Schwartz 'challenge'

FountainfoxMember

I'm no fan of Jim Schwartz, but I don't understand the logic underlying the result of his 'challenge' in the Lions game today.

The runner's knee hit the ground, but he didn't realize it at the time and kept going, crossing the goal line. Call on the field was a TD.

Schwartz threw his red flag -- but he didn't need to because the play would automatically be challenged anyway, it bring a scoring play. This did two things:

1. It canceled the review that would have occurred had he not thrown the flag.

2. It in effect raised the runner's knee of the ground, legitimizing a bad call.

So he threw a flag at the wrong time. Boo-hoo. This is injurious to the game how? I can remember lots of instances where a coach threw a challenge flag over something that was not reviewable at all, was told this, picked up his flag and that was that. Why is this so bad?

I thought the thinking behind the booth reviews was to make things more accurate. This says that on-field etiquette -- on a comparable level, I feel, to obsessing over whether someone eats his salad with the right fork -- is much more important.

Not only does it kill the review intended to make the play of the game more accurately called -- in this case by turning a tackle into a TD -- but it carries an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, as well.

If league officials are so offended by the sight of a flag hitting the ground when what it is signaling would happen anyway had the flag not been thrown, OK -- assess the unsportsmanlike penalty but don't kill the review.

Seems to me someone's priorities may be out of whack.

11/22/128:04 PM

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

PakrzFREEZE!

Why was the scoring play "not reviewable?"

11/22/128:06 PM

FountainfoxMember

My understanding is it would have been reviewed had he not thrown the flag.

I hadn't seen the discussion of this in the game thread when I wrote this post. Sorry if this bothers anybody.

11/22/128:08 PM

CUPackFanMember

The NFL was tired of coaches throwing a flag only be told the couldn't challenge something. Stopped the game and effectively gave the team an uncharged timeout. I agree that it should be a 5 yard delay of game penalty, but the idea that it cancels an existing challenge is too severe. But as the rule is written, the refs got it right. I'd expect the rule to be changed this offseason.

However, a coach needs to keep his head when things go wrong and clearly Schwartz does not. This same situation happened last weekend to Atlanta so he has no excuse to not know the rule. This is reason #867 why I'm glad we have a coach like MM.

11/22/128:13 PM

ChilliJonI hate the Vikings!

One of these days the NFL will make sure they get each play called the right way. What we need is HD, replay, and camera angles.

One day......

11/22/128:15 PM

Blair KielGOOD OL' FAKE BLAIR KIEL - My Hood? nice Henry. Fuck You!

If douchy douche simply remembered that each and every scoring play is automatically reviewed (instead of "throwing" a temper tantrum) the Lions would still be alive in the play-off hunt.

Thanks Coach.

Lack of discipline?

Shocking.

11/22/128:37 PM

CheezersMember

The refs got it right the way that the rule is written. It's just a crappy rule.

Others have it right - once the challenge flag was thrown not only was there a 15 yard penalty, but the coach lost the right to even have the play reviewed. So Schwartz'a screw-up trumped the rule about all scoring plays being reviewed.

I think the rule is completely wrong. The main emphasis should be on getting the call right.

11/22/128:39 PM

FedyaMember

quote:
the Lions would still be alive in the play-off hunt.

Might, not would: who can say that Houston wouldn't have scored on that drive anyway?

11/22/128:39 PM

Shoeless JoeMember

This poor sad clown is going to need rotator-cuff surgery if and when he finally grows up.

11/22/128:39 PM

Blair KielGOOD OL' FAKE BLAIR KIEL - My Hood? nice Henry. Fuck You!

quote:
Originally posted by Fedya:
quote:
the Lions would still be alive in the play-off hunt.

Might, not would: who can say that Houston wouldn't have scored on that drive anyway?

Yeah, and if your Grandparents weren't Communists, you might not be a pig-hating, military disrespecting contrarian.

Might.

11/22/128:47 PM

ammoCheese Master

quote:
Originally posted by Shoeless Joe:
This poor sad clown is going to need rotator-cuff surgery if and when he finally grows up.

Nope S J. He'll be fired before he grows up.

11/22/129:21 PM

GoallineLarge Antenna

quote:
Originally posted by Shoeless Joe:
This poor sad clown is going to need rotator-cuff surgery if and when he finally grows up.

Lol. The better question its, why didn't he know the rule? I knew the rule and I am not a NFL head coach making millions.

11/22/129:28 PM

ilcuquiTHE F*** WITH FASHION

After the game he said he knew the rule. Just lost control of himself.

Go figure.

11/22/129:47 PM

ChilliJonI hate the Vikings!

The NFL has rules on top of rules that overrule rules that ignore common sense. How does a play like that go for a TD? It's an 8 yard carry. Period.

We can laugh about it until it bites fans in the ass. Again.

11/22/129:48 PM

bdplantMember

Dumb rule + dumb coach = another Lion loss.

11/22/1210:46 PM

PackLandVAMember

Saw this and thought it was interesting:

"The decision to review all scoring plays is a relatively new one, and the challenge flag rule may be relatively unknown, but here's why this is on Schwartz: Last Sunday, in the Atlanta Falcons' 23-19 win against the Arizona Cardinals, Falcons head coach Mike Smith tried to challenge a fumble recovery made by two Cardinals on an amazing play in which cornerback Greg Toler flipped the ball back inbounds to safety Rashad Johnson after running back Jason Snelling coughed it up. Because turnovers are also automatically reviewed, Smith's challenge voided that automatic challenge, and everybody in the NFL was reminded to avoid trying to stir up trouble with plays that are taken care of up in the booth."

I'd love for an NFL spokesperson to come out and explain the rational for voiding the review. I understand the "unsportsmanlike conduct" call, but there must be some rationale as to why no review.

11/22/1211:26 PM

Pack-ManMember

quote:
Originally posted by cuqui:
After the game he said he knew the rule. Just lost control of himself.

Go figure.

I kinda figured that was what happened. If you just randomly asked the guy about that rule as he's walking down a hallway at the team facility, he'd know it instantly. However, since he's a hothead, he can't control himself enough to actually put this knowledge into practice in situations like this one. Loudmouths and hotheads like Schwartz and Ryan may be able to have success in the league for a while with their swaggering "us against the world" gimmicks, but they're never able to build the sort of discipline on their teams that is needed to succeed as a head coach in the NFL.

11/23/1212:39 AM

PackLandVAMember

Just saw on NFL Network the Director of Instant Replay (Dean Somethingoranother) discussing the rule after last week's Falcons game (as referenced above). The rationale according to him, as I understood him, is that the refs will approach the coach immediately after a scoring play to remind the coach the play is being "looked at upstairs and will be reviewed if necessary (something stands out as being the incorrect call)". If, before that, a coach throws the flag, the NFL basically says that team loses the right to benefit from a challenge. The other team, however, may still benefit from replay (which I don't get what he meant, and he didn't cite an example).

11/23/121:45 AM

BrainDedMember

Stupid rule.. Couldnt have happened to a biiger douche. How does he not know the rule when it came into play LAST WEEK!?!?

11/23/122:03 AM

justanotherpackerfanMember

Didn't McCarthy do the same thing with a turnover earlier in the season (or preseason)?

11/23/125:29 AM

Green CrustaceanCrabby Member

Say what you want, Schwartz has done a nice job of changing the focus of conversation from Suh kicking Schaub in the Jimmies to his inability to control himself.

11/23/126:18 AM

FreeSafetyI wonder what the poor people are doing?

quote:
Originally posted by justanotherpackerfan:
Didn't McCarthy do the same thing with a turnover earlier in the season (or preseason)?

Yes

11/23/127:46 AM

"We"-Ka-BongYou ungrateful biscuit eating son of a bitch

Dum rule. The focus should be on getting the call right.

11/23/127:56 AM

18c3vMember

quote:
Originally posted by PackLandVA:
The other team, however, may still benefit from replay (which I don't get what he meant, and he didn't cite an example).

It means the Texans can't throw a red flag with the intent of preventing the play from being reviewed.

11/23/128:03 AM

GoallineLarge Antenna

quote:
Originally posted by cuqui:
After the game he said he knew the rule. Just lost control of himself.

Go figure.

11/23/128:26 AM

BorisPerson Man Camera Dildo Shop - NFLFU®

This is why I still say...NFL F U!

They are less concerned with getting the call right it seems.

What actually happens on the field doesn't seem to matter anymore. They will call it as they see fit or as it fits their agenda.

I'm no Lions fan but that was the 2nd worst call this season. The runner was down, elbow & knee....period end of play.

They gave Houston a TD they didn't earn on the field. How can anyone bet on these games anymore? We're watching the NBA with Tim Donaghy refereeing. It's disgusting

11/23/128:32 AM

The GBP RulesMember

I've also noticed several times where a play should have been reviewed but because it was a scoring play and got the mysterious "confirmation from the booth" the ref on the field didn't get a chance to review the play.

Sure, Schwartz is an idiot. But that doesn't make this rule right. If you want to give a team a delay of game penalty it's fine but to also take away a review of the play is ridiculous.

11/23/128:57 AM

YooperPackfanMember

quote:
Originally posted by Green Crustacean:
Say what you want, Schwartz has done a nice job of changing the focus of conversation from Suh kicking Schaub in the Jimmies to his inability to control himself.

11/23/129:14 AM

GoallineLarge Antenna

quote:
Originally posted by The GBP Rules:
I've also noticed several times where a play should have been reviewed but because it was a scoring play and got the mysterious "confirmation from the booth" the ref on the field didn't get a chance to review the play.

Aren't all scoring plays and turnovers reviewed in the booth? I could be wrong, but I thought that was the new rule.

11/23/129:32 AM

FountainfoxMember

quote:
"The decision to review all scoring plays is a relatively new one, and the challenge flag rule may be relatively unknown, but here's why this is on Schwartz: Last Sunday, in the Atlanta Falcons' 23-19 win against the Arizona Cardinals, Falcons head coach Mike Smith tried to challenge a fumble recovery made by two Cardinals on an amazing play in which cornerback Greg Toler flipped the ball back inbounds to safety Rashad Johnson after running back Jason Snelling coughed it up. Because turnovers are also automatically reviewed, Smith's challenge voided that automatic challenge, and everybody in the NFL was reminded to avoid trying to stir up trouble with plays that are taken care of up in the booth."

I don't see how throwing a flag to ask for a challenge that you would receive as a matter of course if you hadn't thrown the flag is "stirring up trouble." Seems to me that any "trouble" resulting from a play comes from either the call or the review, not the request, which is all the flag-throw is. Calling it a delay of game is also something of a stretch because the clock stops anyway on a score or turnover. If you asked one of the refs for the keys to his car he'd say no and that'd be that. Telling a guy to pick up his flag isn't much different.

11/23/129:58 AM

TimthePackerFanMember

quote:
Originally posted by Fountainfox:
I don't see how throwing a flag to ask for a challenge that you would receive as a matter of course if you hadn't thrown the flag is "stirring up trouble."

It Schwartz, when isn't he stirring up trouble. He's probably the reason they wrote the rule.

11/23/1210:27 AM

FandameMember

Schwartz is an idot. You would think another coach upstairs or someone would have been in Schwartz's ear telling him that it would be reviewed automatically. I can see a head coach about to lose it, but then another coach has to have the cajones to step up and clue him in. It seems to me that I've heard MM talk about tossing the flag despite other coaches telling him not to, but at least he heard a message from someone upstairs.

Schwartz's team is a reflection of him: undisciplined, hotheaded, over-the-top emotional, and losers to boot.

11/23/1210:41 AM

PackLandVAMember

quote:
Originally posted by Fandame:
You would think another coach upstairs or someone would have been in Schwartz's ear telling him that it would be reviewed automatically.

I believe Schwartz said he grab the flag while the play was still going on and then threw it immediately. My guess is he threw it before any coach had a thought/opportunity to tell him not to.

11/23/1210:45 AM

PakrzFREEZE!

quote:
Originally posted by Goalline:
quote:
Originally posted by The GBP Rules:
I've also noticed several times where a play should have been reviewed but because it was a scoring play and got the mysterious "confirmation from the booth" the ref on the field didn't get a chance to review the play.

Aren't all scoring plays and turnovers reviewed in the booth? I could be wrong, but I thought that was the new rule.

I thought the same thing... but apparently, if the coach throws the red challenge flag on a play that is automatically reviewed anyhow, the penalty is the automatic review is cancelled and they assess a 15 yard penalty on the kickoff.

Makes sense.

11/23/1210:47 AM

GoallineLarge Antenna

quote:
Originally posted by Fountainfox:
I don't see how throwing a flag to ask for a challenge that you would receive as a matter of course if you hadn't thrown the flag is "stirring up trouble."

The NFl is as sensitive as Cutler's vagina.

11/23/1210:57 AM

CUPackFanMember

The application of this rule was likely never contemplated by the NFL. The rule makes sense, that a team cannot delay the next play in order to benefit from a challenge. If they could, a coach would gladly take a 5 yard penalty to give them more time to look into a possible challenge. Problem is, challenging an unchallengeable play and the automatic review of scoring plays all become rules at different times (I think). So the NFL probably never thought about this situation.

My guess is now that it happened twice this season, the rule will be changed.

11/23/1210:59 AM

PackLandVAMember

I wonder if the NFL just figured no coach would be dumb enough to throw the flag, given that the play will be reviewed and also because the penalty is so severe. But then two coaches throw the flag in 5 days. DOH!

11/23/1211:04 AM

TimthePackerFanMember

If the Texans threw the flag so it couldn't be reviewed the rule makes a lot of sense then Schwartz could still have it reviewed. Scwhartz is just a totally idot.

11/23/1211:25 AM

mazrimivOh YEAHH!!

The part that is tough for me to understand is why the language for eliminating the automatic booth review was even put in place. The rule was supposedly created to prevent teams from throwing flags on non-reviewable plays. That's fine, and actually made a certain amount of sense... right up to the point where they made all turnovers and scoring plays non-reviewable. When the rule was directed toward non-reviewable plays, the implication was that we were talking about requesting a review on something that never could have be reviewed anyway. Now that we're talking about plays that are ALWAYS supposed to be reviewed, the entire intent of the rule is being subverted. By cancelling the auto-review process, the league is almost inviting blatantly incorrect calls to stand on some of the most important plays of the game. It makes no sense. Go ahead and access the 15 yard penalty, and IMO they should also take one challenge away from the offender as if it were a "failed" challenge. However, there is no logical reason to cancel the automatic booth review.

11/23/1211:26 AM

PackLandVAMember

I wonder what would've happened if Schwartz said he was not challenging the ruling on the field concerning the scoring play, but rather that there was 12 men on the field, for instance. Obviously, there wasn't 12 men on the field, but he would essentially NOT be challenging the scoring play.

Don't know if he's even quick-witted enough to think of that. Wait a minute...I DO KNOW he's not quick-witted enough to think of that.

11/23/1211:37 AM

Skip to main content

Add Reply

Membership Required

Remove From Your Block List

Manage Follow Preferences

Block

Please wait...