That Unsportsmanlike at the End

[Redskin in Canada]

When I say they are both bad, criticizing the replacements doesn't logically refute that. I'm just saying... And I don't see how making them full time is going to eliminate their agenda against us, which is frankly pathetic for the whole NFL.

If, after seeing what we have seen, this is YOUR opinion. So be it. We could not disagree more strongly.

You could not be more out of touch with reality.

Just ask Shanny and other Coaches around the league. Just follow the informed commentaries.

You conspiracy theory jus does not fly high enough to justify downright ignorance of the geme rules by the scabs.

[Countertrey]

What about not telling Gibbs he couldn't call two time outs when he ... asked them ... and then calling a penalty? We had a bunch of calls last year that were clearly wrong ... after they reviewed replay. The regular refs clearly let teams take more shots at us then they tolerated from us. They call our D-backs way tighter. I'm not defending the replacements, I'm just saying the regulars s-u-c-k too. And at least I see nothing in the replacements that they have an agenda against us as the regular refs make clear they do. I'm not only "comparing them." I'm saying I'll keep these. Yeah, they need some classroom time on the rules. But there's more to work with.

The NFL, indeed, has a problem with it's officials... but the problem with the regular officials can be corrected by making them full time... vs part time, weekends only...

You cannot be more wrong about these replacements... they are simply not competent. 16 of 20 calls that were challenged by coaches yesterday were overturned... that's a pathetic showing.

Did you know that one was pulled from the Panthers game last week, because he posted on Facebook how excited he was to be calling the game for HIS Panthers????? Seriously... how well have these guys been screened???

When I say they are both bad, criticizing the replacements doesn't logically refute that. I'm just saying... And I don't see how making them full time is going to eliminate their agenda against us, which is frankly pathetic for the whole NFL. No matter how much they hate Danny, the Redskins are an NFL team with fans ... us ... who they are willing to throw under the bus to get him back for whatever they feel he's done to them.

Kaz... your paranoia is not evidence of referee bias against the skins... it's just evidence of your paranoia...

While I personally think that the NFL should have full time refs, I don't see how it's a legitimate process for that to happen because their union goes on strike under government protection and demands it.

Huh???? They are locked out...

If the NFL wanted better officiating, they would do it. They have plenty of money. If the refs don't want to work under the conditions their employers want them to, they should find jobs with employers they do want to work for.

... again... they are not on strike... they are locked out... I know you know the difference...

I would have a far better attitude about them though without their agenda. Again, whatever they perceive Danny has done to them, the players and the fans did nothing. We're stuck both with Danny and their agenda, and we can't fire Danny. If he's that bad, the NFL should deal with it without punishing us.

Back to paranoia... man, you are hopeless...

[Redskin in Canada]

Statement from Kyle:

"When I overheard the official tell the head coach that the game was over after the false start penalty, I tried to explain that the game was not over. That is what resulted in the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. I tried to get an explanation of how I could that penalty when half the other team was on the field as well.

"I was frustrated, and in the process of trying to get some answers from the officials, I conducted myself in the wrong way.

"I ask our players to hold themselves to a high standard and be accountable and I know that I'm accountable for my actions as well.

"I know that I need to handle those situations better in the future. My emotions got the best of me and I know my responsibility. This will never happen again."

[Redskin in Canada]

Back to paranoia... man, you are hopeless...

Indeed.

[Irn-Bru]

Sure, the regular NFL officials are not the best in professional sports (they aren't the worst, though, to be fair . . .), but these replacements are on a completely different level. They are lost in the woods, have no control on the game, and are such a wild variable in a game of inches that everyone loses with their involvement.

I'm sure they are very nice people, and I'm glad they are out there trying their best, because I do love watching football, but it is brutal. I'm sure it is tough getting chewed out by coaches the way they are, and it's very easy to see why they are probably feeling intimidated and letting the players take control of things. I feel bad for them. But they really have no business being out there.

[Deadskins]

Did you know that one was pulled from the Panthers game last week, because he posted on Facebook how excited he was to be calling the game for HIS Panthers????? Seriously... how well have these guys been screened???

Actually it was the Saints. But they were playing the Panthers. And there's another one who is a professional gambler.

[KazooSkinsFan]

When I say they are both bad, criticizing the replacements doesn't logically refute that. I'm just saying... And I don't see how making them full time is going to eliminate their agenda against us, which is frankly pathetic for the whole NFL.

If, after seeing what we have seen, this is YOUR opinion. So be it. We could not disagree more strongly.

You could not be more out of touch with reality.

Just ask Shanny and other Coaches around the league. Just follow the informed commentaries.

You conspiracy theory jus does not fly high enough to justify downright ignorance of the geme rules by the scabs.

You can't have it both ways. You say it's about quality of officiating, then you say it isn't about that. I'm not arguing the replacements are better. They both suck. I am saying the replacements will improve. They've only done it three games on the biggest stage. That's not why I want the replacements though.

My argument is there is no way that government guns should be used to allow the union to force the NFL to change how they do officiating. They aren't protecting themselves or negotiating wages, they are using the power of government to force the NFL to change how it operates. That's just pure abuse of power. I agree with what the refs want, I think officials should be full time. I do not agree that false power provided by raw government power is a legitimate way for them to force that to happen. Market power is the legitimate way to do that.

Regarding my points on their agenda, I'm just pointing out the consistency that a union that would force the NFL to change how it operates using the false power provided by government rather then market power freely waging a campaign against a team owned by someone they don't like is consistent, isn't it?

[KazooSkinsFan]

I would have a far better attitude about them though without their agenda. Again, whatever they perceive Danny has done to them, the players and the fans did nothing. We're stuck both with Danny and their agenda, and we can't fire Danny. If he's that bad, the NFL should deal with it without punishing us.

Back to paranoia... man, you are hopeless...

Even paranoids have enemies...

I might buy it was only mild bias if they weren't more wrong then right when they view plays in slomo in high def and still get it wrong against us more then right. Much less overturning a call which went for us and was conclusively correct. And again, I agree with their cause and this isn't why I'm against them. But we are arguing the quality of refereeing and this goes to that. Until the last couple years with the Skins, I went decades saying that calls go for and against us when accusations of bias arose. On this site as well, conspiracy's not exactly been my thing, I've argued pretty strongly against the conspiracy crowd. At this time, I think it's the bias that's rampant.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Did you know that one was pulled from the Panthers game last week, because he posted on Facebook how excited he was to be calling the game for HIS Panthers????? Seriously... how well have these guys been screened???

Actually it was the Saints. But they were playing the Panthers. And there's another one who is a professional gambler.

If we're going anecdotal, I'm not having a problem thinking of regular refs who have been caught in scandals too. We replaced the whole lot at once. Typically that means you're going to have more issues at once, but then things will settle down.

[UK Skins Fan]

Statement from Kyle:

"When I overheard the official tell the head coach that the game was over after the false start penalty, I tried to explain that the game was not over. That is what resulted in the unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. I tried to get an explanation of how I could that penalty when half the other team was on the field as well.

"I was frustrated, and in the process of trying to get some answers from the officials, I conducted myself in the wrong way.

"I ask our players to hold themselves to a high standard and be accountable and I know that I'm accountable for my actions as well.

"I know that I need to handle those situations better in the future. My emotions got the best of me and I know my responsibility. This will never happen again."

No apology. Poor example to the team, in my view. Although it's the team he owes the greatest apology to, and perhaps he's done that behind closed doors.

[DaSkinz Baby]

Dude everyone has a snapping point. He reached his. Too damn bad his father hasn't reached his. Mark my words things will get worse before it gets better and the media, Mara they already have an axe to grind with us. Pretty stupid you can't voice your opinions of refs when it's shown for 3 weeks they don't know what they are doing. Hell why even have them??? Kyle should have punched one in the face and his father should have went behind him and kicked one in the butt.....

[UK Skins Fan]

We have a different view on how an NFL offensive coordinator should behave. Obviously, the officials are incompetent. Obviously, it's frustrating. Obviously, coaches want to point out their errors. But a coach has to be more level headed than that.

[Redskin in Canada]

We have a different view on how an NFL offensive coordinator should behave. Obviously, the officials are incompetent. Obviously, it's frustrating. Obviously, coaches want to point out their errors. But a coach has to be more level headed than that.

Agreed.

M. McCarthy was a good example last night. Kudos to him.

That did not do much for his team other than the good example though. If I had been him, I would have been arguing vehemently my case in the face of the refs and officials IMMEDIATELY. Fine me. I am human and I will make the case to the incompetent crowd.

[1niksder]

We have a different view on how an NFL offensive coordinator should behave. Obviously, the officials are incompetent. Obviously, it's frustrating. Obviously, coaches want to point out their errors. But a coach has to be more level headed than that.

Agreed.

M. McCarthy was a good example last night. Kudos to him.

That did not do much for his team other than the good example though. If I had been him, I would have been arguing vehemently my case in the face of the refs and officials IMMEDIATELY. Fine me. I am human and I will make the case to the incompetent crowd.

He said nothing during the game and refused to talk about it after the game at his post game presser. I had to point out to a few Packer fans that it wasn't a sign of giving in to the situation but rather a indication that he has a whole lot to say and he doesn't want it muddled with explaining away what Belicheat or Shanny Jr did under lesser ramifications. Granted all three teams lost with/due to ref involvement or lack thereof, in the end McCarthy was robbed and kept his cool... so when he finally does speak out everyone will here him.

[markshark84]

Would he have acted that way if his dad wasn't the head coach???

[1niksder]

Would he have acted that way if his dad wasn't the head coach???

What's his dad got to do with it?

So what he's Mike's son, it's been pointed out for three years and it has never been a issue... not a single issue. It wasn't Mike that went down to Waco (maxing out the out the number of visits allowed) and got to know RGIII heading up to the draft, it wasn't Mikes QB that was being robbed of a legitimate shot at the endzone, (technically yeah he is Mike's QB but you get what I'm saying).

Kyle was wrong, and if anything he looks worst because he works for his dad.

It would be a dead issue, if it had EVERY been a issue.

[Red_One43]

They never did the 10 second run-off on the Hankerson injury. The game should have been over the play before.

That play happened with 1:07 remaining. Like you, I thought the run off rule was in effect and thought the Refs erred on that one. In fact, they were corrrect. 10 second run-off takes effect with in one minute.

Here is the 10 second run-off rule in full from the NFL rule book:

Section 7 Actions to Conserve Time

Article 1 A team is not permitted to conserve time inside of one minute of either half by

committing any of the following acts:

(a) a foul by either team that prevents the snap (i.e., false start, encroachment, etc.)

(b) intentional grounding;

(c) an illegal forward pass thrown from beyond the line of scrimmage;

(d) throwing a backward pass out of bounds;

(e) spiking or throwing the ball in the field of play after a down has ended, except after

a touchdown; or

(f) any other intentional foul that causes the clock to stop.

Penalty: For Illegally Conserving Time: Loss of five yards unless a larger distance

penalty is applicable.

Rule 4, Section 6, Article 3

When actions referred to above are committed by the offensive team while time

is in, officials will run 10 seconds off the game clock before permitting the ball

to be put in play on the ready-for-play signal. The game clock will start on the

ready-for-play signal. If the offensive team has timeouts remaining, it will have

the option of using a timeout in lieu of a 10-second runoff, in which case the

game clock will start on the snap after the timeout. The defense always has the

option to decline the 10-second runoff and have the yardage penalty enforced,

but if the yardage penalty is declined, the 10-second runoff is also declined.

If the action is by the defense, the play clock will be reset to 40 seconds, and the

game clock will start on the ready signal, unless the offense chooses to have

the clock start on the snap. If the defense has timeouts remaining, it will have

the option of using a timeout in lieu of the game clock being started.

Read more here: http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.com/co ... rylink=cpy

[Bob 0119]

When actions referred to above are committed by the offensive team while time is in, officials will run 10 seconds off the game clock before permitting the ball

The key phrase is "while time is in" aka the game clock is running.

The game clock was not running so there is no runoff[/u]

[Deadskins]

They never did the 10 second run-off on the Hankerson injury. The game should have been over the play before.

That play happened with 1:07 remaining. Like you, I thought the run off rule was in effect and thought the Refs erred on that one. In fact, they were corrrect. 10 second run-off takes effect with in one minute.

Here is the 10 second run-off rule in full from the NFL rule book:

Section 7 Actions to Conserve Time

Article 1 A team is not permitted to conserve time inside of one minute of either half by

committing any of the following acts:

(a) a foul by either team that prevents the snap (i.e., false start, encroachment, etc.)

(b) intentional grounding;

(c) an illegal forward pass thrown from beyond the line of scrimmage;

(d) throwing a backward pass out of bounds;

(e) spiking or throwing the ball in the field of play after a down has ended, except after

a touchdown; or

(f) any other intentional foul that causes the clock to stop.

Penalty: For Illegally Conserving Time: Loss of five yards unless a larger distance

penalty is applicable.

Rule 4, Section 6, Article 3

When actions referred to above are committed by the offensive team while time

is in, officials will run 10 seconds off the game clock before permitting the ball

to be put in play on the ready-for-play signal. The game clock will start on the

ready-for-play signal. If the offensive team has timeouts remaining, it will have

the option of using a timeout in lieu of a 10-second runoff, in which case the

game clock will start on the snap after the timeout. The defense always has the

option to decline the 10-second runoff and have the yardage penalty enforced,

but if the yardage penalty is declined, the 10-second runoff is also declined.

If the action is by the defense, the play clock will be reset to 40 seconds, and the

game clock will start on the ready signal, unless the offense chooses to have

the clock start on the snap. If the defense has timeouts remaining, it will have

the option of using a timeout in lieu of the game clock being started.

Read more here: http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.com/co ... rylink=cpy

Yeah, someone else already pointed that out. I always thought it was in the last two minutes, but I guess I've always been wrong. BTW, once again it was Kyle that explained the rule to the refs. So when they tried to end the game, with a similar bad call/lack of knowledge of the rules, he got a little upset.

[Deadskins]

When actions referred to above are committed by the offensive team while time is in, officials will run 10 seconds off the game clock before permitting the ball

The key phrase is "while time is in" aka the game clock is running.

The game clock was not running so there is no runoff

Yes it was. They stopped the clock due to the injury. I remember because I was pissed they let it keep ticking even after it was obvious he wasn't getting up. I wanted those 3 seconds back.

[Redskin in Canada]

Some of you arguing about the rules???

WHY??????

The SCABS never did read the book to begin with. What did you expect?

Have you seen THIS ???

[1niksder]

When actions referred to above are committed by the offensive team while time is in, officials will run 10 seconds off the game clock before permitting the ball

The key phrase is "while time is in" aka the game clock is running.

The game clock was not running so there is no runoff

Yes it was. They stopped the clock due to the injury. I remember because I was pissed they let it keep ticking even after it was obvious he wasn't getting up. I wanted those 3 seconds back.

The play that was the focus of the 10 sec run off was the Next play (F. Davis jumped off-sides), and like you have pointed out the clock was stopped at the end of the previous play due to a injury.

Klye was right

[DarthMonk]

Would he have acted that way if his dad wasn't the head coach???

What's his dad got to do with it?

-snip-

Kyle was wrong, and if anything he looks worst because he works for his dad.

There you have it.

To answer (sort of) ms84, no he would not have acted that way since he would not have this job.

Dad needs to check Kyle's diapers and binky.

DarthMonk

[Deadskins]

The key phrase is "while time is in" aka the game clock is running.

The game clock was not running so there is no runoff

Yes it was. They stopped the clock due to the injury. I remember because I was pissed they let it keep ticking even after it was obvious he wasn't getting up. I wanted those 3 seconds back.

The play that was the focus of the 10 sec run off was the Next play (F. Davis jumped off-sides), and like you have pointed out the clock was stopped at the end of the previous play due to a injury.

Klye was right

Fred jumping offsides was at :07. Hankerson getting injured was at 1:07, and the ref's asked the clock keeper to reset the clock to :57. But as it turns out, the 10 second runoff for an injury with no timeouts only happens in the final minute of each half, so the time was never run off. Kyle had to tell them they were wrong then, too.

[emoses14]

When actions referred to above are committed by the offensive team while time is in, officials will run 10 seconds off the game clock before permitting the ball

The key phrase is "while time is in" aka the game clock is running.

The game clock was not running so there is no runoff[/u]

This is what I thought the right answer was when the "missed run-off" point was previously made.