Just curious about the punt

[Ennjay]

Something I wonder about: the substitute officials aren't just guys off the street. They're all college officials.

 

Even if they're out of Div. III, College reffing is this bad????????

[JinWPB]

I assumed they thought the ball had bounced back from just inside the endzone before being caught, otherwise , wow .

[DrDawkinstein]

Whoever got the ball slid into the endzone after catching it. Apparently that means thats where it goes.

 

These replacement refs are awful

 

If that had actually happened, a touchback would have been the correct call. As it really happened, it was caught and downed at the 5. No sliding, no moving, not even close. That is why the call is especially bad. They must have thought Smith had the ball. Cant think of anything else.

[BobChalmers]

I was under the impression that they thought a guy who went out of bounds was the first to touch the ball (Easley), when in fact it was Martin.

 

Edit: This was what the announcers in Washington said, anyways. It appears a different story happened with Buffalo's announcers. DAMN YOU THEISMAN!

 

Also watching from the DC area, I heard this and thought it made a little sense since #82 was pushed out-of-bounds and someone else with a #2 made the touch on the ball.

 

Having said that, I should know to ignore any and every thing Thiesman has to say.

[The Wiz]

Anyone know how the chick did in her game?

Better than the refs in ours. I watch the Packers/Chargers for about an hour and it didn't seem like she was doing anything wrong.

[SageAgainstTheMachine]

Pretty weird. If these guys have done Division I football, the only potential confusion should be over switching to the NFL rules. Something like a blown touchback on the 5 certainly doesn't qualify as understandable.

[UpperDeck]

I find it hard to believe they thought the 5 was the goal line but you never know with replacement refs. My take was that they thought Brad Smith had caught the ball and stepped into the end zone. If you watch the replay Smith is running right next to Martin when the ball comes down. So the ref on the goal line on the sideline away from the camera (visitor's side) had to think he caught it. Smith then continues to the goal line and tip toes to keep from stepping on it but that ref clearly sees him step on it. He had to be the one who made the bad call.

 

There's still no excuse for the call. The refs should've talked it over and told the errant ref that Martin had the ball and had downed it on the 4. I'd chalk it up to the lack of familiarity with each other between the members of the referee team.

You can watch the replay here:

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000048058/article/replacement-officials-miscue-overturned-in-buffalo

[Ennjay]

Pretty weird. If these guys have done Division I football, the only potential confusion should be over switching to the NFL rules. Something like a blown touchback on the 5 certainly doesn't qualify as understandable.

 

Exactly. The touchback that wasn't and the missing pass interference call . . . those aren't "NFL rules." Those are everybody's football rules. So evenif you cut them slack on the 10-second runoff (which I'm not sure you do) . . .

[pkwwjd]

My brother and I were a little confused on the 10 second runoff ... We thought that the runoff only takes place if the penalty causes a stoppage of the clock. Since the clock was already stopped due to the spike/incomplete pass ... Should there still be a runoff?

[Best Player Available]

Apparently the Refs were in the lot drinking shots with the teenagers before the game. No worry's.

[biglukes]

I don't know how, but I'm sure that call was in some way Fitz's fault.