Share This Page

NFL notebook: Packers fans still upset with replacement officials

| Sunday, Sept. 30, 2012, 7:38 p.m.
A fan holds up a sign welcoming back the regular officials inside Lambeau field before the game between the Packers and Saints on Sunday, Sept. 30, 2012, in Green Bay, Wis. AP Photo/Jeffrey Phelps

• With the NFL's regular officials back on the job, Packers players were prepared to move on from a call that cost them a win at Seattle. Their fans didn't quite seem to be ready yet. Some fans showed up Sunday intending to voice their displeasure with replacement officials whose decision to allow a last-second Seahawks touchdown cost the Packers the win Monday night. “Worst Call Ever,” read one fan's shirt. A sign in the stands welcomed back the regular officials, and a handful of fans wore black and white striped shirts.

• New York Jets receiver Santonio Holmes had to be helped from the field after hurting his left foot on the first play of the fourth quarter against San Francisco. The Jets said after the game that Holmes was being treated for a foot problem.

• Tennessee quarterback Jake Locker injured his left shoulder after being sacked by the Houston Texans in the first quarter and missed the rest of the game.

• Giants wide receiver Hakeem Nicks was inactive for Sunday night's game at Philadelphia. Nicks missed his second straight game since injuring his foot and knee in a 10-catch, 199-yard performance against Tampa Bay on Sept. 16. Domenik Hixon started in his place.

— AP

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.