Ref’s mistake kept Raiders from running last play vs. Chargers Posted by Michael David Smith on September 11, 2012, 12:36 PM EDT Getty ImagesThe NFL has acknowledged that a mistake by the replacement officials prevented the Raiders from running one last play at the end of their 22-14 loss to the Chargers. The game ended with a Chargers punt that took the final few seconds off the clock. The Raiders rushed all 11 players in an attempt to block the punt and didn’t have anyone back to return it, so the Chargers downed it and both teams walked off the field. But the rules say that when the game ends on a punt, and the punting team is the first to touch the ball, the receiving team has the opportunity to run one more untimed play. NFL V.P. of Officiating Carl Johnson confirmed to Jason Cole of Yahoothat the Raiders should have been given another play. The Chargers downed the ball at the 5-yard line, so the Raiders would have had to score a 95-yard touchdown on that final play, then make a two-point conversion just to send the game into overtime. So it’s extremely unlikely that the mistake affected the outcome of the game. But it was a rule that the replacement officials didn’t know, and that’s a problem. Also a problem is that neither the Chargers nor the Raiders seemed to know the rule: If the Chargers had known it they presumably wouldn’t have touched the punt, and if the Raiders had known it they presumably would have alerted the officials instead of just walking off the field. It’s also worth noting that Chargers coach Norv Turner made a clock management mistake just before that punt. When the Chargers recovered an onside kick with 54 seconds left and the Raiders down to two timeouts, all Turner had to do was run three plays on which Philip Rivers takes the snap, scrambles around behind the line of scrimmage for a few seconds and then kneels down, and the Chargers would have run out the clock without needing to punt. Instead Turner called for two handoffs — risking a fumble — before finally having Rivers kneel on third down, when there was too much time left to run the clock all the way down to zero. So Turner’s clock management error set the stage for the officials to make a clock management error of their own. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...t-raiders-from-running-last-play-vs-chargers/
I had had a few too many adult beverages by that time, so I didn't know the EXACT right thing to do, but I could tell we weren't handling it right. At the time, I thought we should have had rivers take a shotgun snap on 4th down and just heave a long pass out of bounds.
No, it's only a "mistake" if you want it to be. All are agreed that 3 Rivers kneel-downs would not completely run out the clock. Mr. Smith claims it's an "error" because he prefers that the Chargers' most essential player --Rivers--be running around, with the ball, with a team of guys trying to hit him hard and dislodge the ball, instead of a running back. Just because Smith knows less football than Turner, doesn't make Norv's choice a "mistake."
It has to be a "mistake", Lance. Otherwise we could settle back & enjoy the win against a divisional opponent, rationally discuss where the team needs to improve, & look forward to Sunday's meeting against the Titans. But where would the enjoyment in that leave us? Feeling only partially fulfilled in our need to thoroughly dissect decisions that quite likely few if any of us here are qualified to make? C'mon - you know better. There's quite a few posters here who could develop, coach, & lead a team to the prize that only 1 in 32 achieve each year. Now quiet down & let the omniscient ones run this show.
That does seem to be an obscure rule that is seldom ever needed, ill admit my ingnorance of it and I wouldn't be surprised if a good percentage of players and staff aren't aware of it either. The last set of plays did seem to work out odd, with the rb taking a.couple or rivers scrambling in the pocket there is a risk for last minute fumbles or a sack or any number of other unknowables to go wrong. I cant really give norv to much crap about that situation, I'm sure there could have been a more solid way to handle it, but what he did worked out and we won. The raiders staff didn't know anything about that last play rule either and if they had gotten thier play its extremely inconceivable that'd they could have made that 95 yard run with a 2pt conversion....
I was surprised that following the handoff the RB didn't just run around back there for 5 seconds per handoff. The idea of Rivers scrambling back there is just absurd, though. Also, it's somewhat absurd to assume that any play involving a handoff, turning around, and running like a silly person away from the LOS/in circles would be any less likely to result in a fumble than a rush into the A gap. Interesting about the rule though.
Interesting. Seems like the Chargers coaches knew the rule. I wonder if the Raiders coaches did? They clearly did not know about the importance of having a backup long snapper, since several postgame comments made by players suggest that the guy doing the "snapping" in the 2nd half and not worked at it in practice or training camp. This contrasts with an article at the UT last week that talked about Melvin Ingram spending several minutes after practice everyday working on his emergency long-snapping duties.
Sometimes Norv's screw-ups aren't what you'd call "observable." Sometimes flogging the narrative requires a bit of creative license...
People keep saying they should have had Rivers run around and chuck the ball after the clock ran out, but that's a dumb plan. You're risking a sack/fumble as he runs around. Keep in mind, he'd have to run out of the pocket, otherwise he'd be forced to throw the ball near a receiver (risking an INT/pick-6) so as not to get flagged for intentional grounding. (The game can't end on a penalty, and if the scrub refs missed that one it'd be more flagrant with the would-be field position). The best course of action would have been to have Rivers (or Whitehurst???) take the snap and run back for the Safety, just like the Saints did to us in a similar situation in London. Unless there's a rule where the game can't end without the ensuing safety punt/kick? (Honestly don't know).
It can't end on a defensive penalty unless declined. This punt deal I had never heard of or don't remember if it ever happened before.
it's because when the Raiders were punted the ball we became the defense, and by touching the ball first, that constitutes a "defensive" foul.
Why was it a penalty anyway? Because a Charger touched the ball first? Doesn't that happen all the time when they pin a punt at the endzone?
It's not a penalty, just that the game can't end with the punting team downing the ball, unless the refs don't know the rules.
Change of possession and the Dud's never touched it on the punt (not a live ball as in a place kick) but if I were Norv I wouldn't have said anything either.
