Something fishy in Texans-Chiefs game on a pass interferce call

[syhuang]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/10/14/something-fishy-happened-in-that-texans-chiefs-call/

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It occurred with the Chiefs leading 17-9 in the second quarter, and driving for more with a first down on the Houson 32. Quarterback Patrick Mahomes fired a deep ball to the end zone, and it was intercepted by Texans defensive back Tashaun Gipson.

 

Referee Shawn Hochuli initially informed the fans in the stadium and the TV audience that Texans defensive back Lonnie Johnson Jr. had committed defensive pass interference on Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, with the video showing Johnson grabbing Kelce and driving him into the ground. Then, as the teams were lined up for the next play at the spot of the infraction (the Houston 23), Hochuli and two other officials huddled. During the conversation, one of the other officials clearly can be seen pressing his finger against his ear, it what most likely was an attempt to better hear whatever someone was saying to him.

 

PFT has learned that replay review definitely was not involved in this decision. This means that no one should have been talking to any of the officials regarding whether or not the call for pass interference should have been changed, or whether some other penalty should have been called.

 

After the consultation, Hochuli announced “the contact that was potentially a hold was while the ball was in the air; it is not pass interference, because it was not on the receiver that caught the ball.” While a little clunky on the back end, the point was that the officials concluded, apparently with input from either the replay official or 345 Park Avenue, that the blatant hold on Kelce happened while the ball was in the air, and that Kelce wasn’t the intended receiver — making the ball uncatchable as to him and thus resulting in no interference.

But the contact on Kelce seems to have clearly commenced and continued before Mahomes threw the ball. Thus, if there was going to be any type of consultation (even if technically unauthorized by the procedures for helping the officials on the field), someone should have told the officials that Johnson committed defensive holding on Kelce, with the interception nullified and possession given to the Chiefs, first and 10 from the Houston 27.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

Go to 1:12 to see one of the officials seems to listen to something. Note that the play wasn't under review.

 

Conspiracy? ?

 

Edited October 14, 2019 by syhuang

[MJS]

So what's the fishy part? They shouldn't have been talking to the officials at that point in time? Is there a rule against that?

[syhuang]

Just now, MJS said:

So what's the fishy part? They shouldn't have been talking to the officials at that point in time? Is there a rule against that?

 

From the article:

 

PFT has learned that replay review definitely was not involved in this decision. This means that no one should have been talking to any of the officials regarding whether or not the call for pass interference should have been changed, or whether some other penalty should have been called.

[Augie]

I would have expected this to happen during a Patriots* game.

 

?

[MJS]

5 minutes ago, syhuang said:

 

From the article:

 

PFT has learned that replay review definitely was not involved in this decision. This means that no one should have been talking to any of the officials regarding whether or not the call for pass interference should have been changed, or whether some other penalty should have been called.

But why does it mean that? Is that what the rule is? The league can only talk to the officials when there is an official review?

 

I'm just trying to understand the actual rules behind this.

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

Does it count if the call from the office is “You idiots ¥}%< up one more call, and your crew will be selling beer in Section 307!!”?

[Buffalo716]

14 minutes ago, syhuang said:

 

From the article:

 

PFT has learned that replay review definitely was not involved in this decision. This means that no one should have been talking to any of the officials regarding whether or not the call for pass interference should have been changed, or whether some other penalty should have been called.

Refs are allowed to huddle up tho and change calls

 

They wear an O20 official to official radios

Edited October 14, 2019 by Buffalo716

[Fortunesmith]

Is it out of the realm of possibility that he was simply communicating with an official on another part the field? There's 7 of them.

[Warcodered]

1 minute ago, MJS said:

But why does it mean that? Is that what the rule is? The league can only talk to the officials when there is an official review?

 

I'm just trying to understand the actual rules behind this.

I wouldn't be surprised if they just needed clarification on how the rules line up with what they saw but who knows.

[MJS]

1 minute ago, Warcodered said:

I wouldn't be surprised if they just needed clarification on how the rules line up with what they saw but who knows.

Yeah, I would expect the officials to be able to contact the league any time they need to regardless of the situation and vice versa, but knowing the league, there's probably some rules around when you can and can't.

[GoBills808]

Where in the rulebook does it say referees can't communicate w/replay officials via headset on non-replay review calls?

[Nanker]

Screw it. The Chiefs were due for a hosing by the Refs. 

[Buffalo716]

4 minutes ago, Fortunesmith said:

Is it out of the realm of possibility that he was simply communicating with an official on another part the field? There's 7 of them.

Ding ding ding

 

That's exactly what was going on..  NFL officials use O20 official to official radios

 

They are linked up to all officials so all 7 don't have to huddle

[MJS]

2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Where in the rulebook does it say referees can't communicate w/replay officials via headset on non-replay review calls?

That's my exact question. There's only something fishy if the rules state they can't.

[xsoldier54]

19 minutes ago, syhuang said:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/10/14/something-fishy-happened-in-that-texans-chiefs-call/

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It occurred with the Chiefs leading 17-9 in the second quarter, and driving for more with a first down on the Houson 32. Quarterback Patrick Mahomes fired a deep ball to the end zone, and it was intercepted by Texans defensive back Tashaun Gipson.

 

Referee Shawn Hochuli initially informed the fans in the stadium and the TV audience that Texans defensive back Lonnie Johnson Jr. had committed defensive pass interference on Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, with the video showing Johnson grabbing Kelce and driving him into the ground. Then, as the teams were lined up for the next play at the spot of the infraction (the Houston 23), Hochuli and two other officials huddled. During the conversation, one of the other officials clearly can be seen pressing his finger against his ear, it what most likely was an attempt to better hear whatever someone was saying to him.

 

PFT has learned that replay review definitely was not involved in this decision. This means that no one should have been talking to any of the officials regarding whether or not the call for pass interference should have been changed, or whether some other penalty should have been called.

 

After the consultation, Hochuli announced “the contact that was potentially a hold was while the ball was in the air; it is not pass interference, because it was not on the receiver that caught the ball.” While a little clunky on the back end, the point was that the officials concluded, apparently with input from either the replay official or 345 Park Avenue, that the blatant hold on Kelce happened while the ball was in the air, and that Kelce wasn’t the intended receiver — making the ball uncatchable as to him and thus resulting in no interference.

But the contact on Kelce seems to have clearly commenced and continued before Mahomes threw the ball. Thus, if there was going to be any type of consultation (even if technically unauthorized by the procedures for helping the officials on the field), someone should have told the officials that Johnson committed defensive holding on Kelce, with the interception nullified and possession given to the Chiefs, first and 10 from the Houston 27.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know man.  Looked to me like Kelsey was the one holding and he fell down trying to push the defender away.   Guess it depends on your point of view.

 

 

 

Go to 1:12 to see one of the officials seems to listen to something. Note that the play wasn't under review.

 

Conspiracy? ?

 

 

[MJS]

Just now, Buffalo716 said:

Ding ding ding

 

That's exactly what was going on..  NFL officials use O20 official to official radios

 

They are linked up to all officials so all 7 don't have to huddle

Ah yes. And they still end up huddling up often, wasting time when they could be communicating via headsets.

[HamSandwhich]

I think the issue is, even if it was not pass interference it was defensive holding and thereby defensive holding. It’s absolutely nuts to me that they gave that ball to the Texans. That turned the game.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

NFL -  

 

Uh Sorry about that.....  Better luck next time 

4 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Screw it. The Chiefs were due for a hosing by the Refs. 

now it is the Pats*** turn 

 

[Buffalo716]

1 minute ago, MJS said:

Ah yes. And they still end up huddling up often, wasting time when they could be communicating via headsets.

Yep because zebras  are pack animals

 

And need to be Led in a herd

[syhuang]

4 minutes ago, MJS said:

That's my exact question. There's only something fishy if the rules state they can't.

 

I didn't locate the exact rules in NFL rulebook but found this article relating to it when quickly googling it. Not sure if anything changes afterward.

 

----------------------------------------------------------

https://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/224822/mike-pereira-wants-to-reveal-nfls-undercover-officiating-program

 

In a conversation this week about his book, "After Further Review," Pereira reiterated and amplified a theory that he first advanced last year -- a premise that makes perfect sense but would undermine the transparency of NFL game administration. According to Pereira, referees regularly receive assistance and advice from replay officials on their wireless headsets, communication that helps them make accurate calls but would be in violation of rules the league itself has published and publicized.

 

"They're never going to come out and admit it because it's not allowed in the rules," he said. "I get that. And I'm not against the notion of trying to get as many calls right as you can, but my only concern is if the rulebook doesn't allow you to do it -- to me, there is a conflict. I get the side of trying to avoid controversy, but I'd rather the rulebook allow it first."

----------------------------------------------------------

Edited October 14, 2019 by syhuang

[Warcodered]

2 minutes ago, MJS said:

Ah yes. And they still end up huddling up often, wasting time when they could be communicating via headsets.

Well i mean it is easier to go over something and come to a consensus when you can see who's talking.

[folz]

I don't know if the NFL called in that reversal, although the ref is obviously listening to someone on his headset and I definitely don't put it past the NFL to skew games  a bit here and there (I think it happens a lot),

 

But, how can that not be a penalty. He basically tackled Kelce off the line of scrimmage. Tough to make that changed call seem believable (within the rules of the game).. 

[MJS]

1 minute ago, Warcodered said:

Well i mean it is easier to go over something and come to a consensus when you can see who's talking.

Why?

[Warcodered]

3 minutes ago, MJS said:

Why?

Because it's how human beings are designed.

[MJS]

2 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

Because it's how human beings are designed.

Look at us, communicating without even looking! Or even speaking!

 

And parents and kids texting each other when they are all in the same house.

 

Any company that uses radios frequently to communicate implements radio etiquette rules to ensure clear and effective communication.

[GoBills808]

11 minutes ago, syhuang said:

 

I didn't locate the exact rules in NFL rulebook but found this article relating to it when quickly googling it. Not sure if anything changes afterward.

 

----------------------------------------------------------

https://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/224822/mike-pereira-wants-to-reveal-nfls-undercover-officiating-program

 

In a conversation this week about his book, "After Further Review," Pereira reiterated and amplified a theory that he first advanced last year -- a premise that makes perfect sense but would undermine the transparency of NFL game administration. According to Pereira, referees regularly receive assistance and advice from replay officials on their wireless headsets, communication that helps them make accurate calls but would be in violation of rules the league itself has published and publicized.

 

"They're never going to come out and admit it because it's not allowed in the rules," he said. "I get that. And I'm not against the notion of trying to get as many calls right as you can, but my only concern is if the rulebook doesn't allow you to do it -- to me, there is a conflict. I get the side of trying to avoid controversy, but I'd rather the rulebook allow it first."

----------------------------------------------------------

This is all I could find in the rulebook- 

 

ARTICLE 9. GAME ADMINISTRATION

The Replay Official and designated members of the Officiating department may consult with on-field officials, or conduct a replay review, of game administration issues, including: (a) penalty enforcement; (b) the proper down; (c) spot of a foul; and (d) the game clock.

Item 1. Game Clock. The game clock is reviewable for purposes of restoring time to the clock but not for purposes of taking time off the clock.

Notes:

1. Time can be restored to the game clock if the clock operator incorrectly starts the game clock when it should remain stopped, provided that the correction occurs before the next legal snap or kick.
2. An on-field ruling that time expired during or after the last play of any half, or of an overtime period in the preseason or regular season, or of an overtime half in the postseason, is reviewable by the Replay Official only when the visual evidence demonstrates that the clock should have stopped with two or more seconds remaining. In the first half, time shall be restored only if the additional play will be a snap from scrimmage. In the second half, time shall be restored only if the next play will be a snap from scrimmage by a team that is trailing by eight points or less, or by either team if the score is tied.
3. The game clock is reviewable to determine if it properly expired when on-field officials restore time after the last play of any half, or of an overtime period in the preseason or regular season, or of an overtime half in the postseason. Visual evidence that a clock should have stopped includes any situation when the clock stops by rule after the ball becomes dead. Visual evidence that the clock should have stopped for a team timeout occurs when an official starts to raise his or her arm to signal a stopped clock.

 

...

 

So if 'designated members of the officiating dept' (no idea who those may be) are able to consult w/ on-field officials about 'game administrative issues' including penalty enforcement...it seems like it's a gray area. This came from the section pertaining to instant replay (what I take to mean all video coach-or-Replay-Official-or-scoring/turnover mandated replay situations)...I guess defining what 'penalty enforcement' means would be the issue.

[The Wiz]

22 minutes ago, HamSandwhich said:

I think the issue is, even if it was not pass interference it was defensive holding and thereby defensive holding. It’s absolutely nuts to me that they gave that ball to the Texans. That turned the game.

That's where I'm at too. 

 

I can't remember how many times I've seen that called away from the pass/receiver. 

[Warcodered]

8 minutes ago, MJS said:

Look at us, communicating without even looking! Or even speaking!

 

And parents and kids texting each other when they are all in the same house.

 

Any company that uses radios frequently to communicate implements radio etiquette rules to ensure clear and effective communication.

You're not looking? That is impressive.

 

There are significant differences though, we're not in any kind of rush, we can see our names and Avatars, and even specifically quote each other.

 

Right and they develop those etiquette rules for a reason. I'm not saying they can't do it only that it's easier when they can see and hear each other directly which is why they tend to do it.

[Rochesterfan]

35 minutes ago, syhuang said:

 

From the article:

 

PFT has learned that replay review definitely was not involved in this decision. This means that no one should have been talking to any of the officials regarding whether or not the call for pass interference should have been changed, or whether some other penalty should have been called.

 

That is not correct though - it was a turnover with a penalty- all turnovers are automatically reviewed.  I agree they should not be looking at PI, but the coaches and GMs decided they wanted PI reviewed - so on a turnover PI can be reviewed as part of the turnover.

 

If they had ruled holding or illegal contact and this occurred - I would cry foul, but because it was called PI and a turnover - it is certainly up for review and discussion.  The replay official should have buzzed down to discuss and if there was an issue - it should go to NY for clarification.

 

The problem is the coaches and GMs on the competition committee do not think about impact they saw the NO play and way over reacted and it leads to this.

 

I believe there are many issues because they cannot review holding or illegal contact - so if that had been called - no review and the play is reversed.  Additionally if the ball had not been intercepted or a TD scored - the PI would have need to been challenged to get a review, but in this case they actually did the correct thing.  The problem is all with the wrong call on Kelce - should have been defensive holding and all of this goes away.

[mykidsdad]

Should have been a 5 yard penalty on the D, and remained KC's ball. It is obvious something weird was going on.

[PetermansRedemption]

35 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

Refs are allowed to huddle up tho and change calls

 

They wear an O20 official to official radios

This. Just because they were listening to their ear radio doesn’t mean they were talking to New York. They run 7 man crews and everyone has a radio to communicate with each other. Likely someone on the crew corrected the white hat on the call. This is completely legal if done before the next play. 

[MJS]

1 minute ago, Warcodered said:

You're not looking? That is impressive.

 

There are significant differences though, we're not in any kind of rush, we can see our names and Avatars, and even specifically quote each other.

 

Right and they develop those etiquette rules for a reason. I'm not saying they can't do it only that it's easier when they can see and hear each other directly which is why they tend to do it.

I think they do it because they are old and have been doing it a certain way for their whole lives, not because it is better, more effective, or because that's how humans are designed.

 

All in all, it wastes time and they should be using the technology more because that's why they have it, to avoid delays. Having to huddle causes delays.

[Putin]

Is Lonnie Johnson jr the son of that GREAT  TE ( out of FSU ) that used to play for the Bills ?

[syhuang]

1 minute ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

That is not correct though - it was a turnover with a penalty- all turnovers are automatically reviewed.  I agree they should not be looking at PI, but the coaches and GMs decided they wanted PI reviewed - so on a turnover PI can be reviewed as part of the turnover.

 

If they had ruled holding or illegal contact and this occurred - I would cry foul, but because it was called PI and a turnover - it is certainly up for review and discussion.  The replay official should have buzzed down to discuss and if there was an issue - it should go to NY for clarification.

 

The problem is the coaches and GMs on the competition committee do not think about impact they saw the NO play and way over reacted and it leads to this.

 

I believe there are many issues because they cannot review holding or illegal contact - so if that had been called - no review and the play is reversed.  Additionally if the ball had not been intercepted or a TD scored - the PI would have need to been challenged to get a review, but in this case they actually did the correct thing.  The problem is all with the wrong call on Kelce - should have been defensive holding and all of this goes away.

 

For this bold statement above, my understanding is that only when the end result is a turnover, the play gets auto-reviewed. In this case, it didn't end up as a turnover so there is no auto-review.

 

Also, from the original article: "PFT has learned that replay review definitely was not involved in this decision", auto review didn't kick in for this particular play.

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

That is not correct though - it was a turnover with a penalty- all turnovers are automatically reviewed.  I agree they should not be looking at PI, but the coaches and GMs decided they wanted PI reviewed - so on a turnover PI can be reviewed as part of the turnover.

 

If they had ruled holding or illegal contact and this occurred - I would cry foul, but because it was called PI and a turnover - it is certainly up for review and discussion.  The replay official should have buzzed down to discuss and if there was an issue - it should go to NY for clarification.

 

The problem is the coaches and GMs on the competition committee do not think about impact they saw the NO play and way over reacted and it leads to this.

 

I believe there are many issues because they cannot review holding or illegal contact - so if that had been called - no review and the play is reversed.  Additionally if the ball had not been intercepted or a TD scored - the PI would have need to been challenged to get a review, but in this case they actually did the correct thing.  The problem is all with the wrong call on Kelce - should have been defensive holding and all of this goes away.

Good call. I forgot about the rule that all turnovers are reviewed now. Fair game to get help from video  crew on this one I think...

[Rochesterfan]

29 minutes ago, folz said:

I don't know if the NFL called in that reversal, although the ref is obviously listening to someone on his headset and I definitely don't put it past the NFL to skew games  a bit here and there (I think it happens a lot),

 

But, how can that not be a penalty. He basically tackled Kelce off the line of scrimmage. Tough to make that changed call seem believable (within the rules of the game).. 

 

 

Because the correct call as the ref announced was probably holding, but that was not what was called and that is not reviewable because the coaches and GMs in their wisdom created a bad rule that does not work.

 

The PI was incorrect and could be reviewed and overturned.

[Augie]

I wonder if the words “just give it to ‘em” were spoken???

[TheFunPolice]

Let's just hope the script is all about building up the evil team (NE) making them seem invincible, while also making opposition to them seem weak...

 

Then, when all looks lost a hero emerges....Wearing red white and blue... America's hero....

 

A TEAM of heroes. The true America's team. The Buffalo Bills!

 

The NFL is basically recreating the Marvel scripts....  

 

 

[DisplacedBillsFan]

It's been fairly apparent this year that via their ear pieces, officials on the field are receiving input from someone off the field. It's happened on multiple potential "game changing" calls that were not under review or challenged (e.g. kick catch interference in the Steelers game last night). The normal routine is the officials huddle to "discuss" it, but it's obvious they're waiting on input that's communicated to them from somewhere.

 

Side note, I'm 100% fine with this, but feel the league should be more transparent about it.

Edited October 14, 2019 by DisplacedBillsFan

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

13 minutes ago, Putin said:

Is Lonnie Johnson jr the son of that GREAT  TE ( out of FSU ) that used to play for the Bills ?

 

I'm sorry, but you really shouldn't use GREAT and LONNIE JOHNSON in the same sentence.