{"id":1013983,"date":"2026-09-29T14:51:18","date_gmt":"2026-09-29T14:51:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/1013983\/"},"modified":"2026-09-29T14:51:18","modified_gmt":"2026-09-29T14:51:18","slug":"two-controversial-calls-add-to-saints-frustration-after-raiders-loss","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/nfl\/1013983\/","title":{"rendered":"Two Controversial Calls Add to Saints\u2019 Frustration After Raiders Loss"},"content":{"rendered":"

Sign up for the daily Saints Newsletter\u00a0by clicking here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The New Orleans Saints<\/a> had plenty of opportunities to avoid putting Sunday’s game in the hands of the officials.<\/p>\n

Four turnovers, including three in the fourth quarter, ultimately proved devastating in a 35-27 loss to the Las Vegas Raiders<\/a>. Still, two officiating decisions played significant roles in swinging the game \u2014 and once again left New Orleans frustrated with how the NFL interprets some of its most subjective rules.<\/p>\n

One extended a Raiders touchdown drive in the first half. The other involved a pivotal Tyler Shough turnover that was correctly ruled a fumble but looked eerily similar to a play that went against the Saints two weeks earlier.<\/p>\n

Together, the plays highlighted how thin the margin was for New Orleans in another one-score loss.<\/p>\n

Danny Stutsman’s Roughing-the-Passer Penalty Proves Costly\"Saints\"<\/p>\n

Sep 27, 2026; New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; New Orleans Saints linebacker Danny Stutsman (28) sacks Las Vegas Raiders quarterback Kirk Cousins (8) in the first half at Caesars Superdome. Mandatory Credit: Stephen Lew-Imagn Images | IMAGN IMAGES via Reuters Connect<\/p>\n

The first controversy came with 5:54 remaining in the second quarter.<\/p>\n

The Raiders faced third-and-4 from the Saints’ 5-yard line when quarterback Kirk Cousins dropped back and threw incomplete. Linebacker Danny Stutsman came through the middle, tackled Cousins immediately after the release and took him to the ground. It was a good, clean hit \u2014 no head contact, not a body slam.<\/p>\n

Now, the Raiders have to go ahead on another missed opportunity to score a touchdown and kick a field goal.\u00a0<\/p>\n

However, Stutsman was flagged for roughing the passer. The 2-yard penalty gave Las Vegas an automatic first down at the 3-yard line.<\/p>\n

Former Sooner @Danny_Stutsman<\/a> was flagged for roughing the passer on this play\ud83e\udd14 <\/p>\n

What is the guy supposed to do? pic.twitter.com\/MZFiWG1jG3<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Red Dirt Media (@RedDirtMediaCo) September 27, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

On the next play, Cousins found tight end Michael Mayer for a 3-yard touchdown, putting the Raiders ahead 13-6.<\/p>\n

The controversy wasn’t necessarily about whether Stutsman arrived late because he was right on time and hit Cousins just as immediately after Cousins released the football. Instead, the issue appeared to be how Stutsman brought Cousins to the ground.<\/p>\n

Officials apparently determined Stutsman’s tackle violated the NFL’s protection against a defender unnecessarily driving or landing on a passer. Replays, however, showed what appeared to be a continuous tackling motion. Stutsman hit Cousins as the ball came out, wrapped up the quarterback and went to the ground with him.<\/p>\n

Saints coach Kellen Moore disagreed with the decision.<\/p>\n

Moore, who doesn\u2019t usually show much emotion and is often laid back, was animatedly arguing with an official after the flag, an indication of how strongly he believed the Saints had been denied a fourth-down opportunity.<\/p>\n

A similar controversy unfolded earlier Sunday when Dolphins edge rusher Chop Robinson was flagged for roughing Patrick Mahomes. Robinson hit Mahomes as he released the ball and landed on him, drawing a 15-yard penalty despite the contact appearing to be part of a conventional tackle.<\/p>\n

This Chop Robinson hit on Patrick Mahomes was beautiful. Refs flew the flag for roughing, but it was a clean hit, no helmet. Ostensibly, the flag flew because Robinson buried his full weight? But what the HELL does the NFL expect rushers to do?<\/p>\n

Mahomes gets ALL the calls…\u2026<\/p>\n

\u2014 Chad Jensen (@ChadNJensen) September 27, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

Like Stutsman’s hit, the play raised questions about what defenders can realistically do to avoid landing on a quarterback once they have committed to a tackle.<\/p>\n

Either way, the consequences were significant.<\/p>\n

Without the penalty, Las Vegas faces fourth down. With it, the Raiders received a fresh set of downs and scored a touchdown on the next play.<\/p>\n

Tyler Shough Fumble Brings Back Memories of Week 1 Controversy\"Saints\"<\/p>\n

Sep 27, 2026; New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; Las Vegas Raiders defensive end Malcolm Koonce (51) sacks New Orleans Saints quarterback Tyler Shough (6) during the fourth quarter at Caesars Superdome. Mandatory Credit: Matthew Hinton-Imagn Images | IMAGN IMAGES via Reuters Connect<\/p>\n

The second controversy was different because the officials appeared to get the call right.<\/p>\n

However, many in New Orleans were frustrated with the fact that it was similar to a ruling that went against New Orleans earlier in the season.<\/p>\n

With the Saints protecting a 27-22 lead in the second half, Raiders edge rusher Malcolm Koonce got to Shough as the quarterback appeared to begin his throwing motion. Koonce knocked the ball free before Shough completed the pass, and Maxx Crosby recovered.<\/p>\n

Las Vegas took advantage of the turnover and eventually grabbed the lead.<\/p>\n

The play was correctly ruled a fumble. But for Saints fans, it was difficult not to think back to New Orleans’ Week 1 loss to the Detroit Lions<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In that game, Chase Young hit Jared Goff during his throwing motion. The ball traveled backward and was recovered by Jonas Sanker, who returned it for an apparent Saints touchdown.<\/p>\n

Replay review overturned the ruling and determined it was an incomplete forward pass<\/a>, wiping a defensive touchdown off the board. Even Lions coach Dan Campbell acknowledged afterward that he initially believed Detroit had fumbled.<\/p>\n

Somebody please explain it to me like I\u2019m dumb. Here is a side-by-side of Tyler Shough\u2019s play against the Raiders today and Jared Goff\u2019s from Week 1.<\/p>\n

Saints lost a td from Goff\u2019s mistake. Today, ref says Shough fumbled and Raiders recovered. Make it make sense! @NFLOfficiating<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/UM2UwSLjke<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Farrah Yvette (@farrah_yvette) September 27, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

The explanation centers on the NFL’s definition of a forward pass.<\/p>\n

Under Rule 8, when contact from a defender occurs after the passer has begun a forward throwing motion and materially affects the throw, the play can still be considered a forward pass regardless of the direction the football travels.<\/p>\n

In a pool report conducted by Luke Johnson of The Times Picayune<\/a>, NFL replay official Mark Butterworth explained after the Detroit game that Goff had begun his throwing motion before Young made contact, which resulted in the play being ruled an incomplete pass.<\/p>\n

That makes the timing of the defender’s contact critical.<\/p>\n

If the quarterback loses possession before beginning the forward throwing motion, it is a fumble. If contact occurs after that motion begins and affects the throw, the result can be an incomplete pass even if the football travels backward.<\/p>\n

Pool report interview with Mark Butterworth pic.twitter.com\/RgRrESpotV<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Luke Johnson (@ByLukeJohnson) September 28, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

Technically, that provides a distinction between what happened to Goff in Week 1 and what happened to Shough against Las Vegas.<\/p>\n

Visually, the two plays appeared remarkably similar.<\/p>\n

Against Detroit, New Orleans lost a defensive touchdown when replay ruled Goff’s backward pass incomplete. Two weeks later, Shough fumbled after another split-second hit, setting up a Las Vegas comeback.<\/p>\n

The issue is less about Shough’s correct fumble call, but rather an NFL rule that yields drastically different outcomes based on split-second timing. Without that rule provision, both plays would have generated far less controversy.<\/p>\n

In short, both plays should be fumbles. It\u2019s essentially the Tuck Rule 2.0.<\/p>\n

Though four turnovers ultimately doomed New Orleans on Sunday, these two critical quarterback protection calls placed the Saints on the wrong side of high-stakes decisions in consecutive close losses. In games with tiny margins for error, such rulings are critical.<\/p>\n

Saints Mailbag<\/p>\n

Wednesdays,\u00a0On SI Saints\u00a0will answer your questions\u00a0about what we see from our vantage point. To\u00a0submit your thoughts or inquiries click here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"Add us as a preferred source on GoogleFollow<\/a>