Three days after the NFC title game was decided by a first-possession field goal in overtime, we’re still not pleased with the current overtime procedures, and we believe that the league needs to change the rules before it happens in a Super Bowl.
But why type more about it when I’ve already bitched about it to Brocato at the PFTV studios?
Enjoy.
Latest Stories in: Minnesota Vikings, New Orleans Saints, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
This is an unofficial and independent source of news and information not affiliated with any team(s) or the National Football League (NFL).
Corrections. Independent Programming Report. AdChoices
Copyright © 2010-2012 NBC Sports. Images provided by Getty Images. Powered by WordPress.com VIP.
LEAVE THE OVERTIME RULE ALONE!!! IF THE VIKINGS WOULD HAVE BEEN GOOD ENOUGH THEY SHOULD HAVE STOPPED THE SAINTS!!!
This is silly. Sudden Death is the best approach, so no changes are needed.
The Vikings could have held onto the ball and not turned it over five times to avoid overtime. They could have kept the Saints out of the end zone four times with less than total 250 yards, you know, play better Red Zone defense. They could have kicked a 51 yard FG to win in regulation. They could have not thrown a pick with 7 seconds left to go to OT. They could have played better defense in OT. They could have stopped the Saints on 4th and 1 in OT. They could have avoided penalties in OT. They could have blocked the kick. They could have forced taken a tip from the Saints and forced a fumble.
However, because they did NOT do any of these things, YOU want to change the rules.
I am neither upset about nor do I consider the result of the NFC Championship this year embarrassing to anyone other than the Vikings.
If the Vikes defenders had done their job in OT they would have gotten the ball. If Farve hadn’t choked the game away they would have won.
Zero need to change the OT rules.
How come no one brought up changing the overtime rule when the Cards D beat the Packers in the wildcard game, or when the Saints caused a fumble in overtime against the Redskins? Bret threw a dumbass interception. They had their chance.
I hope they change it now so all of Minnesota could wonder……”What if?”
****Damn, Life is GOOD in the Big BrEasy!
wah my team didn’t get the ball and we got screwed in overtime.these are the rules of the game. have your defense stop them and you won’t lose!so what if it happens in the superbowl?it is part of the game!leave it the way it is!it is not the saints fault favre and the vikings choked and sent the game into ot,why should they get another chance?I could care less what the casual fan thinks about the game and is there realy such a person out there?that would be like be like me not watching soccer then turning on the championship game and questioning the rules of that stupid game.
aaaaahhh… the return of joe and his head-mounted raccoon!
it is not going to have to be changed; lets end the typical liberal media “imminent change in our preferred way” meme. it is a multi-phase game. learn to play defense and special teams. or just stop putting the balls on the ground.
the vikings had plenty of chances and decided to try and play basketball instead.
if the nfl wasnt embarassed by letting vick in, they wont get embarassed. but in this case, there is no need for embarassment on their part whatsoever.
more people, per capita, know and agree with the rules, than do nfl players and hanger-on media.
One argument that OT is unfair is that the winner of the coin-flip always chooses to receive because they know that gives them a better chance of winning. That argument misses the point of OT. The point is, after 4 quarters, two teams have matched so evenly that the state of the game can be left to chance by a coin. The teams forfeited their rite to “fair” when they failed to win by the end of regulation.
Its sudden death for a reason. If you change it so everyone gets a shot at the ball the game could go on forever. Get it over if you don’t like the OT rules then your team needs to win it in regulation.
A simple improvement:
If receiving team scores a TD game over.
If they kick a FG they must KO and other team gets a shot. If second team get a FG, sudden death. If they get a TD game over.
If receiving team fails to score on first possesion then sudden death.
Biggest objection to present system is receiving team gets a couple 1st downs and kicks a FG to win. This would eliminate that. It would put some strategy into OT. Teams in FG range would still have to try for a TD or risk the other team getting the ball and scoring a TD.
Exactly. I can’t wait for a great game in a Superbowl (no turnovers and good execution) to come down to one OT possession and end with a world wide audience laughig at the fools that run this league.
I remember hearing years ago that the league also didn’t need the “2 point conversion”, but alas, things always change for the better.
In 1994 the kick off mark was moved back 5 yards (from the 35 to the 30 yard line). Before that, the % of teams getting the ball first in OT and scoring was around 28%-29%.
When they moved kickoffs back to the 30 yard line that jumped to 55%-60%.
Move the kickoffs back to the 35 and problem solved.
As a Very Big Vikings fan -
In the words of Brad Childress “It’s the D’s job to stop them.”
I hate to be that guy, but that’s how it should be. Sudden Death is the way to go. Is it luck? Nope. Get the coin toss, D forces a punt, ball back and win. The Vikings failed to do that. You can blame it on the refs, Favre, or anyone. The Defense failed to stop the Saints the one time they needed to. I love the Vikes Defense, but I would say the same thing no matter who the team is. For an example, the Cards defense stopped the Packers D in their game.
The Vikes deserved to lose the game, simple as that. The point they’re making here is not specific to the Vikings, Lord Favre or the NFC champioship game, although it does give fans of the teams that “choked” away the 2009 season long before the Vikings did a reason to spout off. This game just brought up the issue again, and the PFT guys, along with Peter King fom SI, Silver from Yahoo, and 3-4 ESPN talking heads are using it to pontificate from their soap box. Anything said by a Viking fan pro or con will be viewed as sour grapes.
This must be talked about only in the “inner circles” of the media because no other fotoball fan agrees with this. The coin toss can go either way and is fair and then it is the team’s responsibility to either score or stop the other team from scoring. I have never heard anyone else, ever, anywhere think that it should be changed. I dont think anyone has mentioned the Rooney Rule but Florio either. It seems Mr. Florio has 2 pet peeves that no one else cares about.
stadanko says:
January 27, 2010 6:52 PM
How come no one brought up changing the overtime rule when the Cards D beat the Packers in the wildcard game, or when the Saints caused a fumble in overtime against the Redskins? Bret threw a dumbass interception. They had their chance.
—————————
Probably because the first team to get the ball didn’t win in those cases. Maybe? At least, that’s what happened in the Packers/Cards game. I don’t know what year you’re talking about with Saints/Redskins. It wasn’t in the last decade.
And I’m not in the we-need-to-change-the-overtime-rules boat. Just pointing out that’s why no one complained about the OT rule after the Cards beat the Packers.
The current rule is fine – no one has come up with a better one, including you Florio!
The overtime rule is perfect how it is. Green Bay had the ball first and lost. It happens all the time.
What if in a “big profile” game the team that dosen’t win the toss wins. That would validate the exsisting rule.
Every other way would extend the game too long.
If the NFL must change the rule, then the only thing I could support is the first team to six.
A TD wins, or two field goals.
I think the college rule is the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen.
The only change they should make to OT rules is not allow ties in the regular season. Otherwise the rules are fine. Don’t be bitter that both your picks were wrong Florio. It happens. Man up and stop trying to fix what ain’t broken. Typical lawyer, things don’t go your way then the rules aren’t fair. The Vikes made mistakes and paid for it. They should have held onto the ball and not given the Saints a chance to hang around. Deciding possession by stats has to be one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard. Why not open it up to an online vote?
No change neccesary. I am a Vikings fan and they didn’t play well enough to win that game. They wanted to lose that game and it’s a wonder that New Orleans wasn’t able to capitalize on all those turnovers and beat us by 20 points. New Orleans is terrible, and the Colts are going to destroy them.
For everyone who like the NFL overtime rule how about deciding a baseball game by flipping a coin and the winner gets first at bat and if they score they win. Every other sport gives both teams a shot at scoring so why not football. College football does and nobody is wanting the NFL rule to be implemented, just because this is the rule does not make it fair.
It’s funny how the fans and media are the only ones who seem to think this is an issue. Every player and every coach who has ever spoken about the overtime rules says it’s fine the way it is….even after they just lost in overtime without ever getting the ball.
It’s the offense’s job to score points, and it’s the defense’s job to prevent that from happening. Whichever team does their job better wins.
College overtime rules are horrible. I like the NFL rules, are they perfect? no, but they’re fine. There isn’t any system that is going to give you a 50% win percentage for who gets the ball first. These people are paid professionals….get a stop if you dont get the ball back. That Arizona playoff game was a perfect example…neither team’s defense had done crap all night…then when it mattered the most in overtime…bam! sack/fumble/touchdown. It’s fine the way it is, the media needs to find something else to cry about every year.
I am neither a Saints nor Vikings fan, but I would like to see the rule tweaked to TOUCH DOWNS ONLY. The current sudden death over-time rule originated in the famous over time Colts/Giants NFL championship game, but anyone who has seen a replay of that game knows the Colts won with a TD and not a field goal. I think making a TD required to win would pay homage to that historic game and rule while making it more interesting. Really, I hate seeing a team get 2 first downs, then trot out a kicker with a big leg to win it from 50. Did we really play the last hour+ for it to come down to this??? Especially in the playoffs. Really, as it stands now, an enormous amount of pressure is placed on the defense right out of the gate after losing the toss. With the “win by TD only” rule, it would lessen the pressure on the defense and put a little on the offense. Thats what I would like to see.
Sudden death is stupid. It turns winning the game into an unequal task–one team only has to get into field goal range to win, while the other has to first make a defensive stop and then score to win. The shortest paths to victory for each team are wholly different. (Yes, there’s always the defensive takeaway + score to win, but that’s highly unlikely.)
Additionally, since playing defense is harder, a team’s defense is going to be a lot more tired at the end of the game than the offense. Which tilts the playing field still further away from level. And if the team who gets the ball first doesn’t score, their defense has had an extra drive’s worth of rest, adding a _third_ extra burden to the team which loses the coin toss.
The argument of, “if you don’t like it, maybe your stupid team should have won in regulation” is childish. A football game isn’t about whether one team’s offense is better than the other’s defense–it’s about the competition of both team’s offenses and defenses. To arbitrarily say that, now that the contest is tied, only half your team decides the game–that’s stupid.
Make the rule change. Give both teams the ball in overtime. The current rule sucks.
The duration of the game is long enough. OT doesn’t need to stretch on and on. I see nothing wrong with the way OT is played now. Offense and defense both have a job to do on the field. Why does anyone want to give the defense a pass and naturally assume they’re not up for the job? They should be expected to get out on the field, give it their all and stop the offense. But I really am posting this message to stay Braccato looks sharp in those Indy colors. Go Colts!!
The duration of the game is long enough. OT doesn’t need to stretch on and on. I see nothing wrong with the way OT is played now. Offense and defense both have a job to do on the field. Why does anyone want to give the defense a pass and naturally assume they’re not up for the job? They should be expected to get out on the field, give it their all and stop the offense. But I really am posting this message to stay Braccato looks sharp in those Indy colors. Go Colts!!
2 years ago giants-packers game went to overtime because lawrence tynes in the last minutes choked and missed TWO(2) field goals for the giants.
packers won the coin toss and got the ball and then favre threw interception. tynes kicked game winning field goal to WIN.
just 2 weeks ago cardinals rackers missed field goal that would have won and ended the game on last play of regulation tie vs. packers but he choked and missed.
packers won the toss and got the ball, rodgers threw fumble/interception and cardinals recovered it and ran it into the endzone for TD and WIN.
Even the year before cardinals and cowboys went to overtime. cowboys won toss and got ball in overtime but cardinals stopped the cowboys on all 3 plays and then blocked 4th down punt which the cardinals recovered in the endzone for the TD and the WIN.
You can WIN on defense TOO.
how about abolishing the field goal and kicked convert completely – all game long?
c/p
feely missed 2 more yesterday , cardinals rackers in his first 2 years in cinci missed 21 field goals
football has adapted and changed over time especially the nfl. football started as an offshot of english rugby. and like that sport no forward passing was allowed. but over time the nfl has constantly changed yet this part of the game a carryover from rugby still remains part of nfl football and it alone especially this season has won or lost many games and games that have eliminated their entire team who for the other 59 minutes of the game worked their guts out to win. a team gets 3 points for a field goal in rugby JUST the same as in nfl! because it is a part of rugby. in rugby there are no supposed “specialist” kickers standing on the sidelines 59 minutes a game – one of the real players has to kick it. but its rugby this is nfl football. feely and his field goal kicking team missed 3 field goals all easy vs. atlanta in that 3 point loss that almost eliminated the jets. then sure footed on field goals this year misses 2 easy ones vs jets. note – graham was NOT so sure footed on his extra points especially in cleveland game early this year. then kaeding another “specialist” with about the best kicking record THIS year, he misses 3 two of them easy the third from the 57 is not even to the endline and kaeding has kicked 57 yarders in the past. kris brown lost the texans at least 3 games on his choking. suisham cost redskins a couple and he finished his season back with the dallas team who cut him in the first place ending his season missing 2 more field goals on sunday. why is the kicked point after and field goal not abolished from the game? it has nothing to do with moving the ball or stopping the other team from doing so but it decides so many games. might have been in the rules in 1910 but its now 2010 and the forward pass is even allowed now.
@gregjennings – “The overtime rule is perfect how it is. Green Bay had the ball first and lost. It happens all the time.”
Actually, it doesn’t happen all the time. It only happens about 1/3 of the time. That’s the problem. In the last 10 years, 60% of the coin-toss winners won. 30% of the time, the other team never touched the ball in overtime. If the coin toss is random and doesn’t favor either side, then those numbers wouldn’t exist. The current situation is unfair.
I would like the overtime to be:
First one to score 5 points or a 10 minute time limit.
After 10 minutes if the score is still tied, next score wins (sudden death).
That would prevent the team that can kick a 55 yd FG to win and a hard fought game would be over just like that. It would add a lot more strategy.
Please stop beating me.
Signed,
Dead Horse
Stop whining. Of all overtime games this year the team with 1st possession won during that possession half of the games. What’s wrong with that?
Score more points in regulation or shaddup scrubeenies!
The simple fact is that the all the Saints players are wondering:
“How in the hell? We had no business winning that game!”
Saints took advantagae of mistakes by the Vikings at opportune times, and 12-men is just not excusable…but other than that every player on that Saints squad knows they got their asses handed to them.
Here’s what I don’t like about the OT rule in the NFL… It’s the pass interference penalty. A respectable kick-off return and one bad call (that can’t be red flagged) and the other team is in FG range.
At the very least the other team shouldn’t be able to win on a FG without the other team getting a chance – especially in the playoffs.
They should modify the OT rules slightly. DO NOT consider the college treatment at all….in my opinion they stop playing the game the way it was intended to be played.
Here’s a simple solution:
The game is sudden death after each team gets AT LEAST one possession. Thus, the coin flip is not a big concern and can be kept as is.
Keep in mind, the criteria for each team to get at least one possession DOES NOT necessarily mean that each OFFENSE gets one possession, but that each team gets one possession. Let me explain:
Let’s say the Saints-Vikes game began as it did with the Saints winning the coin flip. The Saints go down and score a field goal. Next, the Saints must kick off and the Vikes would have a chance to match the field goal or score a TD. If the Vikes would score a TD on their possession, THEY WIN THE GAME. GAME OVER. If the Vikes would match the Field Goal, the game would be played as Sudden Death from that point forward and thus, then the NEXT team to score in any fashion – Safety, Field Goal, TD would win the game in Sudden Death.
Now, here are some details to this approach. Let’s say the Saints won the coin toss and they run a few plays and FUMBLE! Then the VIKES get the ball and score either a TD or Field Goal on their possession…..thus, GAME OVER.
Here’s another one under this new approach. Let’s say the Saints win the coin toss and start moving down the field. During this possession, the Vikes intercept a pass and are in the process of running it back for a return, but during this run back – the ball is fumbled by a Vikes player and recovered by the Saints. The Saints offense then takes over and goes down the field for a score……..AND THE GAME IS OVER because both squads had a possession.
In my opinion, that’s why there were no complaints in the Green Bay – Arizona OT playoff game; both teams had a possession even though the game ended in Sudden Death.
I think this is the solution for NFL overtime. Please comment.
Blinky says:
For everyone who like the NFL overtime rule how about deciding a baseball game by flipping a coin and the winner gets first at bat and if they score they win. Every other sport gives both teams a shot at scoring so why not football. College football does and nobody is wanting the NFL rule to be implemented, just because this is the rule does not make it fair.
What a stupid posistion to take. You can’t score on defense in baseball, hockey, soccar, basketball, or any other sport I can think of.
Anybody forget how the actual game starts…..???…with a coin flip!!! If you want to change it you need to start at the beginning and you will see that its just fine the way it is….as corny as Herm sounds….”you play to win the game”!…so try to win the game before OT otherwise every team has a chance regardless of offense or defense to score or stop ‘em!!!!
This is one of the rules that cannot be changed. The league should just come out and just say that it is never ever gonna be changed and just stop all this nonsense about that changing overtime rules.
Maybe they could change the rules to include a penalty box? Maybe a Designated hitter? How about an extra club in the bag?
.
WTF?
If one wants to change overtime. Simply do not allow FG in overtime. DO not take the defense out of the game but making both saides touch the ball.
I couldn’t stomach actually listening to Florio bellyache about this. I’ve read his crappy arguments before. Leave sudden death alone.
If you give each team a possession and a “chance to score,” you’re actually giving the team with the second OT possession an advantage. If the first team scores, they’ll kick the ball to a team that will be going for it on fourth down every single time. You’re in essence giving them an extra down.
And – as mentioned – see the Packers-Cards game, won by the Cards even though the Packers won the toss. Or the fact that of the four conference championship games that have gone to OT, this is the first that has been won by the team that won the coin toss.
This is a solution looking for a problem, led by a small but vocal minority of sportswriters. And Florio.
Overtime is fine the way it is. Deal with it. And, get over it.
It’s time for some new material? Maybe something along the lines of whether or not the Rooney Rule is a sham or what inferences about retirement can be drawn from Brett Favre’s vacation to lasso wild sheep.
I like the rule the way it is, if for no other reason than the Saints won. The Vikings hiding behind the court system to avoid suspensions gave them bad karma and boy did they get it in spades.
Here’s the best part, Brad “12 men in the Huddle” Childress will be around for many more years to come. Let’s see how they do without Brent.
What a bunch of rednecks posting…..the subject is the OT rule, not the freakin saints vikes game. only when a redneck poster’s team loses in OT without a chance to have the ball will each stupid poster come around. the chit i’m reading now is nothing but rednecks opinions as it regards a particular team…you would think a poster would realize that the person reading the post might not be as stupid as the person posting it. The freaking NFL OT rule is bullchit as it stands. Somehow, both teams in OT need the opportunity to have the ball on offense.
“One argument that OT is unfair is that the winner of the coin-flip always chooses to receive because they know that gives them a better chance of winning. That argument misses the point of OT. The point is, after 4 quarters, two teams have matched so evenly that the state of the game can be left to chance by a coin. The teams forfeited their rite to “fair” when they failed to win by the end of regulation. ”
Hear effin Hear! Couldn’t have said it better myself. Florio! Why don ‘t you just cover college games since that seems to be your thing? Shit happens. The vikings should have won but they didn’t. Just like my Ravens should have beat the vikings but didn’t cause of a stupid rookie biffed and easy kick! That’s life, get over it.
@zoinks – “It’s funny how the fans and media are the only ones who seem to think this is an issue. Every player and every coach who has ever spoken about the overtime rules says it’s fine the way it is”
Yes, but football is a form of entertainment, and the fans fund it. The only reason those jokers have jobs is because of the fans. Football isn’t a force of nature; it’s basically a big song-and-dance which exists at the pleasure of the paying public. In other words, the NFL works for the fans, whether it behaves that way or not.
Players and coaches are employees of corporations which are funded by the public at large. They’d do well to listen to what the fans want.
Its a bitch but that’s the way it goes. It is a shame it was the Vikes. If it had been the dallas team Jerry would have had a rule change before the boys hit the showers. It is not just reviewed plays that are ruining the game. The league is doing all it can to shoot itself in the foot with some success I might add. Wait until they do away with profit sharing and try to lock the players out. The league is in a greedy death spiral and after 50 years I’m about ready to watch women’s beach volleyball full time. Hey, that may not be such a bad idea anyway.
Jesus, Mary, and Joseph! Do we need one of these stories every day?
If there’s any change to make, move the kickoff up about 5 yards or less to make kicking off a better bet.
redsquare says:
January 27, 2010 10:48 PM
Yes, but football is a form of entertainment, and the fans fund it. The only reason those jokers have jobs is because of the fans. Football isn’t a force of nature; it’s basically a big song-and-dance which exists at the pleasure of the paying public. In other words, the NFL works for the fans, whether it behaves that way or not.
Players and coaches are employees of corporations which are funded by the public at large. They’d do well to listen to what the fans want.
—————————-
What great logic that is. We should just change NFL rules yearly based on the whims of the fans. Great idea. Go ahead and change the rules.
I’ll be over here watching college basketball.
Hopefully the competition committee and Goodell keep things the way they are. I’m not holding out hope for Goodell, though. He seems willing to cower in front of a vocal minority of imbecils… Like Mr. Entertainment here.
Every football fan will have the moment that their team loses on first posession of OT due to a coin flip. You argue differently when on the losing end. Understanding the money involved there is a certain protection of players in regular season for making sudden death a good idea. Playoffs are a total different situation and maybe should have a different OT mentality in regards to “Fair”. Each offense should have a chance with ball.
gregjennings wrote:
What a stupid posistion to take. You can’t score on defense in baseball, hockey, soccar, basketball, or any other sport I can think of.
with exception to baseball, all the other sports you list are transtion games. Rules involving an interception are not as specific and precise as they are in football. There are 2 teams to each football team, and the “fair” way to determine a playoff game is to let each team battle. You can’t compare football to those types of sports. Baseball OT format is “fair” although they can’t score on defense.
Generally I think the current sudden death format is fine. Only suggested change that doesn’t make the OT rules markedly different from regulation rules is this: At the start of OT, the team that had possession at the end of regulation resumes possession at the same spot on the field where they had it at the end of regulation, and it’s sudden death from there.
The current overtime system may have worked back when defenses dominated the game, but in today’s game the rules are set up to give an offense the advantage.
Therefore, if a team gets their offense on the field first, they have the advantage… and the advantage is determined by a coin flip. That seems very unfair to me.
How about this: The first team to get six points wins the game. That makes it a lot tougher for an offense to win it on the first drive. It also makes the red zone and touchdowns much more important in overtime. They should be important since they are in the other 4 quarters. You can push any defense, even great ones, to the 30 yard line and kick a field goal. But doing it twice against a great defense is a lot harder and scoring a touchdown against a great defense is really tough. What do you guys think?
Redsquare, you need another answer? Are not the other poster enough for you.
Very few NFL fans want to change the overtime rule. No one wants that fake college OT system.
It is simple and clean. This is to the point that the Vikes could have gone for 2 after their touchdown to take the lead.
But NO Coach in the will take the chance. They almost always take their chances with the coin toss you think is so unfair.
Odds for winning on first drive fall in playoff games because most teams at this level have good D. Farve has lost in OT twice in p/o past few years, once without getting the ball and once after throwing INT in overtime. No difference.
At NFL, players don’t need “special ed” rules to get in the endzone. A 63/37 % split means teams have a solid chance to hold and get the ball back. And if you can’t do that, then you should go home.
Minnesota had 8 possessions in regulation on which they failed to score. In so doing, they forfeited the “right” to get possession in OT. Not counting end of halves, New Orleans had 7. The Saints forfeited the “right” to get possession in OT. If the teams had managed even a FG just once in 15 opportunities, they win in regulation. They didnt. Time to take your chances.
And, if teams felt they were at that big of a disadvantage by kicking off, wouldnt we see more onside kicks to open OT? If it’s “pre-determined” you have a 60% chance of losing and not seeing the ball? Considering the recovery rate of a “surprise” onside kick is about 60%, seems like a good mathematical strategy to me.
It’s simple….give each team one possesion in ot, if they are still tied then sudden death. That way at least each team had the ball and a chance to win…
If team “A” has the ball first and they have a turnover and team “B” scores off of it, then game over.
There is nothing worse than the college overtime rules. I just cannot stand it. I turn off a game if it goes into overtime. Suddenly, everything changes and we are playing a different game with different strategies. Ridiculous.
This is not just about the NFC title game. The fact of the matter is, the overtime rule is grossly unfair. The average range of an NFL kicker is 47 yards. Most of these kickers have no problem kicking over 50 yards. The league is in offensive league. Preventing the other team from reaching your 35-yard line is way too much to ask of a defensive unit. In regulation, these guys celebrate when they hold the other team to a field goal. In overtime, well, you know the story. It’s hard to accept that your favorite team’s season ended on a fieldgoal. In overtime, you don’t even see good football because all the teams do is gring it out just to reach the other team’s 3o. I am not against sudden death, but let it not be a field goal. The misconception is that the defense is given a chance to stop the other team. This is simply not true. If holding a team to a field goal is consider a success in regulation, it should not be different in overtime.