And now, the ballad of the the NFL ref strike, as performed by the replacement refs at the Seahawks-Packers game

Storytime: Last night, during Monday Night Football's presentation of the Seattle Seahawks versus the Green Bay Packers, an insane thing happened that illustrated exactly why the NFL's referee strike is a very bad thing for the game (as great as it is for ratings). In the last seconds of the game, Seattle quarterback Russell Wilson threw a 24-yard Hail Mary to the end zone, where Green Bay safety M.D. Jennings caught the football half a second before Seattle receiver Golden Tate got his own hands on it -- after Jennings pulled the ball into his chest, establishing possession (aka "MINE!"). What you see pictured is a screenshot of one referee signaling a touchdown for Seattle. The other referee is signaling an interception by Green Bay, meaning the touchdown didn't happen. As a result, the Seattle Seahawks beat the Green Bay Packers, 14-12 -- the Green Bay Packers. After the jump, the insane play, followed by the incredibly bad call. Packers fans (including my Uncle Bobby): my deepest condolences.

Here is the video of the play, followed by another angle (video link):

And a different view (video link):

I'm not saying that professional referees are immune to making bad calls. It totally happens. But this? This is what you might call "a doozy," and since we all know the people officiating the game are non-professional replacements, it makes them look like farcical baby dumb-dumbs who don't understand the rules they are tasked with enforcing (or, as they're more commonly being called, displaced Foot Locker employees) while the real refs sit back and laugh and wait for NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to get over himself and pony up. Because it didn't end there -- the call was reviewed for almost ten minutes, at which point, another replacement official said that the touchdown call from the field will stand, and everyone had to come back on the field for the extra point. Meanwhile, Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll thought it would be totally cool to conduct a post-game interview before the actual end of the game, but this morning said that yeah, maybe the real refs should be brought back. You know, after they hand him the game. Either he feels guilty about his dubious win, or he has brought new meaning to the phrase "Monday/Tuesday morning quarterback."

ESPN has a more detailed rundown (in the video) of how bad this call really was, and how it ranks among the NFL's worst calls ever. (Hint: It's up there.) But Bill Plaschke at the LA Times has put it in a pretty neat nutshell:

Want to know my favorite statistic of Week 3 before Monday? Sixteen of 20 coach's challenges resulted in overturned calls, meaning officials made the wrong decision on 80% of some of the biggest plays. Think about that.
Want to know my second-favorite statistic? When you crunch the numbers, if the NFL gave the locked-out referees everything they wanted, it would cost about $100,000 extra per team per season. That equals about four games' pay for one of a team's lowest-paid players. The owners are watching their sport burn because they won't improve the officials' compensation by about one-fourth the amount they would pay a backup guard? Think about that.
OK, real quick, I've got a third-favorite statistic from last weekend. There were 13 penalty first downs in the game between the Patriots and the Ravens, which is only the most in the history of the NFL.

Yeah -- time to pony up.

Seahawks Defeat Packers, 14-12: Disputed Replacement Referees' Call Results In Golden Tate TD [Huffington Post]

$150M-$250M in MNF bets shifted [ESPN]


  1. Also, the right call was that the touchdown didn’t happen. The refs eventually decided that a TD DID happen, thus giving the Seahawks the points they needed to win.

    The TD is the bad call, and the call stuck. It’s unclear in your article which is the bad call and which isn’t.

    In addition, it wasn’t Pete Carroll’s fault that he was doing interviews, the idiot refs called the game over and forgot about the extra points.

    Worth updating these things.

    1. What that angle makes clear, and what is important is that Golden Tate, the Seahawks receiver, CLEARLY doesn’t have possession, as his arm flails out and he desperately tries to grab the ball out of Jennings’s grip. So the call is EITHER an interception or an incomplete. So whether Jennings had possession or not is moot – there is no scenario in which Tate has possession that makes sense with the video. Either way Packers should have won.

      1. That isn’t so clear to me.  It looks like he had his arms wrapped around the ball in the same manner as Jennings when he hit the ground, which would make it simultaneous possession, and mean they get the TD.

          1. Well, I don’t know anything about NFL nor the cities playing, thus I think i’m pretty fair, and what I see in this gif is the ball landed on the blue guy’s hand while the yellow one put his hand on it, then they fight for it as they fell down. Not sure if the yellow guy would have grabbed the ball if the blue guy’s hand was not there.
            Anyway, the big mistake in there is that you call that game football, as it should be called soccer (or anything else but football).

        1. Focusing on one blown call misses the point. The proper refs blow calls sometimes — what happened in this game, and most of the other games so far this season, is bad calls from start to end. WIth one blown call you can say, okay, if it had gone the other way the outcome would have been such-and-such. With the current situation, you literally have no idea what the game would have been like if it had been called even 90% properly.

      2. How could it be incomplete – the ball never touches the ground.

        The issue, I believe, is whether Jennings has possession before Tate, or whether they get possession simultaneously. Tate doesn’t need to get it first, because tie goes to the receiver. So Tate doesn’t have to have possession in this clip we see – he could get it afterwards, simultaneously with Jennings. From this clip, I can see how the ruling on the field would stand (there’s too much doubt about whether Jennings getting possession *before* Tate, which would be required to overturn it).
        I can’t believe we’re talking about this on boingboing.

        1. The rule states that if the defender possesses the ball first and the receiver grabs it after, it’s not simultaneous possession.  Jennings gets both hands on the ball immediately; Tate is barely touching it until they hit the ground.  Interception.

          The NFL rulebook Article 3, Item 5: 
          Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. 

          1. But, it doesn’t count as a catch for Jennings until he’s (1) gotten control, (2) hit the ground, and (3) keeps possession long enough for him to “make a football move”. Clearly, Tate might not have his hands on it initially, but he clearly has his hands on it by the time that ALL THREE of these things have happened. I think the NFL’s response is spot on – it was a catch:

        2. I can’t believe we’re talking about this on boingboing.

          It’s like trying to moderate a post on Sumerian adverbs. I have no idea what anyone is talking about.

    2. I’ve seen several replays from different angles. Its clear to me Jennings has caught the ball and Tate has Jennings ARM and is touching the ball after the catch. If just touching the ball mean simultaneous possession, it will make for an interesting change in strategy by the defenses of the NFL!

        1. That is just dripping with delicious irony.  Still, Walker can go fuck himself running.

          Full disclosure:  not a football fan, but they inject you with something when you’re born in Wisconsin that makes you a Packers fan.  For life.  No matter what.  So weird.

    1. re:  “union busting”

      That must be it.  I had been wondering why the NFL would lock out the refs when arguing over increased expenditures for the refs (rather than wanting to cut back on the status-quo like with the player contract), so I’d have thought that had there been no lockout, there’d be a chance they could continue play using the existing contract structure while a real deal was being negotiated..

  2. Terrible call.  The grasping, ungracious owners and the league High Command acting like wishy-washy dickwads is sadly no surprise.

    Labor is an expense to be whittled down at all costs and to hell with the consequences…

    Or as my friend put it last night: “This is Great!  Totally random penalties and blatant botched calls makes everything more exciting and mysterious.  Now football…is like boxing!”

    1.  “Now football…is like boxing!” Indeed: a former co-worker refused to place any wagers on any professional sports as long as Don King was still around.

  3. The scabs made an earlier bad pass interference call that extended a Packers drive that resulted in a GB TD. In my eyes, the bad calls evened themselves out.  Although, I’m from Chicago and wish more bad things would happen to Green Bay regularly.

    I do agree with the general thesis. The scab refs are consistently horrible.

    1. True, but they also made two more bad calls, a roughing the passer call that negated a Seahawk’s lost fumble and a defensive pass interference( that was clearly offensive pass interference) call against G.B. that extended the Seahawk’s game winning drive. The “Refs” handed the game to Seattle.

      Gotta be honest here. I haven’t ever been this entertained by football, I say keep em around a little longer.

  4. Do most boingboingers care about NFL games? I know I don’t. A google search shows previous mentions of “NFL” on boingboing were related to copyright, security abuses, etc., not games or league play or whatever.

    1.  You’d be hard-pressed to find a full day’s worth of posts here which “most” boingboingers all care about, and that diversity in interest is one this blog’s greatest strengths.  Lots of boingers do actually care about sports in general, and/or the NFL in particular, and lots of others occasionally find that sort of thing of interest.  I dunno about you, but I’m specifically here to learn of things I didn’t know of before, I suspect many  –maybe even most –others are, too.

      1. “You’d be hard-pressed to find a full day’s worth of posts here which “most” boingboingers all care about, ”

        While I’m sure that’s true, they’re in the same general areas, and boingboing nevertheless has a certain demographic. If we were listing characteristics of “happy mutants”–boingboing’s self-applied label–“watches the NFL” would not be among them. That is, boingboing is not and never has been an avenue for mainstream news like this. If you want that, you can go to, well, mainstream news. It’s bad enough that reddit has been flooded with this stuff.

          1. Sorry, what? I’m not a hipster. And even if I were it would have nothing to do with this. That’s a completely irrelevant thing to say.

            I consume lots of mainstream news, and I come to boingboing for stories you don’t see there.

            This type of sports news is simply not what boingboing has been for. I would point out the same disparity if I saw this story posted on, say, Ars Technica, or an article about Apple vs. Samsung  on ESPN.

    2.  I care about NFL football.  But beyond that, I think this situation is unique and interesting enough to be worthy of attention, even if it was for a sport I cared nothing about.

      What we have here is the number one sports league in the US, a multi-BILLION dollar industry, locking out its refs and bringing in non-professional refs from third tier colleges, high schools and “the lingerie league” to oversee the NFL games, to the detriment of the players, the fans, the teams, and the very reputation of the league itself.  And for what?  $3.3 million dollars in benefits for the refs.  Total.

      It’s just insanity.

      1. It’s not insanity, it’s Business Management 101.  The NFL has realized that you, the fan/consumer, are going to buy their product no matter what, so why should they spend more money to produce it than is necessary?

        If you’re still watching, then they’re right.

        1.  Well, Business Management 101 is rather short-sighted, then.  In the long term this will cost the NFL fans and popularity.  But more critically, it’s starting to look like the poorly run games are endangering player’s health: more on-field fights and roughing not being “handled” by the refs, illegal hits not getting called, etc.  The last few years, the NFL has been desperately trying to appear like it really cares about player health because it’s only a matter of time before there’s a class action suit by ex-players over concussions and other long-term negative impacts on their health.  Being too cheap to spend a relative pittance on the better refs to keep the game under control and protect the players will look really bad in court.

        2.  Watching has little to do with it. Not buying tickets maybe, but most fans are clueless on these issues. It’s really the players that should be taking action in solidarity. They have the most to lose, particularly from getting hurt by another player who knows the refs won’t catch some excessive hits etc.

          1. It is unfortunate, then, that the players signed a collective bargaining agreement just last year that prevents them from engaging in precisely this form of solidarity of labor action.

            What I believe all fans can do in lieu of not watching and not going to the games (which is still admittedly the best form of signalling to the owners) is to boycott the advertisers of the NFL and its broadcast partners.

            That action would have an immediate and powerful signalling effect, almost as strong as the boycott of the games themselves.

          2. Really, I hadn’t heard that. I have a hard time believing that tbh.

            So you’re suggesting that the players contract somehow forbids them from doing anything. Can you source that? I’d like to see it. Thanks.

        3. You got a point there, mappo.  I’m a native San Diegan, and there’s never been much of a percentage in being a pro-sports fan of any league in SD, at least not since the Sockers packed it in about sixteen years ago.  Our climate and lifestyle makes us the ultimate fair-weather fans: during those rare occasions when the Padres or Chargers make it to postseason play, we might pay halfhearted attention, but the rest of the time we’d rather go outside and play a pickup game ourselves.  

          Still, I consciously gave up on MLB during the 1994-95 strike and never looked back.  I haven’t purchased gas from an Exxon or Mobil station since the botched cleanup of the Exxon Valdez spill 23 years ago (not that my personal embargo has made any difference to the company).  I bailed on Facebook several privacy scandals ago, despite continuing familial pressure to get over myself and come back to FB.  And though I’ve never been an NFL fan, this story interests me enough to pipe up and mention that due to things like this, I never will become an NFL fan.  The Chargers often threaten to leave San Diego if they don’t get a new stadium.  I’d tell ’em to not let the door hit ’em where the Good Lord split ’em.

          I kinda like watching football, but the NFL has been too corrupt to interest me for decades.  The NCAA has befouled itself almost beyond redemption by now, too.  For all I know, even high school football is more tainted than I suspect.  But what can anyone do?  It’s easy for me to give up on the NFL; they never made any real money off me anyway.  What kind of scandal will it take before the NFL turns off a sufficient number of actual game-attending, memorabilia-purchasing, jersey-wearing, satellite-package-buying profitable fans to make a negative impact on their bottom line?

          We’re nowhere near that point, I bet.

        1. Well, I stated it above in that same post, right after that sentence.  TL;DR: vast megacorporate parsimony and arrogance, mainly to its own detriment, on a very public stage. 

          OK, that’s sadly not all that unique, but I think it is interesting/notable and certainly well within Boing Boing’s purview.

    3.  This isn’t just about football. Its a major event in American history, like the assassination of a president or a declaration of armed conflict/police action. I think this rises to the level of Boingboing coverage! A turning point in history. And yes, one can be a football fan and a boingboinger!

      1. “Its a major event in American history, like the assassination of a president or a declaration of armed conflict/police action.”
        Please tell me this is sarcasm. If not, I must retreat to seclusion and weep.

        1. Green Bay just lost a game due to a bad call. If the game was against the Lions, Bears, or Vikings, then the Wisconsin National Guard would be on the march. In fact this is why the Lions always play so bad — Wisconsin is just looking for the excuse to annex the Upper Peninsula.

        1. Thanks for pointing that out, I guess they ocassionally make punctuation errors as well. Feel better about yourself?

  5. It’s worth noting that there was an entire game leading up to that play and many other horrible calls. Claiming that this one call “gave the game away to seattle” or “cost the packers the victory” is moronic and short sighted.

    1. I watched that game and there were a lot of bad calls. However, none of them came under as much review and scrutiny as this one. None of them were so universally assigned one way by sportscasters/fans/players while the refs decided to go another.

      This isn’t the one and only mistake they’ve made. It’s the most egregious and the straw that broke the camel’s back. It would be moronic and short sighted to think that all bad calls are equal.

    2. Yeah, there were lots of bad calls in that game (and in many many other games), and all of those can contribute to one team winning or losing a game, but for those, you could always at least say that the other team had some amount of time afterwards to try to compensate and overcome the bad call.

      In this case, on this one critical final play of the game, the refs (1) failed to call the blatant offensive pass interference by Seahawks receiver Tate, then (2) screwed up the call on the interception, and then (3) screwed it up again on the replay review.  The refs had three chances to get it right and blew all three.  The Packers had no chance to compensate or overcome that.

      It was the refs and their the bad call (and non-call), and not the actual play on the field, that literally decided the winner of this game.

  6. Did you folks get permission from the NFL to include those clips?

    Because, as we are all warned by a stern voice during every game, “This telecast is copyrighted by the NFL for the private use of our audience. Any other use of this telecast or of any pictures, descriptions, or accounts of the game without the NFL’s consent, is prohibited.”


  7. As a life-long Packer fan (and long time BoingBoinger to boot) I find no enjoyment in watching a contest in which the rules are not those I (and millions like me) understand, and are liable to change from play to play.
    I am voting with my TV clicker and am turning off the NFL (including my beloved Packers) until the “real refs” are back. I’m reclaiming my Sundays!

    1. I smile when I think of the productivity our species could attain if Sundays were universally reclaimed from pro sports and churchin’.

      Then again, I spent last Sunday finishing Mass Effect 3, so what do I know.

  8. Hi –

    Sure, it is odd for American Football to be featured here on boingboing, but as some others have pointed out this is not really a football story, but yet another attempt by a group of large corporations (each NFL team is worth roughly a billion dollars or more) to further rollback what few benefits American workers might still have.  As far as costs, I think the NFL gets many billions a year in TV money, yet as I recall this issue with the officials is over roughly five _million_ a year, almost a rounding error in scope.

    Here is an article from today’s L.A. Times focusing on the corporate / economic angle of the dispute:,0,2570919.column

    – Tom, Redondo Beach, California

  9. One more thing:
    It doesn’t matter who caught the ball; the play should’ve been negated by the obvious offensive pass interference committed by Tate. Had that penalty been called (and the NFL today admitted it should’ve been: ), the game would’ve ended, and the completion/interception controversy would moot.

  10. Hey Green Bay, threaten not to show at the next game…  NFL will fold and end the lockout in about 20 minutes.  The refs pretty much just want a few pennies compared to what everyone else gets.

    Oh wait, you cant do that because money is more important than the game.

    Jeez, I guess we should all complain on the internet.

    1. Given that tickets have already been sold and the Owners have their money, I don’t think the Owners would give a damn.

      But boy, that would be a pretty amazing sight to see two hundred guys standing around an empty stadium playing for security and the guys that sell hot dogs…

    2. The real problem is that as stated up above, the players have already signed a collective bargaining agreement that includes a clause that prohibits them from striking in solidarity with the refs. In the movie industry we had similar clauses in our contracts when the writers struck.

      They may seem like inconsequential things when the contracts are negotiated and everyone is scared to lose their pension, but I guarantee if they weren’t there various industries could bring management to their knees in seconds. It’s a shrewd move by management – get them to concede what appears to be a minor clause in exchange for not fighting on perceived big things like health care and pay scales, profit later when the players are helpless to assist the refs.

  11. As a Seahawks fan, I’ll totally sympathize with GB fans on this one – I’d be pretty bummed if it went the other way. But I’ve got beef with the this post. Quite a few factual errors as pointed out above, but the tone is what gets me – like the suggestion that somehow it was more egregious because the ‘Hawks beat the almighty Packers. Or that these things never happen when the “real” refs are involved.

  12. It’s not exactly clear that it was a bad call. This angle shows both players holding the ball, but the Seattle player’s both feet are down, inbounds, while the Green Bay player is still in the air. For Jennings to be credited with an interception, I believe he’d have to have control of the ball and his feet inbounds. That makes a strong case for at least simultaneous possession, if not an outright reception, which would favor the offense. Also, the booth review was done by a full-time NFL employee, not a replacement ref. He had the power to reverse the call and did not. They did miss calling offensive pass interference, and that was a legitimate mistake, IMO, but PI was a *very* flexible concept throughout the game. That non-call was not review-able.

    1.  My understanding is that the booth official does not have the authority to challenge the refs, but can only decide very specific objective facts of the play, such as whether the player went down in bounds or not.

      1. Or who had possession? I’m no expert. While I’m a Hawks fan, I get no joy out of winning with an asterisk. It’s a shame the whole first half will be forgotten, when the Seattle defense was shoving Green Bay all over the effin field. That did give me joy. It’s the first season I’ve felt optimistic in a long time, so it’s no fun to see it marred.

        1. Also, I was with some people doing a thing, and we had the game on, muted. After the missed pass at 2:00, we *turned it off*. “Oh well, @#$! Hawks are back to normal.” Talked some more, packed up my stuff, went to my car, THEN heard the neighbors cheer. Turned on the radio and was all, “WTF?”

        2.  I’m not an expert either, I’m relying on SA’s Sports Argument Stadium thread.  The jist of the discussion was that the judgment call on the field was “dual possession”.  The only thing the booth could do in this situation was determine whether the ball was caught (i.e did it touch the ground for a split second before some one had possession), whether the catch happened in bounds, and whether any obscure rules affect the play as it was called.  Who had possession is in the purview of the field refs.

          1. Thank you. In that case, I shall cling to the photo above, choose to believe it was dual possession, and try to forget the pass interference.

      2. I’ve heard many fans and paid commentators making this (or a similar) point.
        My response has and will continue to be “so what?” 

        The NFL should simply change the rules of the game (even if it’s only during the lockout) so that the booth officials have the full authority to exercise judgment in support or in contradiction of the referee and other on-field officials.

        It’s only the NFL’s rulebook that prevents the booth official from doing so today, not some law or regulation, so it can easily and readily be changed (and then changed back once the lockout has concluded.)

  13. To be fair to Pete Carroll, at the end of the game he hadn’t seen the replay of the videos like we all had. The only thing he had to go one was refs calls and replay decision. Likewise, he like a lot of people probably didn’t realize the game wasn’t quite over yet.

    I’m surprised Green Bay actually came back out on the the field. That was a classy move, but I kind of wish they hadn’t in protest.

    1. Think of Henry’s uncalled handball against Ireland:  It’s like that but some officials can watch a replay of only the goal itself, not the handball that everyone else saw.

      That should give you a good idea.

    2. As I understand it, different countries sometimes have different “sports.” Whatever the details of the sports, they serve the same function in every country: to divide people into simulated tribes and give them proxies to fight each other in a way that avoids permanent damage. This is one of those, except the fairness of the conditions are in dispute, which affected the outcome of the battle. One tribe feels robbed of a rightful victory, while the other tribe wants to enjoy the victory, but will enjoy it less because the conditions were unreliable. The possible unfairness is the result of a labor dispute. (Surely that’s a familiar concept to a European fellow.) Ironically, some of the members of the defeated tribe have historically been aggressive in suppressing organized labor, and they now feel the need to publicly state support for organized labor in regards to their tribe’s defeat. I hope this helps clear it up.

      1. This theory presupposes that humans possesses an innate and inalienable blood lust that must be sublimated lest actual violence occur. Interesting. 

      2. Whatever the details of the sports, they serve the same function in every country: to divide people into simulated tribes and give them proxies to fight each other in a way that avoids permanent damage.

        It appears to be universal.

      3. Actually, Wisconsin has historically been *pro* Union.  Milwaukee–my town–had Socialist mayors for about half a century.  It’s only been lately with Mr Walker where that’s been reversed.  

  14. In the future, I think we will all remember where we were when “THE CALL” was made. And what junk food we were eating off our chest in the recliner. 

  15. Hats off to Seattle.  They’re a good team, and Wisconsinites like me should find no shame in a fair loss to them.  There was indeed the rest of the game, which was close the whole way.  But still. Dude.

    Also, what hasn’t been brought up is how seriously devoted we Wisconsinites are to the Packers.  They’re sort of our version of the Queen, if the Queen was also the Statue of Liberty, who was cradling the Baby Jesus.  Suicides in Wisconsin are positively correlated to Packers losses the previous week.  Basically, the Packers *are* Wisconsin.  This call was hardest for us here, because we are taking it super personally.

    1. In one way, this is better. At least this week, instead of Seattle and GB fans having to hate *each other*, we can share a common enemy!

    1.  Back in ’87, didn’t they bring in pro wrestlers as scab players? I can’t remember people’s reactions, other than Bloom County made fun of it.  That season was also the last time I bet on a football game; someone talked me into squares and I came out $20 wiser.

      1. I recall NFL players in pro wrestling here and there, but nothing vice versa for ’87…

        Of course, I recall a Fridge Perry GI Joe figure from that era as well, so I’m not sure what to believe anymore.

  16. The thing all these articles about how stupid the lockout is seem to ignore is that the major hangup in the negotiations between the NFL and the ref’s union is that the NFL wants to add more teams of referees so that they can remove the referees who perform poorly during the season.
    It’s not the money. Truly. It’s not the money. That should seem obvious.
    The irony here about poorly performing referees makes for a pretty interesting story but no one seems to want to talk about that, only the money. It’s especially noteworthy that Scott Walker is supporting the referees union given the parallels…

    That said, the NFL needs to just give it up and end the lockout already, this is just getting ridiculous. 

    1. Yep. Bad refs are bad and more accountability is needed. I hope the NHL (if they every play again) switch to the ref team system with regular performance assessment. The way it is now there is often indecision between the different refs on who is to call what because they don’t regularly work together.

  17. The greatest irony is that Boeing’s SPEEA (new hire) engineers are being offered the same kind of 401K pension package as the NFL referees. After the Great Recession?  Yeah, let’s throw the newbie engineers and NFL referees under the bus!  ‘Effin’ scabs! 

    And why are the NFL players crossing the picket line?  ‘Effin’ scabs!  The only redemption might be to prove the case for why NFL owners, Boeing, and scabs are all dumb beeves.

  18. Here is the problem, the average fan does not know the rules.  The pass is completed, as you know because of the change made to the reception rule because of Calvin Johnson, stay with me here, that states, THE RECEPTION IS NOT FINISHED UNTIL THE PLAYER HITS THE GROUND AND MAINTAINS POSSESSION.  tHINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MINUTE.  Who cares if Jennings had it in the air, when they hit the ground and shortly there after, who had possession?  They both did.  This is one reason why from DAY 1 of football instructions they tell you to knock it down, Jennings went for the interception and got burned, bet he knocks it down nexttime

  19. That “Sixteen of twenty challenges were reversed” is VERY misleading – coaches won’t challenge a call unless they think it is likely to be reversed.

Comments are closed.