It’s supposed to be so simple. Heads or tails? It’s been done countless times in a countless number of games. No problem.
___On this day, to this referee, in this league, the coin toss mattered. Big problems. That simple act — nothing more than a procedural, administrative chore — will never be looked at the same. Neither will Phil Luckett.
___You could chalk up the incident to plain bad luck — it could have happened to any referee — and the Luckett-bashing that ensued as part of the criticism that any referee endures. But just like the coin toss that started the firestorm, it’s not that simple. To understand Luckett’s actions during and after the incident, you must come to know Phil Luckett, the man. You also must know the NFL privately said he was “correct,” paid him $9,800 for a playoff game he didn’t officiate and to this day never publicly supported his call. Why?
Nov. 26, 1998 — Thanksgiving Day.
Phil Luckett, in his eighth year as an NFL official and second year in the referee position, was the referee on the nationally televised Detroit Lions victory over the Pittsburgh Steelers, a game fraught with strange plays, controversial rulings and typically jaded TV commentary. It was a tough day at the office for the officials and they were to put in some overtime as well.
___Pittsburgh captain Jerome Bettis was the player charged with the responsibility of calling the overtime coin toss in the air. With TV cameras and sound equipment broadcasting the event, Luckett, with his microphone turned on beaming the voices to the stadium crowd, gave the typical instructions to the captains, looked directly at Bettis and said, “Call it, please, in the air.”
“Tails” was the word TV viewers across the nation heard. But incredibly, as the coin hit the ground Luckett said, “Heads is the call. He said heads. It is a tails.” Immediately, Bettis, looking incredulous and confused, said,
“I called tails.” Luckett turned toward Bettis and said, “No you didn’t.” He turned his microphone off and immediately went to business getting the captain’s choices while Bettis and teammate Carnell Lake continued to argue the call.
___During that sequence, CBS announcer Greg Gumbel said, “Oh, I believe he said tails” to which tag team partner Phil Simms said, “He did.” Moments later while listening to the exchange, Gumbel laughingly said, “Oh, man. Jerome Bettis said tails … oh, my.” Simms added, “Now we’re going to have to get all of the officials out there for the coin toss to see what’s going on.” As the network broke for a commercial, Gumbel said with a touch of sarcasm, “When we come back, the Lions — we think — have won this coin toss and will receive. Happy Thanksgiving.”
___That was just the beginning of an onslaught. The media experts, stirring the officiating controversy pot week in and week out, finally had something — and someone — they could sink their teeth into. To the media, Luckett was juicy. How could an NFL referee screw up the coin toss? He became the nation’s posterchild of poor NFL officiating. In the weeks that followed, TV analysts covering Luckett’s games repeatedly highlighted and referenced controversial plays involving Luckett’s crew. Luckett was even highlighted prevalently when ESPN’s Espy Awards looked back on the year in sports.
It went so far and Luckett became so frustrated in the months that followed that, in a highly unusual move for an NFL official, Luckett resolved to tell his side of the story.
What really happened. Why did Luckett rule the toss differently when virtually everyone in the nation heard “tails?”
“(Bettis) called ‘heads-tails.’ He first called ‘heads,’” explained Luckett matter-of-factly.
“I did not say ‘heads-tails,’” Bettis ranted after the game. “That is a lie. That’s a bold-faced lie.”
In the days after the incident, Pittsburgh TV station KDKA reported that they enhanced the audio on the game tape. The result: Two different calls were heard. Referee also carefully examined a videotape and discovered other items that conflict with Bettis’ account.
___After the argument in the middle of the field, Luckett jogged over to Pittsburgh coach Bill Cowher to explain his ruling. Though Luckett’s field microphone was off, TV microphones picked up the conversation. Luckett explained to Cowher that while the toss was in the air, Bettis changed his call. Said Luckett, “He said heads-tails. I’m going with heads because that’s what he called first.”
___In the Official NFL Playing Rules, rule 5-3 states, “A captain’s first choice from any alternative privileges which may be offered his team, before or during the game, is final and not subject to change.”
___The tape also shows that while Luckett was explaining things to Cowher, an off-camera voice said, “He changed it in the air. It never hit the ground.” The camera then panned back enough to see Bettis say to Cowher, “It hadn’t even hit the ground.” Cowher then looked to Bettis, who clearly says, “I said ‘hea-tails.’ I said, ‘hea ….’ I said, ‘hea ….’”
___Luckett talked to NFL director of officiating Jerry Seeman the night of the game about the incident and then sent Seeman a game report Nov. 29, a copy of which was received by Referee. In the report, Luckett refers to Bettis and Lake saying that the coin hadn’t yet hit the ground. Luckett wrote, “In my opinion, the implication of their statement is quite clear … and demonstrates their knowledge of what they had done.” Later in the report, Luckett wrote, “… I have also always maintained that they knew they had ‘messed up the call.’ Naturally, I am disappointed with what all transpired, but I did what I felt was right.”
___Decisive action? On Nov. 30, NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue issued a statement saying, “I have read the report of referee Phil Luckett and also seen the comments of Steelers players Jerome Bettis and Carnell Lake. All three individuals have excellent reputations and are known to be men of integrity. However, their conflicting accounts do not resolve the matter.”
___The NFL coin toss procedure was modified immediately. The new procedure calls for the referee to ask the captain to call heads or tails prior to tossing the coin instead of while it’s in the air. It also calls for the back judge and field judge to remain for the coin toss after they escort the captains onto the field.
___Tagliabue concluded, “Our primary concern is not necessarily resolving the Thanksgiving Day incident but rather making certain that it is not repeated. We believe these new procedures will help prevent that from occurring. Prior to Thanksgiving, we used the existing procedures for more than 20 years without serious incident. We expect these modifications will hold for 20 times 20 years.”
___From bad to worse. As the NFL season continued, Luckett-bashing became commonplace. The commissioner’s statement, though complimentary of Luckett’s integrity, did not clearly state Luckett was correct in handling the situation. The second-guessing continued.
___He was called “pitiful” and “pinhead” in the papers. Luckett’s crew worked the highly publicized Jets-Seahawks game in which a member of Luckett’s crew missed a call that allowed the Jets’ Vinny Testaverde to score a touchdown. “Phil Luckett’s crew has been responsible for two of the worst calls in the National Football League,” said one commentator.
___As the criticism grew, so did Luckett’s uneasiness with the situation. From the start, he put his trust in the NFL to handle the situation. There had been no confusion on his part. Months after the NFL season ended, Luckett was asked what he would do if he could do it all over again. “I didn’t do anything wrong,” he said. “So, I wouldn’t do anything differently.”
___Internally, within the NFL officiating ranks, the coin toss was examined and discussed on an NFL officiating training tape, a copy of which was sent to Referee. Training tapes are seen weekly by all NFL officials. As the coin toss is shown, Seeman is heard to say in a voiceover, “… The captain from Pittsburgh, Bettis, instead of calling directly ‘tails,’ which you will hear on here, he comes out and says, ‘hea-tails.’ And as you all know, whatever’s called first is what you deal with. … You will hear this on the television and then Phil will properly go over to and explain to coach Cowher, and then Bettis also at that time will be saying, ‘Well I said ‘hea-tails’ before it hit the ground.’ … You can understand the interpretation and what Phil did is correct.”
___On Dec. 11, Luckett sent a letter to Seeman, a copy of which Luckett also sent to recently retired NFL referee Jerry Markbreit in his capacity as the Professional Football Referees Association (PFRA) executive director. Luckett wrote, “As the coin toss controversy (among other things) continues to rage across the nation, I, the NFL officiating and the league continue to be pulled down. … For anyone to say this is a dead issue is in total denial of reality.” He formally requested that the league “set the record straight.”
___That same day, the PFRA sent a letter to Tagliabue. In part, the letter, a copy of which was received by Referee, read, “We are baffled by the league’s failure to vehemently support its officials in those situations in which the preponderance of evidence shows the official to be correct. As a result of the league’s silence, the integrity of the officials and the credibility of the game have been seriously impugned and Phil Luckett has been characterized as incompetent. … We strongly urge the National Football League to publicly support its officials in the current difficult environment in which we are now working. The first step would be to release to the press an announcement that after a full investigation, the National Football League and you, as its commissioner, have determined that Phil Luckett acted correctly in the coin toss controversy during the conclusion of the Thanksgiving Day game.”
___The playoff straw. Luckett told Referee that on Dec. 29, the day the officials were called for wild card playoff assignments, he was called by Seeman and told he would be paid a full postseason game fee of $9,800 but was being assigned as an alternate to protect him from further media scrutiny. A game fee for an alternate referee in a playoff game is $3,500.
___Luckett was hurt. “I hadn’t envisioned that possibility,” he said. “I fully expected to have an assignment.” Without revealing his specific rating, Luckett, who worked Super Bowl XXXI as a field judge, said he was told by sources in the officiating offices that he easily rated high enough to get a playoff game.
___The next morning, Luckett received a phone call from Seeman, who, Luckett said, was concerned about possible actions by Luckett and the PFRA. Luckett told Seeman that he wanted to work a playoff game. “I told Jerry that I didn’t agree with (the assignment) but there wasn’t much I could do,” said Luckett. “Not assigning me to a playoff game told everyone that I messed up this year.”
___Seeman had no comment when asked about Luckett’s playoff assignment and the increased game fee but added, “(The assignments are) always done in the best interest of all concerned.”
___Meanwhile, the PFRA sent a second letter to Tagliabue. In part, the letter, a copy of which was received by Referee, read, “… It is apparent that you have chosen not to publicly support Phil. … The media has continued to wrongfully ridicule Phil and his name and reputation have become severely tarnished, perhaps permanently. The continued derision could have been avoided if the league had quickly explained that Phil Luckett acted correctly and remains one of the league’s top referees. In addition, as a result of the league’s inaction, Phil has been denied the opportunity to referee a playoff game he justly earned and nothing has yet been done to attempt to clear his name and reputation. … Through no fault of his own, (Luckett) has been, and continues to be, vilified by the media. … It has reached the level that the league found it necessary to take the unprecedented step of paying him a full playoff game fee while not allowing him to officiate the game. … On behalf of the 113 active officials in the PFRA, we urge you to please do the right thing and publicly support Phil Luckett.”
___Markbreit confirmed that the commissioner responded via a letter to the PFRA after its second letter but would not comment on the contents.
___Now, after repeated attempts to clear his name, Luckett feels disappointed. “I was supported personally but regrettably I felt no support publicly,” he said. “I don’t feel the NFL handled it well. Perhaps they thought it would go away quickly. Unfortunately it didn’t.” Regarding the PFRA, he said, “(The board) was supportive. I appreciate all the guys and their efforts, but it is unfortunate that our association has not been able to accomplish much or show much leverage in the situation.”
___The big question. With all that happened, why didn’t Luckett simply re-toss the coin? It’s a question that has likely entered the minds of every sports official in America.
___Even after the evidence showed that Bettis made two calls, there are still those who believe Luckett could have cleaned up the mess by simply re-tossing the coin. Confusion justifies a “do-over,” just as a good game manager would re-explain penalty options to a captain who made an odd choice because of confusion. The officiating philosophical division on this issue may be the only black-and-white element in the whole bizarre occurrence. Take the first call by the captain or re-toss the coin? Strict rules enforcement or “common sense” game management? You either believe that a good game manager would have re-tossed the coin or you believe a good referee follows the letter of the law in this case. The way Luckett leads his life left him with only the one choice: take the captain’s call.
___The re-toss proponents base a part of their theory on the confusion on the field. However, in Luckett’s mind, there was no confusion. He heard what he heard, followed the book, made his call and stuck with it. What’s the problem?
___“I was never confused and I knew what happened,” said Luckett. “I know the rulebook guideline to go with the captain’s first choice. I’ve never been given any type of instruction that you can have a second toss. I assume the Detroit captains heard the toss. How would I proceed in the best interest of them?”
___Seeman told Referee, “This is a judgment situation on the part of the referee. Would (a re-toss) have been an option? Yes, that would have been an option. For example, I can remember one time when I was a referee working a game in Houston. I flipped the coin and it landed against the foot of a player and was laying there diagonally out on the turf and I originally said, ‘heads.’ Then the players reacted, ‘No, that wasn’t down on the turf.’ And in that situation, I went back and I re-flipped it. I’m not saying that is what Phil should have done or anything like that. There’s procedure for something like this and in Phil’s judgment he definitely felt it was ‘heads-tails’ and that’s what he called.”
___Former referee Red Cashion, who spent 25 years in the NFL, faced non-routine, high-pressure judgments thousands of times in his career. Cashion was quick to note that he would not be critical of a fellow referee, but with the benefit of hindsight he would discuss options. “I think (Luckett) had two options,” he said. “He could have tossed it over, but made an announcement using the microphone. Or I think he could have opened up the microphone and said what occurred, that he heard ‘heads’ and ‘tails’ and that he was going to accept the captain’s first choice. That’s why I think the best friend of the referee is the microphone. You open up the microphone and explain one, what happened and two, what you did about it. Now that’s with a lot of hindsight and probably a good many years of experience on top of Phil.”
___Luckett is a man who lives his life by the book. His signals are crisp and he rarely shows emotion, much like Seeman was as an on-field official, but the rulebook isn’t the only book Luckett lives by. He has a strong belief in the Lord that guides him every day, on the field and off. He’s a man of powerful conviction based on principles — do the right thing and trust in the Lord. Other referees may have handled things differently because of who they are and how they manage. Phil Luckett, because he goes by the book, could not.
___Going public. After Luckett did what he felt was right, the criticism and lack of public support over time began to mount. His decision to talk to Referee about the incident stemmed from frustration over the league’s unwillingness to publicly support his actions. He says he never felt anger, but he did struggle with why those things were happening to him. How could Seeman tell the NFL officials Luckett was correct on training tape 16 but no one in the league office would tell the world?
___Phil Luckett took his fate into his own hands by going public. In his mind, he was being unfairly persecuted. He needed absolution.
___“Nobody likes to be criticized,” said Luckett, “but for the most part I just tried to be satisfied I knew what happened and trust the Lord in the outcome of things, which I continue to do.”
___“There’s no criticism of anyone,” said Seeman. “We aren’t criticizing the players’ judgment or Phil’s judgment or anything of that nature. But it was a very unusual situation.”
___A lack of criticism is a far cry from the public support that Luckett needed for the vindication to which he felt entitled. So why wasn’t there any? “We did not feel it was necessary to make another public statement in that we supported Phil’s decision internally,” said Seeman. “No matter what we would do to try to change any (of the) perceptions that may be out there, it would not be a winning situation. Phil knows the support we have given and consequently another decision was not necessary to make public. …We still had games remaining in the season and with an issue like this (we) would not gain any benefit by bringing it back up again publicly. … We just wanted to go forward.”
___You could look at Luckett as a fallen hero, a ref who did his job and faced the wrath of media ignorance and management indifference. Throughout the ordeal, Luckett has been careful not to criticize the NFL, Seeman or the PFRA. He just wants people to know what happened. “I’m still supportive of Jerry Seeman, the program, the NFL,” said Luckett. “I want to do a good job. It’s just kind of a mind-boggling thing that all this has occurred. But those are the facts.”
___There is no black and white. Questions and opinions abound. Did Bettis fully say “heads” then “tails” or was it “hea-tails?” Does it even matter? Maybe Phil Luckett should have re-tossed the coin and maybe if he’d been a referee with more experience he would have. But how could he re-toss the coin when he heard what he heard? And what would the Lions have done? Should the league have gone public? Or did the NFL not go public because it really believes that Luckett should have re-tossed the coin? And if so, why did the league pay him a full playoff game fee? Why didn’t the PFRA go public after seemingly getting nowhere with the league? They say that’s not their policy. Maybe the PFRA didn’t go public partly because there are members who believe Luckett didn’t handle it properly. Do the commissioner’s views differ from Jerry Seeman’s views? Was Luckett programmed by the NFL’s training system or did he on that day lack game management skills and fall back on the rulebook?
___Did the NFL do the right thing?
___Did Phil Luckett do the right thing?
___Heads or tails?
(For more information on Phil Luckett, please see “Interview” in the 11/98 issue of Referee)
Heads or tails? |
