February 07, 2006
Was Darrell Jackson Was In Bounds When He Hit The Pylon?
Thanks to Jim Henley and Balloon Juice for pointing out the rule that answers the question I asked Sunday about the Darrell Jackson reception that was ruled out of bounds despite the fact that he had one foot in bounds and the other hit the end zone pylon. Here's the rule in question:
A player will be ruled in bounds if he touches the pylon at the goal line before going out of bounds. For example, a pass would be considered complete if one foot touches the pylon and the other foot is in bounds.
And that's exactly what the world saw on Sunday. The NFL owes the Seahawks franchise an apology. And they owe the fans an apology too.
UPDATE: Below in the comments, two of my readers say that I've got the sequence of events wrong. I just remember Off Wing reader Dave Smith openly question why Jackson wasn't in bounds when he hit the pylon, and I also remember a pregnant pause in the ABC booth when the reception was replayed, as if Madden and Michaels were reluctant to say something.
We need video review. Anybody got a link?
UPDATE: The NFL is sticking up for its refs, but Seattle head coach Mike Holmgren is hearing nothing of it.
And here's a commenter at Jim Henley's place with a different, and credible, interpretation:
The rule used to be that the pylon was considered out of bounds, so if you got one foot in, hit the pylon with that leg, you’d be out of bounds, even if you got the other foot in. The rule was changed so that the pylon is essentially nothing - i.e. hitting the pylon has no effect on the in-bounds/out-of-bounds determination. Which means, one foot in, other foot hits the pylon, other foot lands out of bounds = no catch.
Now, the NFL doesn’t release their rulebook to the public, so it’s possible that this is an incorrect interpretation. But if the ”pylon equals get-in-bounds-free card” interpretation is correct, this is a qualitatively different bad call. It’s not ”that was technically a penalty, but no one ever calls it”, and it’s not ”the ref made the right call, but there’s no way he could have seen it, so he should have made the wrong call”, it’s a ”clearly contrary to the facts, NFL calls you up and tells you that it’s sorry” call. Holmgren, or at the very least some high-profile player on the Seahawks, would be SCREAMING about it.
Having to choose between the prospect of the Seahawks not screaming about the one indisputably wrong call that hosed them more than anything else while simultaneously bitching about close matters of judgement, or John Clayton subtly getting the description of a rule incorrect such that the call was actually indisputably right, the latter sounds WAY more probable.
Interesting. Still, I'd like to hear an exact interpretation from somebody familiar with the rules, like a retired ref.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.ericmcerlain.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5715
I may be misremembering, but I thought Jackson hit the pylon with the same foot that had landed in bounds (his left), while his right foot neither hit the pylon nor landed in bounds. In other words, even with the pylon rule, he didn't get both feet in.
But again, it's possible I'm misremembering. I'll have to check my recording later.
Posted by:
at February 7, 2006 11:00 AM
I remember it the same way Jeff does. Left foot in, right foot out, left foot hit the pylon. I can't find video of it online, though.
Posted by:
at February 7, 2006 11:58 AM
Left foot in, right foot hit the pylon before it hit out of bounds. After that play, the camera showed Hasselbeck turning to the ref and mouthing the words "what's going on?"
I was asking myself the exact same thing as the game unfolded.
No video, but a thousand words are at the url.
Posted by:
at February 7, 2006 02:17 PM
Having watched it a few times on TIVO, he makes the catch and his left foot is in bounds.
His right foot hits the pylon but just barely. he get's it with the tip of his foot but he definately does get it. That right foot then lands out of bounds and the left foot knocks over the pylon, which is already moving from his right foot.
If the rule is indeed that he needs one foot in bounds and one foot to hit the pylon, then chalk it up to another screw job in this game.
Posted by:
at February 7, 2006 06:53 PM
I've just gone back over the play several times, and on careful viewing I see what amonusko describes: after Jackson's left foot comes down in bounds, Jackson's right leg clearly does brush the pylon, moving it perceptibly, before his right foot comes down out of bounds. Jackson's left leg then hits the pylon squarely.
On the other hand, I find the commenter at Jim Henley's site persuasive. I've heard a lot of screaming yesterday and today about the quality of the officiating, but very little mention of this particular play. I'm inclined at the moment to think that John Clayton misdescribed the rule in the linked ESPN piece.
Posted by:
at February 7, 2006 10:37 PM
Via a link provided by John Cole in a comment at Henley's site, it looks like Clayton did in fact misdescribe the rule. The play was properly called (scroll down to February 7).
Posted by:
at February 8, 2006 07:07 AM
The Seahawks and their fans are grasping at straws here. No matter what, never leave the game up to the officials. Every team gets screwed at some point. There are holding penalties on practically every play. Could you imagine if they called them all? The officials do the best they can and they are definitely not perfect.
Everyone forgets that the Seahawks missed two FGs. If Brown makes them, the game is much closer. Also, how about not letting Parker run 75 yards for a touch? How about the Hasselback INT leading to a Pitt TD?
It is easy blame the officials when you lose. The only reason this is a story is because it is the Super Bowl. If this was a Week 6 matchup, it is barely a blip on the radar screen.
Posted by:
at February 8, 2006 01:19 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in,
.
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
07:55 AM
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.ericmcerlain.com/offwingopinion/nav-commenters.gif)