Refsuck.com featured in Playboy!

Well not really featured...more like a short letter and a plug for the website. Playboy contacted me a couple months ago to comment on an article they had published about officiating in the NFL. My letter has been edited, and is currently in the May '09 issue. Below is my original response...

Regarding "The Whistle Blowers" (Feb 09), I thoroughly enjoyed the inside perspective presented; however, I believe problems with NFL officiating are often overlooked and were not touched on in the article.

Yes, officials are human and will make mistakes; however, many mistakes are avoidable by simply following the rules and holding officials accountable. Far too often, officials fail to follow the rules they are paid to enforce. For example, replay requires "indisputable visual evidence" for a call to be overturned, yet how often do we see plays overturned lacking "indisputable" evidence? The "Tuck Rule" comes to mind. And how often do we see blatantly blown calls impact the outcome of games? For example, how was Ravens QB Joe Flacco allowed to snap the ball 1.35 seconds (yes, it was timed) after the play clock expired on a critical late 4th quarter pass against the Titans a few weeks ago? And why does the NFL, namely Mike Pereira, stand by officials even when they are wrong? Take for example the officials failing to review Kurt Warner's fumble in the closing seconds of Super Bowl XLIII. Pereira defended his crew, yet it's inexcusable the officials didn't take the time to assure the correct call had been made with an NFL championship on the line.

The bottom line is, NFL officials are the worse in all of professional sports because the system under which they work allows them to get away with loose interpretation of rules and minimal retribution if they make mistakes. The NFL is a business and treats any criticism of officials as a criticism of the product they sell. With few exceptions, Pereira stands by his crews, right or wrong. That may be great for those who work for him, but blatant disregard for what even a casual fan can see on replay is insulting and calls into question the integrity of officiating. Until the NFL is forthcoming and honest about issues with officiating, the problem will persist.

And a few more changes and clarifications

It's called the Brady Rule...a clarification to the existing rules concerning hits on the QB. Apparently, the loss of Tom Brady for an entire season was too much for the NFL to bear. Something had to be done! As such, the NFL Competition Committee has now determined that once a defender is on the ground, he cannot lunge or dive at the QB's legs. I wonder if the rule would have been changed if say JaMarcus Russell had suffered a season ending knee injury on such a play?

In other news, NFL teams voted to expand replay reviews to quarterback pass/fumbles when the ruling on the field is an incomplete pass. The idea is to prevent another gaffe such as the Ed Hochuli ruling which cost the Chargers a win back in week 2 of the 2008 season.

Finally, several small changes have been approved concerning onside kicks, fumbles out of bounds, and the draft order.


Brady rule: Steps taken to protect QBs' knees

'Hochuli' rule, draft order change adopted

Draft order to change for playoff teams

Owners approve rule changes

In an attempt to improve safety and to create more inconsistent interpretation of rules, NFL owners have approved four new rule changes...

- no blindside helmet to helmet hits
- no head shots to defenseless receivers
- no bunching of players on one side during on-side kickoffs
- no "wedges" on kickoffs

While I understand the desire to protect players, any rules changes which create a situation where an official must make a judgment call is just ripe for controversy. Wanna protect players? Outlaw all hits to the head period.

Four safety proposals passed

Super Bowl Summary

My own observation regarding Super Bowl XLIII...the officiating was mediocre at best. There were far too many ticky-tack or downright bogus calls the officials should have let slide. Let the players play! However, unlike Super Bowl XL, I don't believe the officiating had a direct impact on the outcome. Warner's interception at the end of the first half was the biggest play of the game, and the call was correct. Even if Harrison was a bit short, there was no indisputable visual evidence to overturn the call. And yes, the final Warner fumble should have been reviewed, but even so, I don't believe there was any evidence to overturn the call. Of course, those are just my thoughts. Some other opinions...

Can We Please for Once Get Some Good Officials in the Super Bowl?

Adventures in Officiating

Where was the Review?

Anyone else find it unbelievable that the officials didn't even bother to look at the Warner fumble with just seconds remaining? I mean, isn't that why we have replay...to assure the call on the field is correct? Granted, it looked like a fumble and it probably would not have mattered anyway. Even on reversal, the Cardinals only had time for a desperate heave to the end zone. Yet in a way, the play sums up what is wrong with officiating in the NFL. Quite simply, officiating in the NFL is inconsistent, unreliable and suspect.

Officiating dictates Super Bowl XLIII to the unreviewed end