Forsett "red flag" TD in Lions game

[PC Load Letter]

To add to what Popeye said, there are other circumstances that can add to the confusion as well. A play may have seemed to have been a score or even initially ruled to be, but the refs huddle up and rule it a non-score. A coach might intially think "it's going to be reviewed", but then lose sight that it won't be reviewed because it's not a scoring play. The same can happen for turnovers. One can argue that the coach should know the rules. But the fact is that there are more and more rules added every year, which makes it an increasingly confusing moving target.

Still, what is the justification for the 15-yarder? Educate me on that, since I see nothing clock related to justify the harshness of a 15-yarder, much less removing the opportunity for review in addition.

I agree with you, I was just pointing out that a coach cannot take advantage of the rule to prevent a questionable play from being reviewed completely.

I don't understand the 15-yarder, either? I know for a fact there have been plays where Lovie threw the challenge flag only to be told it's not a reviewable play and Chicago was not penalized. Obviously those were not scoring/turnover plays, but the ref still took time to go explain it to Lovie and tell him to go back to staring at the big screen.

[Edonidd]

As it is, it is by far the harshest penalty in football. Automatic first downs or loss of down on offense are pretty harsh penalties. No team wants that to happen to them. Pass interference in the endzone is even worse with the potential (although extremely unlikely) for a 98 yard penalty and the opposing team gets the ball on the one yard line. Harsher but it makes sense, because the play may have cost the other team a touchdown. Harsher than that is holding in your own endzone. Automatic safety, 2 points and the ball to the opposing team. Makes sense though since that opposing team probably could have tackled the ball carrier or QB in the endzone for a safety anyways, otherwise nobody would have held in the first place. This rule awarded 7 points to the opposing team, alp.g with 15 yards on the following kickoff. All for throwing a flag onto the field so the ref had to come over and say "you can't do that." The penalty itself is stupid in that instance, but the punishment also doesn't fit the crime.

[All Hype]

What's lost in all of this is how utterly terrible the "real" NFL officials have been this year. For all of the "the sky is falling" talk about the replacement refs, the non-scabs aren't a whole lot better.

[KickSave]

What's lost in all of this is how utterly terrible the "real" NFL officials have been this year. For all of the "the sky is falling" talk about the replacement refs, the non-scabs aren't a whole lot better.

Which just goes to show, its a hard job and getting it perfect isn't going to happen all the time.

[Ricky Roma]

Him yelling at Harbaugh to "know the f'ing rules" last year makes this all even sweeter.

Can't emphasize this any more.

Schwartz is a garbage HC.

[HawksFanNorth]

Wrong. If HOU had thrown the challenge instead of DET, the play still would have been reviewed for DET's benefit. By throwing the flag, Schwartz effectively took away DET's ability to benefit from the review, but that does not take away the other teams right to have the play reviewed.

As far as altering the rule, I would keep the 15 yard penalty, and in addition I would take away one challenge from the team throwing the red flag. Any plays qualifying for auto-review would still go through the review process.

I tried how to figure out how I'd fix this rule and came up with something similar. Treat the challenge flag as both a penalty and a failed challenge regardless of what the review results are. It would still have a stiff penalty while still managing to get the call right.

[The Cryin Lion]

Another thing that makes no sense to me about this rule is that it is supposed there to prevent coaches from stopping the clock and delaying the game. Except for the fact that on every scoring play or turnover, the clock stops! And generally the NFL goes to commercial. So to me, that explanation doesn't wash at all. Further, we commonly see circumstances where coaches throw the red flag and are told by the refs that the play is not reviewable--without penalty. Someone will have to explain to me the red flag game impact crisis that gave rise to the harshness of the consequences.

The league has already pretty much acknowledged that it's a bad rule and will be changing it maybe even before this season ends.

Schwartz throwing that flag in that situation cause no harm to the game flow. They were going to review the play anyway, so he wasn't delaying the game. He stood to gain no benefit from throwing the flag so it's simply not an instance of a team gaining benefit by being penalized.

[PatsFan2003]

I tried how to figure out how I'd fix this rule and came up with something similar. Treat the challenge flag as both a penalty and a failed challenge regardless of what the review results are. It would still have a stiff penalty while still managing to get the call right.

But still review the play. That seems very fair. It still should keep coach under control while still allowing terrible calls to be reviewed.

[The Cryin Lion]

That loss is 100% on Schwartz.

It's 33% on Schwartz.

1. The NFL had to make a rule that the NFL now recognizes as being terrible
2. There were 29 people on that field. 22 of them knew Forsett had been tackled and stopped play (save for the savvy Forsett). The 7 people paid to see the clear tackle and call it all failed to do their job.
3. Schwartz went Schwartz.

Because 3 triggerd 1, 2 was able to stand.

Any time you ignore the majority of the story to point blame on a minority or even half of the story I just don't follow your logic.

The rule was put in place because too many coaches were throwing the red flag when they knew they shouldn't be able to just so they could talk to the refs it was put in there to deter that behavior. Looks like it finally worked.

No, actually the rule wasn't put in place for this kind of situation. This kind of situation was an unfortunate surprise to the NFL which is why they now are saying they'll likely change the rule (maybe even this season... which is saying a lot.)

If this kind of situation is why they made the rule, then they wouldn't be rushing to change it and wipe the egg off their face.

[The Cryin Lion]

To add to what Popeye said, there are other circumstances that can add to the confusion as well. A play may have seemed to have been a score or even initially ruled to be, but the refs huddle up and rule it a non-score.

I know.

If you remember, that is precisely what happened with the "Calvin Johnson Rule" TD. The official nearest the play with a clear line of sight immediately signaled touchdown, then the refs huddled and 20 seconds later or so they overturned the initial guys signal so that the official ruling on the field was Incomplete. Then they reviewed it on tape and went with the ruling on the field.

The Lions just can't catch a break in these kinds of deals.

The seven officials on the field must have known that he was downed based on the response of everyone even if they didn't see it, but you just won't see that kind of post play, pre-official review conference to reconcile the call on the field for the Lions. QQ

[BHF]

It's 33% on Schwartz.

1. The NFL had to make a rule that the NFL now recognizes as being terrible
2. There were 29 people on that field. 22 of them knew Forsett had been tackled and stopped play (save for the savvy Forsett). The 7 people paid to see the clear tackle and call it all failed to do their job.
3. Schwartz went Schwartz.

Because 3 triggerd 1, 2 was able to stand.

Any time you ignore the majority of the story to point blame on a minority or even half of the story I just don't follow your logic.



No, actually the rule wasn't put in place for this kind of situation. This kind of situation was an unfortunate surprise to the NFL which is why they now are saying they'll likely change the rule (maybe even this season... which is saying a lot.)

If this kind of situation is why they made the rule, then they wouldn't be rushing to change it and wipe the egg off their face.

Using your logic the Seahawks share a portion of the blame, too. I mean if they hadn't allowed Forsett to become a FA he wouldn't have been on the Texans roster to make the run in the first place.

You nt to heap blame on the refs, ignoring that replay is in place as a safety net for the refs. It w Schwartz's action that removed that from the equation.

[OrAnGe CrUsH 77]

probably the stupidest rule in the NFL right now.

[The Cryin Lion]

Using your logic the Seahawks share a portion of the blame, too. I mean if they hadn't allowed Forsett to become a FA he wouldn't have been on the Texans roster to make the run in the first place.

Thats just terrible.