Of pass interference and alleged "fake" injuries

(Normally First and 10 appears on this blog on Tuesday, but this week it's going to wait a day so something else can be addressed …)

There's an old practical joke that I've never actually seen done.

It's the one where a kid fills a bag with some dog poop, then leaves it on a front step, lights it on fire and rings the doorbell.

The idea, of course, is that the person opening the door from the house sees the bag on fire and steps on it to put it out.

Chuckle chuckle.

The thing is, though, that you're never supposed to step in your own fired up mess.

And that's what seems to have happened with Eric Mangini and the Browns following Sunday's loss in Detroit.

Before I continue, let me state that it's more than understandable to have hurt feelings over that loss. The Browns did a lot of things right, from Mangini to the coaching staff right through the players. The opponent was Detroit, but the Browns had their best offensive plan, called their best game and played the best they have all season.

To fight and work as hard as these guys have fought and worked all season and get nothing for it, then to come so close in Detroit … well feelings of anger or bitterness are understandable — especially given the way the game ended.

But it's hard to understand taking it to the level the Browns did on Monday, a day after the game.

First, Mangini more or less accused Jim Schwartz and the Lions of faking injuries to slow down the Browns no-huddle offense. He said this after the game, then did not back down on Monday.

Second, Mangini refused to concede that Hank Poteat interfered with Bryant Johnson on the game's final play.

All this does is make Mangini look like a sore loser, a guy who can't accept the reality of what happened and can't accept the fact that his team blew a 21-point lead and lost. It's one thing to fight for your team, it's another to point the finger at everyone else. What's that old saying about pointing the finger?

Mangini used to be an intern who worked with Schwartz in Cleveland. The pair ostensibly were friends.

But the way Mangini treats his former friends you wonder if anyone will admit to being his friend.

He turned in Bill Belichick for "spygate" after he got to the Jets.

He got the Browns to hire George Kokinis, then Kokinis left the team after nine games.

Now he complains that Schwartz had his players faking injuries to slow down the Browns no-huddle offense. He basically accused his "friend" of cheating.

This is interesting in many respects. But most of all it's interesting because it implies the Browns had an offense worthy of concocting such a scheme.

Prior to Sunday, the Browns did not have any offense, let alone a no-huddle one. To imply that the offense was even worthy of formulating a plan that would require faking injuries is misplaced bluster of the highest order.

"He's way out of bounds on that," Schwartz said at his news conference of the "faked" injuries.

Mangini was asked about the issue seven times on Monday. Each time he could have said, "It's something I'll take up with the league." But each time he hinted and/or implied that the Lions were cheating. On the one hand, you commend him for answering honestly. On the other, in my opinion it's misguided.

Hey, maybe the Lions were faking. I doubt it, but maybe they were. But if they were, so what. Point it out the refs, then go win anyway. I don't think or believe it happened, but even if it did isn't that an admission by the Lions that they can't stop the Browns. Would this not be cause for celebration? Heck, the worst that happens is that the Browns line up and run a play.

As for the pass interference, it's one thing to back your players, for which Mangini should be commended. It's quite another to deny reality.

A day after the game, with a chance to watch film, the Browns and Mangini continued on this notion that because Matt Stafford left the pocket the defensive backs can have contact with receivers. But the key is there can't be contact after the ball is thrown. This would re-write the rule book. By the Browns thinking any time a quarterback rolls out a defensive back would merely tackle a receiver and it would be legal.

"The quarterback was running around all over the place," Mangini said. "Hank (Poteat) matched him [the receiver].  Could he have pushed him less?  Yes, he probably could have.  It’s really not illegal contact when the guy’s out of the pocket or scrambling, but they called it.”

No they didn't.

They called pass interference. Which is what it was. Poteat hit a guy with the ball in the air, which prevented the guy from going for the ball.

That's a penalty.

Again, Schwartz put things in perspective with a blunt statement.

“They don’t know what they’re talking about,” Schwartz said. “You can quote me on that, because when the quarterback’s out of the pocket, there can still be pass interference. There can’t be illegal contact, but there can be pass interference. And when the ball’s in the air, you can’t make contact with the receivers. It’s clear. There’s more flags thrown than there were officials. So when you’re making contact and you’re not playing the ball and the ball’s in the air, it’s pass interference. That’s as clear a case of pass interference … "

Mangini was asked if the call was made because the ball was in the air, and he grudgingly admitted that was the call.

But then he said it's the first time he's ever seen it called in his life.

"Yes, I guess that’s what they called it for," he said. "I haven’t seen it.  I haven’t been a part of it.  It’s their call and we live with it."

Yes they do.

Just like they live with the fact they blew a 21-point lead.

And with the fact that they couldn’t stop the Lions on the last drive.

And with the fact that they let a rookie throw five touchdown passes on them.

There's a lot of give and take in this exchange. Schwartz said Abram Elam could have been flagged for interfering with Calvin Johnson. I didn't see it that way, nor did I see that Johnson interfered with the Browns, as some claimed.

That was the normal jostling that goes with a "Hail Mary." But Poteat's wasn't. He gave the refs no choice but to make the call.

Too, I agree with Mangini that the officials missed a 15-yard penalty on Tennessee's coaches for running on the field to celebrate. I don't know how they missed it, but they missed it.

But the rest of this stuff — the accusation and implication of a fake injury, the interference whining — smacks of a guy who can't accept the fact that his team lost a game it should have won.

I've been very negative toward Mangini this season, and I didn't want to be after this game because I thought the Browns gave great effort and did a lot of things well (albeit with some mistakes along the way).

But to lament and whine about these things smacks of a kid taking his ball and going home because he doesn't like the rules.

Mangini talks about his players having class, and carrying themselves the right way.

That starts with him.

Acting this way after a tough loss is simply not becoming of a coach, much less the Browns coach.

It does do one thing, though. It diverts attention from the real issues. And those are that the Browns are 1-9, they lost to Detroit, and in doing so they blew a 21-point lead and allowed the Lions to go 88 yards in 1:46 with no timeouts.

It's pretty evident that the Browns have enough problems without stepping in their own created mess.

Tagged as: Cleveland Browns, Eric Mangini