The Interactive Zebra Report Mailbag

First of all, let me clear something up. I don't have a personal vendetta against Matt Millen. It's just that his egregious announcing mistake regarding the pylon rules happened on a Thursday night. This column runs every Wednesday. I didn't think a six-day lag would find the play as fresh in the minds of readers as it should, so I ran a stand-alone entry on Millen's mistake.

The reason I mention this is because I received a few emails where people accused me of having a personal vendetta against Millen. One emailer accused me of acting like I've never made a mistake in my life (must not be a regular to the report, huh?). Not surprisingly, when I attempted to reply, the email address turned out to be fake (it was submitted through my FanHouse page, not to my Zebra Report email address -- which is zebrareport2009@gmail.com).

Anyway, due to my quasi-hiatus last week, the emails have piled up. Let's tackle as many as we can in this week's report. These are emails that were sent to my personal account or submitted through my FanHouse page. Please feel free to send more questions along in the future. I reply to 99 percent of the emails personally, but please be patient. Also, I apologize if I had to truncate a submission. We only have so much room.

• I received several submissions about the Mike Sellers fumble, which I reviewed quickly last week, involving the fact that a whistle was blown. Many tried to tell me that once the whistle is blown the play is dead and unreviewable. That's not true anymore, as the NFL changed things after the Ed Hochuli debacle last season (in Week 2 at Denver):

Rule 15-9: Other Reviewable Plays: 2. Runner ruled down by defensive contact when the recovery of a fumble by an opponent or a teammate occurs in the action that happens following the fumble.

The next argument will be, "why couldn't Chris McAlister just keep running and get a touchdown, then?" Ahem ...

Note 1: If the ruling of down by contact or incomplete pass is changed, the ball belongs to the recovering player at the spot of the recovery of the fumble, and any advance is nullified.

• From reader Andrew (referencing a Chris Redman incomplete pass with 5:21 left in the second quarter against the Eagles in Week 13): "To everyone in the room when we saw this happen, it looked like a completed pass, and then a fumble, but the Eagles were told that they were not allowed to challenge the ruling on the field. The commentator was speaking over the top of the referee announcement and so we didn't hear the official ruling, but the commentator explained by saying that the ball was not recovered by any player, and hence it cannot have been a fumble. However, watching the play again, the ball was clearly recovered by Quintin Mikell of the Eagles."

I couldn't find a replay anywhere, so I'm left guessing. Remember, a recovery of a fumble when the whistle is blown has to happen in the immediate aftermath of the play. A good example is the Mike Sellers fumble against the Saints in Week 13. A whistle was blown, but it was clear McAlister of the Saints was in the process of recovering the loose ball. Any recovery in a situation like this would have to be immediate. If there's any delay after the whistle is blown, the play cannot be reviewed. My guess is this is what happened.

If not, I'd say the officials were incorrect, because everything else about the play checks out as reviewable.

• Reader Jill asks, "Why was the Vikings defense called for delay of game?"

I was able to find that cornerback Karl Paymah was called for a delay of game with 11:51 left in the game on a fourth down when the Lions were lined up in punt formation. Paymah lines up on the outside over a "gunner" on punts, so -- without having seen the play -- I can surmise he made this violation (Rule 4-6-5d):

It is delay of game when ... "a defensive player aligned in a stationary position within one yard of the line of scrimmage makes quick and abrupt actions that are not a part of normal defensive player movement and are an obvious attempt to cause an offensive player(s) to foul (false start).

• Reader Eddie wants to know why a play in the Chiefs-Steelers game wasn't called as roughing the passer due to a "blow to the head." It appears Ben Roethlisberger was poked in the eye by a Chiefs defender. The short answer is that I would estimate the officials simply didn't see it. During a pass play, only the referee (the one wearing a white hat who announces the penalties) is paying attention to the quarterback. The other six officials have different responsibilities and the referee stands behind the quarterback. For roughing the passer, there is nothing specific about the passer being poked in the eye, though there are general guidelines in place that roughing will be called if there is a physical act that is "unwarranted by the circumstances of the play." If getting poked in the eye happened accidentally, a case could be made that there's no reason for a penalty. If something happens and appears intentional, though, it would definitely be called. As long as someone sees it.

• Michael G. wants to know: "Has there ever been any discussion about having a replay done from inside the booth much like the way they do in college? The NFL does it at the end of the halves so why not the whole game?"

My best guess is that there are so many calls that end up being worth a review, it would take far too long for every game. Sometimes we see upwards of five challenges in the final two minutes. Can you imagine if plays were reviewed at that rate during the whole game? The NFL would instead rather allot challenges to the coaches so they bear the burden of what is reviewed.

• Karl L. asks: "When the defense jumps offsides in a football game, the play is allowed to continue as normal unless the perpetrator has a clear shot at the QB. This way the offense has a chance to complete the play and then take the better result. My question is why this isn't the case when the offense jumps."

Well, offense and defense are two different animals. If the offense was able to jump, this would cause the defense to start crossing the line, which would cause more offensive players to start moving -- thinking the play has started -- and it would be complete and utter chaos. There would also be far too many ways the offense could use this to their advantage and exploit holes left in the defense.

•Loyal reader and fellow Bears fan Dan asks: "If Lovie Smith is idiotic enough to call a timeout in a close game followed by a challenge to an obviously correct call, doesn't the ref have some obligation to protect him from himself? He was literally under the hood for 15 seconds at the most because it was obvious even from my seats. All I'm asking is just a little bit of help. Maybe a 'No, Lovie, I respect you too much to accept your flag' and ordering the crew to ignore him for the rest of the game."

This one made me laugh. The simple answer is "no," though I'm guessing Dan was being sarcastic. If not, I'll humor him. The officials aren't permitted to do things like this. Otherwise they'd be offering up advice on whether or not to accept or decline penalties. If we really want this to happen, it would have to go both ways, right? Like on a terrible pass interference call, the coach of the benefiting team would be forced to say, "I respect you too much to accept that bogus yardage. We'll decline the penalty and accept the incomplete pass." Wouldn't that be an honorable way to play? Fun topic: what coaches would be the most and least likely to partake in this gentleman's agreement?

• Future official Guy from Montana has a great submission: "My question surrounds the 3 elements an official must judge when a receiver makes a catch. These being control, possession and forward progress. When can an official begin to determine the receiver's forward progress? We know that to gain possession a receiver must have control of the ball and two feet down (NFL Rules) in bounds or another body part besides hands down in bounds. If the receiver is going to the ground he must in addition to the above criteria, maintain control of the ball after he comes in contact with the ground. My hypothesis is that a receiver's forward progress CANNOT be determined until the receiver has true rule based possession of the ball. Here is an example of why I think this is a problem. Team A has the ball on offense at Team B's 40 yard line. Team A's receiver runs a 10 yard stop pattern. The QB throws the ball in such a way that the receiver must jump and come back for the ball. With his body in the air the receiver controls the ball at the 30 yard line, but his momentum is such that his 2 feet do not touch until his body with the ball is at the 31 yard line. At this point he is immediately tackled down by Team B. A line judge runs in and marks the ball at the 30 yard line where the receiver first gained control of the ball and where he believes his forward progress was at it's farthest down field. I see this all the time, but I believe it is wrong. My common sense tells me (please tell me if rules say otherwise) forward progress cannot be determined until the receiver has possession of the ball...not just control. In the above example, the ball would be marked at the 31."

As I said, good submission. Here's the thing to keep in mind though, a player can have possession of the football when in midair -- it's just that he can lose it before the catch is completed. Thus, it's not incorrect to ask, when watching a slow-motion replay if "he has possession there, but does he get both feet in?" If he doesn't, then he's lost possession because he hasn't satisfied all criteria of a catch. That means that forward progress is ruled from the spot where a player has possession of the football with his hands -- assuming he never loses possession, in which case it would be an incomplete pass. Forward progress is always awarded to the farthest point which an offensive player has possession of the ball, as long as he doesn't voluntarily run backward. Thus, in your example above, the correct spot would be the 30, not the 31.

And I love receiving emails from people telling me they are getting into officiating next season. It's one of those areas where it's really easy to get into it on your own. There is a national shortage as well. If you think you can, put your money where your mouth is!

• Finally, some general notes:

1. It doesn't matter whether or not I played football. I love how some commenters think the fact that they played high school football somehow gives them a unique spin on a given football play. Guys, get over it. You played high school football. Congratulations. So did millions more in our country (yes, including myself). That doesn't mean you have a better opinion on a certain play than someone who can read and interpret the rules on their own. Many great officials never played football and many terrible officials played. It doesn't matter. Please stop being a High School Harry. This goes for any column or any discussion anywhere. It's lame to act like that gives you a better opinion than someone who didn't play.

2. Again, it doesn't matter -- but I'm a Bears fan. So saying "you must be a ____ fan" when it's not the Bears is a waste of time.

3. If you want me to answer a question via email, don't threaten me with something like "I bet you don't or can't answer this." I answer every legible email I receive. Several readers have had back-and-forth exchanges with me and could attest to this. I give out my email address so we can have civil discussions. Oh, and if you use the FanHouse page to submit, at least be stand-up enough to include a real email address so we can have a civil discussion.

4. Feel free to disagree, as I know many of you do, but I still do not believe the NFL "fixes" games in favor of teams they "want to win." There's so much you'd have to justify in order to prove the case, but I'd wonder why -- considering the Giants-Patriots game was the highest rated Super Bowl of all-time -- the league would be helping the Saints and Colts more than those teams. And why don't they help the Jets more? The New York media market is a gold mine. If the Colts are the least penalized team in football, maybe it's because they are disciplined. Good, veteran teams don't commit many penalties. Bad calls are bad calls, not the sign of some massive conspiracy.

5. The comments section of the Zebra Report is an interactive forum. Feel free to leave questions or comments and I will reply much of the time. I'd like to ask that disagreements between commenters remain civil, but that's probably asking too much from a select few. If you want to come after someone personally, just make it me. I can take it.

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