Francois penalty - poor coaching

[Patler]

He just needed to be about a foot back and he would have been fine. Not that he had a chance to block the kick, but why even line up there in the first place?

THe picture shows he was already six inches (minimum) behind the limit. They made that call over a timeout and there's no excuse for not getting it right. If the rule is a yard and he's a yard and an inch, they have no right to bring in a rare call.

I don't see how that picture shows him to be lined up legally, if no part of his body can be within a yard and a half of the LOS. It looks like he is about a yard off, to me.

According to the article, the rule is a yard, not a yard and a half. It was another subjective game changing call. If we had our full squad, calls like that wouldn't matter and if they did, we would probably be in a position where we deserved to lose. With a decayed roster, those calls matter, and if its not clear, dont call it.

The thing about the picture is that Francois looks to be moving forward, and the ball has not yet been snapped. Who knows how close he was when the snap occurred?

I don't think the officials had any doubt about the call.

[ThunderDan]

He just needed to be about a foot back and he would have been fine. Not that he had a chance to block the kick, but why even line up there in the first place?

THe picture shows he was already six inches (minimum) behind the limit. They made that call over a timeout and there's no excuse for not getting it right. If the rule is a yard and he's a yard and an inch, they have no right to bring in a rare call.

I don't see how that picture shows him to be lined up legally, if no part of his body can be within a yard and a half of the LOS. It looks like he is about a yard off, to me.

According to the article, the rule is a yard, not a yard and a half. It was another subjective game changing call. If we had our full squad, calls like that wouldn't matter and if they did, we would probably be in a position where we deserved to lose. With a decayed roster, those calls matter, and if its not clear, dont call it.

The thing about the picture is that Francois looks to be moving forward, and the ball has not yet been snapped. Who knows how close he was when the snap occurred?

Francois moved backwards and covered the "guard" in a punt return call.

[Patler]

He just needed to be about a foot back and he would have been fine. Not that he had a chance to block the kick, but why even line up there in the first place?

THe picture shows he was already six inches (minimum) behind the limit. They made that call over a timeout and there's no excuse for not getting it right. If the rule is a yard and he's a yard and an inch, they have no right to bring in a rare call.

I don't see how that picture shows him to be lined up legally, if no part of his body can be within a yard and a half of the LOS. It looks like he is about a yard off, to me.

According to the article, the rule is a yard, not a yard and a half. It was another subjective game changing call. If we had our full squad, calls like that wouldn't matter and if they did, we would probably be in a position where we deserved to lose. With a decayed roster, those calls matter, and if its not clear, dont call it.

The thing about the picture is that Francois looks to be moving forward, and the ball has not yet been snapped. Who knows how close he was when the snap occurred?

Francois moved backwards and covered the "guard" in a punt return call.

But I believe he stepped forward first. Can't check right now because the TV with TIVO has been commandeered by the non-football fanatic portion of my household!

[MichiganPackerFan]

He just needed to be about a foot back and he would have been fine. Not that he had a chance to block the kick, but why even line up there in the first place?

THe picture shows he was already six inches (minimum) behind the limit. They made that call over a timeout and there's no excuse for not getting it right. If the rule is a yard and he's a yard and an inch, they have no right to bring in a rare call.

I don't see how that picture shows him to be lined up legally, if no part of his body can be within a yard and a half of the LOS. It looks like he is about a yard off, to me.

According to the article, the rule is a yard, not a yard and a half. It was another subjective game changing call. If we had our full squad, calls like that wouldn't matter and if they did, we would probably be in a position where we deserved to lose. With a decayed roster, those calls matter, and if its not clear, dont call it.

The thing about the picture is that Francois looks to be moving forward, and the ball has not yet been snapped. Who knows how close he was when the snap occurred?

I don't think the officials had any doubt about the call.

I "rewound" that play several times and i saw NO presnap movement. I deleted it, so i can't review it again and I certainly could be wrong, but i think if it takes the refs a full time out to decide whether or not to make a subjective call, the default should be "no", regardless of team or situation.

[mraynrand]

It's a great rule and a great call. It's all about what the NFL wants to be, and a trial attourney deciding games based on nitpicking is everything the NFL aspires to. It's wonderful to come to this site and see people arguing over whether a LB who clearly was not violating the spirit of the law was technically violating the letter of the law. Perhaps a day will come when the NFL is completely regulated by laser rulers and computerized officials obeying the letter of the law. That's what fans want - perfect precision and reproducibility down to the micrometer. That's what makes the NFL fun.

That being said, the Packers tied the game, and the call became moot. The most important calls were the calls Stubby made to not get the Packers a first down in overtime and lose another close game - yet again, and again, and again, and again, and again.

The defense was sorely hurting and the offense was pretty much intact. Capers did his job,, and did it pretty well, while Stubby failed - That his offense couldn't score more than 20 points against a pretty average defense at home is pathetic. That he can't find a way to win close games is even worse. No, he shouldn't be fired in midseason, but this counts as yet again another strike against the confusing mix of talent, stubborness, and 'flailure' that defines Stubby. This goes in the negative column when TT evaluates him at the end of the season.

[Patler]

I "rewound" that play several times and i saw NO presnap movement. I deleted it, so i can't review it again and I certainly could be wrong, but i think if it takes the refs a full time out to decide whether or not to make a subjective call, the default should be "no", regardless of team or situation.

Hochuli said that call is always a delayed call after conferring, because no one is in position to see if the player is both too close to the LOS and within the center's shoulders. He has to get input from different officials about both aspects, then make the call. It sounded like he suspected it right away, but needed confirmation.

There is another aspect too, that came up in a game last week. If a player from the punting team is in a "threatening" position to receive a direct snap, a player can move up on the center's head. So the call might require input from at least three officials.

When a rule becomes that technical, with so many different caveats, its a dumb rule in the first place.

[mraynrand]

When a rule becomes that technical, with so many different caveats, its a dumb rule in the first place.

But it increases the fun of the game, and makes ol' Ed so happy to know he is being technically correct and useful.

[MichiganPackerFan]

If it's uncertain: don't call it. Period.

[MichiganPackerFan]

And if it's leading with the helmet to the QB or helmet to helmet, call it.

[Patler]

If it's uncertain: don't call it. Period.

Who said it was uncertain? I think the officials were very certain of the call.

[MichiganPackerFan]

They took a long time to call it and it was obviously more than one yard. 37 inches is still more than one yard. That's a game changing call. It should have been a no-call: move on. If they can't call an obvious leading with the helmet shot on the QB, don't call an iffy 36- 40 inch game changing call. Be balanced.

My "uncertain" comment was more of a general comment.

[Patler]

They took a long time to call it and it was obviously more than one yard. 37 inches is still more than one yard. That's a game changing call. It should have been a no-call: move on. If they can't call an obvious leading with the helmet shot on the QB, don't call an iffy 36- 40 inch game changing call. Be balanced.

My "uncertain" comment was more of a general comment.

Per Hochuli, the call always takes a long time, because different officials look at different things, and if they all converge....PRESTO...you have a penalty. That can only be done after he asks each what they saw.

I don't agree that it was obviously more than a yard. Not from the single still picture on the JSO blog.

If the guy wasn't going to rush and try to block the punt, it was either stupid coaching or stupid play by Francois to be so close as to make it an issue. I can't blame the officials at all.

[Cheesehead Craig]

2 problems with the play by the Packers:

1 - Francois is lined up directly in line with the center. There's no dispute about that, it's obvious. Why he's lined up like that is foolish in the first place. If his job is to block the G , then line him up over the G. If it's an area he needs to play, then no need to line him up in line with the C, he sure as hell can take a step or two over if he's not going to block the kick well before the punter kicks the ball.

2 - He's way too close to the LOS. Why put yourself in a position where there is even a reason to have the official make a judgement call? Poor coaching and why someone else on the field didn't see it and tell him to either back off or move over is ridiculous. Again, he didn't rush the punter so why the need to be anywhere close to the LOS?

You can argue about it being a judgement call all day, but when you all but dare the officials to call something when you put yourself smack dab in the greyest of the grey area, don't be shocked when the call goes against you.

[Bossman641]

I'm gonna spend tomorrow night watching how those teams line up on punts cause my gut feeling is that the majority of teams line up the same way Francois did.

[packerbacker1234]

I don't see how us tieing the game back up suddenly makes that call moot. Instead of us ahving the ball with a chance to drive and WIN THE GAME, we got the ball back down by 7 and fighting to get another chance to win the game, which we of course failed at in OT.

Point in that is, it was a huge potential game changing call. That call lead directly to 7 more points being put on the board for miami. If it stayed at 13-13 with us having the ball, who knows what happens?