Redskins at Raiders: Whistle Blowers

Washington Redskins (3-9) vs. Oakland Raiders (4-8)
4:05 p.m. Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum
Woo-wee. The Redskins invent yet another way to lose. See, some teams can just go out there and stink every weekend. They’ll get down early, keep it somewhat close in the middle, then let the other team put them away by 10 to 17 points. Not the Redskins. They like to top themselves every season in the painful loss department.

Now, as poorly as the Redskins played down the stretch, the Saints got a boost from the NFL. I’m not necessarily blaming the refs (although every reviewed play, and there were a whole bunch in that game, went against the Skins…conspiracy theorists unite), but a league rule. Mike Sellers’ “fumble” in overtime was really the last nail in the coffin for the Skins, but it shouldn’t have been.

Before last season, the NFL’s rule on reviewing fumbles was simple. If the referee blew the whistle, even if the runner fumbled, the play could not be reviewed. There were certainly many instances where the runner fumbled the ball and the refs made a mistake. But it didn’t matter if he fumbled. It didn’t matter if the defense would have recovered the ball. The play was over, the ball remained with the team in position. The rule was black and white.

In 2007, the NFL changed the rule. Fumbles on plays that were blown dead were now allowed to be reviewed. The defense could be awarded the ball even if the whistle had blown before the recovery. The only caveat to the rule is that it must be obvious that had play continued, the defense would have recovered the fumble anyway. Now all of a sudden, a rule that was pretty much black and white, was changed into several shades of gray.

Fast forward to last Sunday. Mike Sellers has the ball, is hit by Chris McAlister and appears to fumble the ball on the way back to the ground. Now looking at the replay, I thought it was pretty obvious that Sellers’ elbow had hit the ground, causing the ball to come out. As we all know, the ground cannot cause a fumble. But for the sake of argument, let’s say that Sellers did indeed fumble the ball in mid-air. Both he and McAlister land on the ground next to each other, as does Saints linebacker Troy Evans. Evans and Sellers lunge after the ball. They both get to the ball at about the same time, pushing the ball a few yards further backwards. Then the side judge blows his whistle, charges towards both players, and points to the ground, marking the play dead. Both Sellers and Evans stop. At that point, both players were closer to the ball than anyone else on the field. During all this, McAlister gets up and was about to walk off the field. But he sees both players fighting for the ball, he sees the ball squirt free, and he runs over to pick it up well after the whistle had blown and the other two players had stopped playing.

The referees now had a decision to make. After they determined that Sellers did indeed fumble, they then had to determine who should get possession. Again, looking at the replay, it appears that both Sellers and Evans initially lunged after the ball, only to stop when they heard the whistle. Who is to say that Sellers wouldn’t have recovered the ball had the whistle not been blown? For that matter, what is the point of having whistles? If the play technically isn’t over when the whistle is blown, what’s the point of having whistles at all?

Players are trained their entire career to play until they hear the whistle. But once they hear the whistle they are supposed to stop playing. Otherwise they can be flagged with unsportsmanlike conducts and other personal fouls. They’ve been trained to do that since they were in pee-wee football. All of a sudden, the NFL changes that rule, and the referees are supposed to determine what would have happened if the whistle theoretically hadn’t been blown. How are they supposed to do that? Sports should not be based on what would have happened had something else not happened first. The whistle was blown. The play should end. Period. Once the whistle blows, the majority of players on the field will stop playing.

I understand the rule was implemented years ago to save the butts of the refs when they missed an obvious call. A lot of times when the ball is fumbled, it disappears in a pile, and the players chase after it anyway (despite the whistle). But the rule change also allows, and almost forces, the refs to change the call that was made Sunday. The ball was not fumbled in a pile in between the hashmarks. The ball was fumbled in the open field, with only three players around. Even McAlister, who recovered the ball cleanly, made no effort to run towards the endzone. He picked the ball up as an afterthought. Had he thought the play was really still ongoing, he would have at least attempted to score. In fact, after the play was “over”, McAlister threw the ball at the referee who was in the field of play. Since the play was technically still going, the ball should have still been live and another player could have picked it up. The play should still be ongoing theoretically. This is a dumb rule, and I said as much last year when it cost the Chiefs a win.

This is not a case of sour grapes. Kareem Moore shouldn’t have fumbled the ball after the made the interception. Shaun Suisham (may his career rest in peace) should have made what was essentially a chip shot field goal to put the game out of reach. Laron Landry shouldn’t have been burned twice on obvious double moves. Sellers shouldn’t have lost the ball to begin with. For that matter, Sellers shouldn’t be on the team. Of all the mistakes the Redskins have made this season, giving Sellers a raise and an extension was the worst. They gave him an extension after Week 2 against the Rams because he’d been bitching about his salary for years. The next week against the Lions, he missed two key blocks that were the difference in the game. He has completely quit on this team since his raise. I knew that’s exactly what would happen. He’s an average player and a scumbag of a human (remember, this was a guy who was forced out of the league at the beginning of the decade because he was caught trying to deal drugs…a charge he still won’t admit to even after overwhelming evidence and a conviction). And even if the Redskins somehow went on and won the game, it wouldn’t have mattered all that much in the grand scheme of things. They’d be 4-8 instead of 3-9. The Saints would be 11-1 instead of 12-0. They’d still be in first place in the conference and in control of their own destiny. I’m just very frustrated with that rule and the fact it played a role in giving the Redskins a loss they probably didn’t deserve.

Now, I’m already sort of out the door on my vacation. The girlfriend is a 49ers fan, so we decided awhile ago to go out to the Bay Area this weekend since the Skins are in Oakland and the 49ers play at home Monday Night. Unfortunately, three of the four teams we’ll be seeing are pretty bad right now. It also means I’m going to condense the picks and the Redskins preview into one post. It’s unfortunate because I had a lot of good stuff on Dallas losing another December game and Joe Flacco looking like a FCS quarterback (I know several Ravens fans who had Flacco ranked ahead of Brady and Brees in the quarterback pantheon earlier this season. I kid you not). I guess all that will have to be saved for next week.

Despite being the whipping boy for the national sports media, the Oakland Raiders have put together some decent wins this season. They are 4-8 already, and could potentially win two of their final four games of the year. Futhermore, three of their wins came against the Eagles, Bengals and Steelers. That’s a better resume than many teams over .500. I know they’ve had some absolutely dreadful games (like their loss to the Giants, after which several New York players said they had played against better teams in college). But they are showing signs of life. Correct me if I’m wrong, but Bruce Gradkowski looks like an actual quarterback. He’s clearly much better than JaMarcus Russell, and the Raiders have been much better since Gradkowski started taking snaps. They have several talented running backs even though Darren McFadden hasn’t lived up to the hype yet. Darrius Heyward-Bey has been a bust (shocker), but Louis Murphy has been a pleasant surprise. Even when they were playing terribly earlier in the season, and the offense kept turning the ball over in their own territory, the defense has played well. Oakland gets after the quarterback. They force a lot of turnovers themselves. For my money, Nnamdi Asomugha is the best cornerback in the NFL right now. There appears to be signs that the Raiders are pulling themselves out of a six-year tailspin.

The Silver and Black and the Redskins have similar problems. Both are being held hostage by an owner who doesn’t quite know what he’s doing. While Dan Snyder’s mistakes come from not surrounding himself with the best people, Al Davis’ mistakes come from his instance that he still runs the team despite going through senility. The good news for Raiders fans is that they probably won’t have to wait too much longer before Al kicks the bucket. There are still obvious deficiencies on this team. Head coach Tom Cable is too busy abusing women and assistants to focus on teaching his young players. The offensive line is still a mess. The Raiders continue to be one of the most penalized teams in the NFL (although as we saw last Monday night, they aren’t #1 or even #2 anymore). But there are pieces in Oakland. The right moves in the draft and free agency could make this team a competitor. It probably won’t happen with Al Davis alive, but Oakland is no longer a guaranteed win and the franchise is no longer a loss cause.

Despite the records of the two teams, this actually figures to be a good game. They have both played relatively well the last couple of weeks. A good portion of the players on the field for both teams will be fighting for future jobs. So the effort should be there as well. Even with all the injuries, the Redskins are better than the Raiders on paper. Then again, they’ve been better than several teams that they’ve already lost to.


NFL picks time. I was 11-4 last week overall and 8-6-1 against the spread. Picks are below without many comments. Home teams are in bold. Season records look like this:

Overall: 125-55 (69%)
Vs Spread: 100-76-4

Thursday
Steelers (6-6)(-10) over Browns (1-11)

Sunday
Colts (12-0)(-7) over Broncos (8-4)
Vikings (10-2)(-7) over Bengals (9-3), Bengals cover
Jets (6-6)(-3) over Buccaneers (1-11)
Bills (4-8)(-1) over Chiefs (3-9)
Bears (5-7) over Packers (8-4)(-3.5)
Saints (12-0)(-10) over Falcons (6-6)
Ravens (6-6)(-13) over Lions (2-10)
Jaguars (7-5)(-2.5) over Dolphins (6-6)
Patriots (7-5)(-13) over Panthers (5-7)
Texans (5-7)(-6) over Seahawks (5-7)
Titans (5-7)(-12) over Rams (1-11)
Chargers (9-3) over Cowboys (8-4)(-3)
Giants (7-5)(-1) over Eagles (8-4)

Monday
Cardinals (8-4)(-3.5) over 49ers (5-7)