Zebra Report: Some Angry Texans

Zebra Report is FanHouse's analysis of actual NFL rules and how they are to be applied ... because most fans think they could do a better job than the NFL officials, yet definitely could not. Click here for an introduction as to how we do things.

Whether it's bitterness over the Colts' dominance of their team, their team's recent gut-wrenching losing streak or the truth, many Texans fans seem to think the league is costing their team in a big way in terms of officiating. Let's examine some of the Week 12 plays which have drawn the ire of fans before checking out some plays from other games (like that late fumble by the Ravens and more Louis Murphy Rule).

• I got an e-mail from a fan who was in attendance ("Txpen") asking about the personal foul call on the Texans after the Brian Cushing interception. During the game broadcast, they were able to find the highlight of Antonio Smith absolutely leveling Dallas Clark well behind the play when it was nearing its conclusion. As Rule 12-2-8 tell us, unnecessary roughness includes:

(e) unnecessarily running, diving into, cutting, or throwing the body against or on a player who (i) is out of the play

Basically, there is no reason to hit someone that far away from the play, even if in front and above the waist. This used to be legal, but it's not anymore.

• Also contained in the aforementioned e-mail was a sentiment expressed by almost everyone who witnessed this play: There was a defensive pass interference called on Jacques Reeves which ended up giving the Colts 43 yards. A few plays later, there was a second pass interference called, this one on Glover Quin, which drew the ire of the Houston faithful. (Watch the highlights here. The first call was 1:40 mark of the video and the second play starts at the 1:57 mark)

I know I'm trying not to comment on judgment calls this season, if possible, but that first one was so bad I'm just going to say it was an awful call. The defender did nothing to restrict Pierre Garcon and the ball appeared to be uncatchable. I'd even go as far as saying Garcon had already given up on it. If the NFL official wants to contact me and tell me how much better he is than me because I'm a high school official, he can feel free to use the e-mail address at the bottom of this post. I'll kindly ask him to explain the call. And then I'll agree that -- overall -- he is better than me. Being better doesn't make someone immune from mistakes, however.

On the second call, I believe that has to be called. I've previously listed the pass interference guidelines. You can read them by clicking here and reading point No. 3. In my opinion, I believe Quin was restricting Austin Collie's ability to catch the ball and he wasn't playing the ball himself. I've seen many say this was uncatchable, but, remember, this guideline is only applied when it's so uncatchable we can be sure the contact isn't what made the ball uncatchable. If the contact happens early, we never get the chance to deem if it was catchable or not. My opinion -- and there's room for disagreement -- is that Quin contacted Collie early. When the defender is not looking at the ball this is a no-brainer penalty. I've included a poll for reader's thoughts on this one (and feel free to utilize the comments section below). As far as the first, it was so blatantly wrong there's no need for a poll.

• On our final Texans-Colts play, there was a roughing the passer called on the Texans for hitting Peyton Manning on the facemask during a passing play. It extended a drive. This call actually happens quite frequently. A blow to the head of the quarterback -- whether you like the rule or not -- is an automatic penalty. The Packers were called for an incredibly similar play against Matthew Stafford on the opening drive during Thanksgiving's first game.

• On the other hand, Jason Campbell appears to have possibly been roughed on the Redskins' last gasp effort to keep the game going. You can watch the video here (at about the 3:10 mark) and make the judgment. What do you think? Should that have been roughing the passer based upon what we've seen thus far this season?

• Many people have submitted a question about the spot which set up a last-second field goal attempt for the Ravens in regulation Sunday night. Al Michaels drew attention to it on the broadcast, and he was correct. There's a common misnomer among casual fans that you can't "fumble forward." Meaning if a player fumbles at the two yard line and a teammate recovers in the end zone it's not a touchdown. Well, that's false. You can do that, as long as the fumble wasn't intentional (in which case it would be ruled a pass -- likely an illegal one). The other exceptions are on fourth down and when the play in question happens after the two-minute warning of either half. In those cases, Rules 8-7-4c and 8-7-5c cover this:

If the recovery or catch is by a teammate of the player who fumbled, the ball is dead, and the spot of the next snap is the spot of the fumble, or the spot of the recovery if the spot of the recovery is behind the spot of the fumble.

Let's all thank our lucky stars Billy Cundiff missed the ensuing too-close-because-of-an-incorrect-spot field goal. We now know the Ravens ended up winning anyway, but we wouldn't have known that had he made it and I'm not sure Steeler Nation would have been too happy about the missed spot. All's well that ends well, I guess, though I'm not sure the NFL is pleased with Ed Hochuli's crew over this.

• Reader Brian submitted this question: "When there is a dispute whether the quarterback fumbles the ball or his arm is moving forward (even the tuck rule) and the decision is that his arm was moving forward, thus it was an incomplete pass, why is it not intentional grounding or (in some cases) illegal touching by a lineman?"

Good question, Brian. Everything here boils down to intent. The quarterback is generally in the process of being hit by defenders or trying to stop himself from throwing a pass in these instances. Thus, he's not intentionally throwing at an ineligible receiver or getting rid of the ball to avoid a sack. Here is some specific language from Rule 8-3-1 that will help:

Item 2: Physical Contact. Intentional grounding should not be called if the passer initiates his passing motion toward an eligible receiver and then is significantly affected by physical contact from a defensive player that causes the pass to land in an area that is not in the direction and vicinity of an eligible receiver.

• Loyal reader and frequent question submitter James G. seeks further clarification of what I'm now calling the Louis Murphy Rule. Due to a play involving Malcom Floyd, the end zone, and the fact that receivers have to possess the ball all the way through the ground to make it complete, we arrive at a scenario.

What if the receiver gets his hands on the football while he's going to the ground in the field of play near the end zone. His knee hits the ground when the ball is at the one-yard line with the ball firmly in his grasp, but he then falls forward and the ball breaks the plane of the end zone. James wonders: "how can they rule the ball down at the one-yard line if the catch is not complete until two yards later?"

Well, the simple answer is that we're dealing with two different rules and where they intersect. In this scenario, when taking into account all the rules at hand, we can rule the receiver had possession of the football when he was down at the 1. He would have lost possession afterward had he lost control of the ball when he hit the ground, thus making the pass incomplete. But, since he did maintain control, he had possession all along. Therefore, he's down at the 1.

I guess a good way to outline this in a way easier to grasp would be to describe the same play but have the boundary in question be the sideline. Say a receiver has control of a catch while dotting both toes in bounds but hits the ground with all parts of his body out of bounds. You aren't ruling him out of bounds for completing a catch once he's laying on the ground with clearly every part of his body out. You are awarding the catch for when he initially had control of the ball with his toes both in.

Good stuff for this week, folks. Please keep 'em coming and I'll get as many as I can.

Got a rules-related question? Whether it's elementary, high school or NFL, e-mail TZR and he'll see what he can do.