobody is overanalyzing the poor calls against the Broncos because they won. Excuses are truly for losers.

To win in the NFL, poor calls need to be overcome in every game on every Sunday. Good teams win despite the refs. SD vs Indy in the playoffs last year is a great example of this truism.

by CoastalBronco on Oct 13, 2008 7:32 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dont agree with the final call

That being said, it didnt lose the game for us. We got beat on offense, defense, and special teams. Anyone who thinks the refs lost us the game needs to remember that we went 3 and out the drive before. We have earned every bit of our 4-2 record. Excuses be damned.

by Papamag on Oct 13, 2008 3:12 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

the ref's are part of football

We can still complain about their terrible calls, and point out the lack of any bad calls that came down on Jacksonville, and NOT be “blaming” the loss on the refs.

You can’t take the refs out of the game because then we would be replaying everything and changing penalty calls and the game would then just be slow and stupid. So the refs exist, error exists, fact of the matter is Jacksonville played better than us, offense lost the game, the defense let Garrard of all people beat them.

Jason
The Hanging Curve

by poorboywilly on Oct 13, 2008 3:19 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Here is a question...

Why can’t important judgement calls be reviewed? They review other judgement calls like out of bounds and the spot the ball carrier gets to. It wouldn’t make the game any longer because the coach would still only have one review per half, and if the coach kept reviewing over and over again and getting calls reversed (and thus getting the review back), then it would truly show how bad refs are and the league would have to take action and get better refs :)

Go M's

by OBF on Oct 13, 2008 3:46 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

I would be against that. I may feel screwed over by these calls and they were bad judgement calls...but that is

why they implement a grading system. Those refs will probably receive a couple of black marks at the end of the season that might keep them out of working in the playoffs. In the end, we just need to get over it and move on. The system has flaws, but I don’t see how it can be improved any more than it is currently. It’s not like our offense didn’t have enough opportunities to win this football game. We were only penalized four times, it just happens that three of them cost us in a big way.

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

by Tim Lynch on Oct 13, 2008 3:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

they would never put the refs out on an island like that

by broncosfaninphilly on Oct 13, 2008 3:51 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

It is okay for us to talk abotu this

What made me proud was that the Broncos didn’t talk about the refs giving the game to Jacksonville, They knew who to blame which shows some maturity in this team that i havent seen among other teams who had calls blow against them. Like it or not we should have played better all the way around. bad calls would be no big deal if we were up by 30 but guess what we werent.

" He goes against Champ everyday." -Jay Cutler

Davis to the Hall!

by Jon Tollerud on Oct 13, 2008 3:56 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

well said jon tollerud

by broncosfaninphilly on Oct 13, 2008 4:04 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

unlike Charger players, coaches, and fans.

If God is not a Bronco fan, then WHY are sunsets Blue and Orange? - Jon Tollerud 5/22/08

by Tim Lynch on Oct 13, 2008 4:59 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

++ JT

I also like very much that Denver did not focus on the refs when discussing how the game should’ve gone. And I also agree with Zappa that SD could learn a thing or two on that front.

by CoastalBronco on Oct 13, 2008 7:36 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

If the offense takes the Jags first turnover and punches it in instead of turning it over themselves the calls wouldn’t have been as big a deal.

If Brandon Marshall doesn’t fumble when we’re in the red zone we likely get points and the calls don’t seem as big a deal.

I will say that the refs were overly noticeable in this game but if Denver plays the way they are capable of playing it doesn’t matter.

All that said, the contact penalty on Bly shouldn’t have been made and was a game changer because of when it occurred and what resulted from it. Our defense is getting better (and that series was spectacular up to the penalty), but they still don’t have a huge amount of confidence and you could see having that stop taken from them on an iffy call took some an emotional toll on the rest of the drive.

To tell the truth, I wouldn’t mind seeing the Jags in the playoffs. Denver can beat that team handily. Denver is capable of beating Jacksonville close or blowing them out. Jacksonville can only hope to beat Denver close in my opinion.

by jaffe28 on Oct 13, 2008 4:41 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

MCcree

Should of went for the ball not the hit

The quest is the Highway to the Danger Zone-Kenny loggins

by TommyTSlice on Oct 13, 2008 6:49 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

What did we learn today?

If you put the game in the refs hands or in the other team’s, you don’t deserve to nor will you win.

I wish Cutler didn't have tunnel vision.

by broncodude793 on Oct 13, 2008 6:51 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs

++ broncodude

by CoastalBronco on Oct 13, 2008 7:34 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly...

The calls were blown, and a couple of them were crippling penalties, but we should not have put ourselves in that position. If we score on either of the possessions that we fumbled away then we probably win the game going away…

by hai17 on Oct 13, 2008 7:49 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed..........................

There are penalties in every game that can be questioned, some think that the turnovers didn’t have an effect on the game. I tend to disagree. Two of them led to 10 Jacksonville points. Lets say we would have scored 10 points on these three drives instead of giving up the turnovers and Jacksonville scores 10 less. In that scenario we win 27-14. I agree hai that we shouldn’t have let it come to that. That being said, I will take 4-2 at this point in the season. We will beat some teams during the rest of the year that no one expects us to beat and we will prolly drop one or two games that we probably shouldn’t have, but that is the frustration of a young team. They are better than I thought they would be and will do nothing but improve. On the bright side of things, as good as we are, we probably still have one of the biggest upsides in the NFL for the future. GO BRONCOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The player who thinks he can and the player who knows he can are two different players, which one are you???

by Broncofan on Oct 13, 2008 8:01 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

4-2

i had us going 10-6/11-5 this season which should be enough to get us a wildcard spot and maybe even the division title so i that we are still in good shape

by broncofan91 on Oct 13, 2008 8:40 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, my prediction was originally the same,

10 or 11 wins. After the 2-0 start I changed my prediction to 11 or 12 wins. I think it is all still possible.

As far as the questionable calls, I agree with most that they were bad calls, and they did affect the game, but only because we put ourselves in that position by playing poorly. I am proud that Shanny and the players, when questioned about the calls, always ended it by saying it did not matter, the refs did not cost us the game.

But it is okay for fans to talk about it. I don’t think we MHR fans are going to be whining about this all year long like the pathetic SD fans. What a bunch of tools they are.

by The Gun Young on Oct 13, 2008 11:54 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

halve our turnovers in two games

and we’re undefeated.

Unlike some other aspects of the game, turnovers are relatively easily addressed. This team is going to be okay. I think 11-12 wins is a reasonable expectation, considering our schedule.

by CoastalBronco on Oct 14, 2008 9:24 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Double the points of Detroit...

….and you have a 1st place team. It’s hard to take statistics and say, “But if we change them around…” without entirely changing the face of what just happened. It’s kind of like the discussion recently on MHR about “Take away the guy’s best runs, and his YPCs go down”. Well, yeah!

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 14, 2008 9:40 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

understood

but my point was that turnovers are relatively easily correctable.

Doubling Detroit’s offensive scoring, not so much.

by CoastalBronco on Oct 14, 2008 9:50 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I buy that.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 14, 2008 12:44 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

the referees have a huge impact on the game

i have seen too many games over my 16 years of watching football which have been decided by the refs. 3 to 4 games yesterday were decided by poor officiating (bears and lions games for example). This idea that you cant “blame it on the ref” is complete bologna. The blown calls/phantom calls are inexcusable. Denver did make mistakes, but were making a comeback when they were cut off at the legs by the refs. i have little patience for poor officiating. Coaches should be allowed to challenge a penalty 1 time per half, this is the only solution

by The Villyn on Oct 13, 2008 8:33 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Every game has bad calls that go both ways.

People only focus on the ones that are near the end of games that benefit the eventual winner. I challenge anyone who has a problem with bad officiating to try being an official in local city league sports. Nobody that refs or umps can go a full game without being blamed for several calls.

The only game I ever saw where reffing was obviously fixed was when the US basketball team in the olympics lost to the Soviets, and the officials were all Warsaw Pact people. No matter how many times the US won the game, the refs forced the game to start over with time on the clock until the Soviet team won. This was back during the days of the cold war, and it was plain to even the Soviet players what was going on.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 14, 2008 4:35 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also

I love the fact that the Baskeball team has yet to accept the screw job or the silver medals. I think that shows everyone that the US was screwed.

somethings wrong, Trying to conquer these fears i thought were gone. And it's been so long, I'm dying to live in a world i don't belong

by broncfanstuckinsd on Oct 14, 2008 11:21 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

when i saw the last pi call at first glance

i thought that we would get flagged it wasnt until after i saw a few replays that i realized that it was a bad call

by broncofan91 on Oct 13, 2008 8:40 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

Which is exactly the way the ref saw it

only he didn’t get the benefit of multiple replays to change his mind. He saw what he saw and made a split second decision.

"It's all over Fat Man" - Tom Jackson to John Madden 1977 AFC Championship Game

by DesertBroncoFan on Oct 14, 2008 9:59 AM MDT up reply actions 1 recs

Well done.

And a rec’d comment. It’s easy for us to spend so much time second guessing these guys.

"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" Defoe

by Steve Nichols on Oct 14, 2008 12:41 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Really, the refs...

…do an outstanding job. As I’ve said before, the hand is faster than the eye. The refs can’t get them all right. They are there to keep the game under control, and they do that. They also get 99% of their calls right (at least with the help of instant replay). All professional players and their fans need to understand that they aren’t perfect – that’s impossible.
Hey, “To err is human…”

See everything. Overlook a great deal. Improve a little. Pope John XXIII.

by bradley on Oct 14, 2008 12:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

What do you think of the current setup

would you ideally keep it as is, or would you lean towards MORE or LESS technological oversight of the game (during the game)?

It seems to me that we have the tech to have a review system that reviewed every play, without delaying the pace of the game, but I have always felt that the less we interfered with the refs doing their job, the better they could do it.

I am certainly not pleased with the current challenge system. There is no way, in my mind, that making a level playing field a matter of strategy can be good for the game…

Mountains, forest, sea: these render man fierce, but yet do not destroy the man.

by Jeremy Bolander on Oct 14, 2008 4:05 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess

I kind of like it the way it is. When the NFL did it for awhile, then got rid of it for awhile, I missed it. When they brought it back, I think it was improved in terms of not delaying the game as much. At any rate, as an old coot, I’m not up for more change.

We don't even know where we are. They say that we're circling a star. Waylon Jennings.

by bradley on Oct 16, 2008 1:21 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs