The Eagles found themselves in a bit of a nail biter on Sunday afternoon.
Certainly that was partly due to the poor coaching decisions by Nick Sirianni to leave nine points on the field in favor of terrible conversion attempts which all failed (well, at least officially – it can be contended that the first two-point conversion attempt was successful and called incorrectly).
But the other portion of keeping the game close was due to the zebras. The refs decided to once again make it all about them as they called a shoestring tackle a touchdown for the Jaguars.
This occurred on the first play of the Eagles offensive drive following the Jaguars scoring their first points of the game. Video below.
Saquon Barkley was CLEARLY touched by #51 here which caused him to fall and subsequently “fumble”.
— Philadelphia Eagles Central (@pheaglescentral) November 3, 2024
This should’ve been called back.
This was reviewed too. pic.twitter.com/dsiyCFRtje
Essentially, anyone with eyes can see that Ventrell Miller (51) contacts Barkley’s leg and trips him up. He then stumbles forward a few steps before falling down, making contact with about four down points, and then the ground causes a fumble.
In any normal world (and for the past 104 years of NFL football), that is a down by contact.
Instead, the referees decided it was a fumble and Jacksonville recovered for a touchdown that put them back in the game. It baffled commentators, fans, rules analysts, basically anyone with eyes.
So how was such a stupid call reviewed and upheld? The Vice President of Instant Replay, Mark Butterworth, has his explanation (provided to Zach Berman, who asked the question):
Pool reporter @ZBerm with Vice President of Instant Replay Mark Butterworth on the Saquon Barkley fumble: pic.twitter.com/3NClhdroX3
— Dave Zangaro (@DZangaroNBCS) November 4, 2024
Sure, there’s a bit there. Most of it is garbage word salad that clears up nothing whatsoever. The only seemingly clear part of his statement: they made this call because it was a “stumble”.
It’s a term that’s been used in football before (Chris Berman famously used it often), but we’ve never seen it used as though it’s a term from the NFL rulebook (ie. what is a catch? what is a stumble?).
Yes, a defensive player hit Barkley and altered his ability to run in a balanced manner. Yes, that would normally be credited a tackle. But this is different, per Butterworth, because Barkley then touched an offensive player (Landon Dickerson) and that makes it a “stumble” and not a tackle.
This should be news to the rest of the NFL. A runner who breaks a tackle and is off balance need only find a nearby teammate to touch. Then it becomes a “stumble” and he can get back up and keep running.
This could be great news for the Eagles, who have offensive linemen who are great at getting downfield for blocks. Just stick near the runner and keep touching him while he goes down to force a “stumble” so they can continue running after they hit the ground.
By this apparent rule that’s not previously been enforced, you could also have receiver that get bounced off of the DB covering them and fall back touched by another WR, which should initiate a “stumble” and allow them to just get up and run down the field.
Given that none of this has ever happened for the past 104 years of the NFL, my personal guess is that Mark Butterworth is full of crap (there’s a much better word I’d prefer to use) and too scared to admit that his team has screwed up yet another play when he is overseeing people who literally re-watch videos in slow motion with tons of angles and still can’t do it at a level acceptable to most fans.
But who knows, maybe Mr. Butterworth will usher in a whole new era of football where we never truly know when a player is down and tackled or is “stumbling”, because the NFL has just earned so many fans from their willingness to flip flop on ambiguous decisions.
