I have heard a number of comments regarding the officiating at the Packer-bear game, so will address that here. I will also address McCarthy’s decision not to go for two points early in the fourth quarter, which I agree with, but others don’t.
1. The Packers kicked off to start the game, and after Hester’s big return, the refs called a personal-foul penalty on the Packers, allowing the bears to start their first possession in Packer territory. As the kickoff return was ending, a bear player slapped a Packer player in the face in the open field, which should have been easy for the refs to see. The Packer player retaliated, and of course the refs only called the penalty on the Packers. The announcers talked about this, as it was obvious. So, on the first play of the game, the refs were already making bad calls to hurt the Packers. (Let’s not forget that the bears “beat” the Bengals by twice committing personal fouls, not being called for them, and the Bengals being called for retaliating.)
2. The bears had to punt on that first drive, and the ball was downed just before the goal line. The officials ruled a touchback, giving the ball to the Packers on the 20. I don’t believe either bear player who touched the ball was on the goal line and the ball should have been inside the one, but the officials needed what they called conclusive proof to overturn the call, and did not feel they had it. I do believe it was a bad call. However, if not for the bad call in Point 1 above, this play never happens. In addition, Rodgers took the Packers inside the bear 10, where he threw an interception, and the resulting momentum change allowed the bears to go on an 80-yard TD drive, their only points of the half. So, the call never happens if the refs don’t blow the first call, and as it worked out, the bears got a TD out of this.
3. McClellin was called for roughing Rodgers on a third-down sack to the bear 33. Some questioned whether this was a good call, but the replay showed that it was. Rodgers was clearly down, and McClellin then came in and hit him with some weight behind it. Two ex-bears who have a postgame show on a Chicago sportstalk station were yelling about this after the game, talking about how stupid it was for McClellin to do this. They never mentioned anything about it being a bad call, because it wasn’t. For those who want to think it was, perhaps it was a delayed call (as hockey has) for the roughing that wasn’t called on McClellin injuring Rodgers in the first Packer-bear game. The Packers got a field goal on this drive. Had the penalty not been called, it would have been a 50-yard attempt with the wind, so it’s possible McCarthy might still have attempted it, although it’s obviously harder than a shorter attempt.
4. Toward the end of the half, the Packers forward lateraled on a fumble recovery around the bear 40, which was not called and should have been. However, I missed these same fans mentioning that the week before, the Steelers forward lateraled on a kickoff at their 7, and this no-call resulted in a Steeler TD and was the difference in the game, giving the Packers a loss.
5. The Packers punted on their first possession of the second half, and Hester returned it 49 yards, setting up a bear TD and a 14-13 lead. One of the reasons Hester had such a good return was that the punter, Masthay, was held, but there was no call. This gave the bears, who had done nothing offensively with the exception of one drive, momentum, and they scored touchdowns on the next two drives, too.
6. With under 4:00 to play in the third quarter, Quarless caught a pass that would have given the Packers a first down at the bear 43, for a 19-yard gain. The first official called it a catch, and another overruled him. The replays were not 100% conclusive, but it appeared that Quarless did catch the pass. However, as with the downing of the punt, the refs didn’t feel they had conclusive evidence. The Packers had to punt, stopping a momentum change and resulting in a bear TD to go up 28-20. Had this been called a catch on the field, it would have remained a catch, but one ref overruled the other.
7. On the Packers’ winning-touchdown drive, Lacy ran the ball on third-and-one, and it appeared he got the first down. The announcers also felt he did. The ball was spotted inches short, forcing the Packers to have to convert on fourth down. This was very close, as was the downing of the punt and the Quarless play.
8. On the winning-touchdown-pass play, which was a fourth-down play, Jordy Nelson was blatantly leveled by Major Wright, which should have been illegal contact and a first down. The Packers scored a touchdown, but had they not, since there was no flag despite the blatant penalty in the open field, they would have lost.
Now, let’s talk about McCarthy’s decision to go for one and not two with the score 28-26 bears, with 11:38 left in the fourth quarter. This was absolutely the right decision, and going for 2 at the same point of the Viking game earlier this year cost the Packers a win in a game they tied as a result. Others feel that if McCarthy had gone for two and made it, the game would have been tied while the Packers were driving at the end, rather than them being down 1. Here are the reasons that is bad strategy, keeping in mind the strategy can only be evaluated at the time, and not after the rest of the game has been played. The Packers, I believe, were 0 for 4 on 2-point conversions this year, and missed one later in the game. However, that doesn’t enter into my thinking. The thinking is this. I believe you have to look at a worst-case scenario when you decide to go for 2, in case you don’t make it. In this instance, had the Packers gone for 2 and not made it, they would have been down by 2 points, 28-26. This means a bear TD puts the bears up 9 points in the fourth quarter, which is 2 scores. By kicking the extra point, you keep it to one score (with a 2-point conversion) if you give up a TD. As it turned out, they nearly did give up a TD, as Jeffery nearly caught a long pass deep in Packer territory. Hindsight is easy, but all scenarios have to be considered when making the decision. I said it was the right decision at the time, just as I said it was wrong when they went for 2 in the Viking game.