Problems with making PI reviewable...

[row_33]

3 hours ago, Southern Bills Fan said:

I don't remember everyone on tv screaming for rule changes when an obvious illegal forward lateral on a kickoff changed the outcome of a playoff game.

 

that was the correct call

 

still hurts though

 

i saw it happen and said "forward pass" and went to get another beer and came back and yikes....

 

 

49 minutes ago, papazoid said:

dee fords offside penalty cost KC the game (wiped out a change of possession, that likely would have led to KC running out the clock). he and coach reid claim he didn't get the customary verbal warning.

 

the PI penalty that wasn't called didn't singularly determine the outcome (would have only been a first down, but still significant)

 

the side judge Cavaletto  and back judge Prukop should never work another playoff game for a very long time, if not fired. human error from officials calling judgement plays in real time will NEVER be eliminated.

 

after PI, then what about roughing the passer calls, holding, illegal picks, etc....the complaining from the vanquished and their fans will never end, they will just move on to the next outrage. there are already complaints that replays make the game too long.

 

HAVING  SAID ALL THAT.....it can easily be improved and reviewable calls expanded.....when knowledgable people like gene steratore and tony romo can make better snap judgements in 15 seconds than the booth officials do in minutes, that's an area that can be improved.

 

NFL needs a bigger pool of better trained, full time  NFL refs on the field and in the booth. you could start with a massive video conferencing effort from the officials home (eliminate travel to a central location) with maybe 20 hours of classroom video training per week for most of the year, where actual tests are regularly given. based on real game and classroom grading/rating, referees move up and down the starting and practice squad designations.

 

 

bad call, happens, oh well

 

not worth dwelling on for the next 50 years of your life and post-death mind

 

unless you are a fan of that team or lost at least $2,000 on the game

 

otherwise STFU and get on with your life

 

[Roch Jim]

it always drove me crazy how ESPN railed and railed against the replacement refs. They were clearly in bed with the Refs union, and took great pains to show every missed call by the replacements, and advocate for full-time refs. The full time refs have been no better than the replacements since the day they came back, and maybe even worse due to the arrogance of some of the more senior/famous ones. ESPN has obviously covered the blown calls (to death), but I have never seen or heard one of their talking heads discuss the general mediocrity of these full-timers. Just another example of how ESPN decides to advocate for an issue, as opposed to an impartial representation.

[row_33]

10 minutes ago, Roch Jim said:

it always drove me crazy how ESPN railed and railed against the replacement refs. They were clearly in bed with the Refs union, and took great pains to show every missed call by the replacements, and advocate for full-time refs. The full time refs have been no better than the replacements since the day they came back, and maybe even worse due to the arrogance of some of the more senior/famous ones. ESPN has obviously covered the blown calls (to death), but I have never seen or heard one of their talking heads discuss the general mediocrity of these full-timers. Just another example of how ESPN decides to advocate for an issue, as opposed to an impartial representation.

 

it's just a game....

 

not worth it

[RochesterRob]

  If they modify the challenges then they should have one set of challenges for regular season and maybe provide one or two additional challenges for the playoffs.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Topic titles must reflect the content of the topic (and it must contain more than just a name). This helps to reduce the number of duplicate topics and makes the community much more user friendly.

 

Please edit the title so that it properly reflects the discussion that you started.

 

Thank you.

[LabattBlue]

52 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

Topic titles must reflect the content of the topic (and it must contain more than just a name). This helps to reduce the number of duplicate topics and makes the community much more user friendly.

 

Please edit the title so that it properly reflects the discussion that you started.

 

Thank you.

Better?  

[Logic]

Not sure if anyone has said this yet, but the CFL gives each head coach ONE flag (separate from the usual challenge flags) with which to challenge a pass interference call. Since this rule was instituted, the average time of games in the CFL has actually gone DOWN.

I don't see why we can't give each coach one flag -- say it's blue, just for the sake of argument -- and that's all they get. They can each challenge ONE pass interference play a game. Is that REALLY going to add a bunch to the length of games? I say no.

If you're going to let PI be a spot foul, you have to let it be challenged.

[papazoid]

Thanks to Andy Reid and Saints nation, whining is the new national pastime of the 'No Fair League'

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/thanks-andy-reid-saints-nation-whining-new-national-pastime-no-fair-league-041306334.html

[Doc Brown]

Even watching it live I wasn't sure if he got their early at first and we have the benefit of a high def TV.  Of couse I was half schnozed, but the ref still has to make these split second decisions in real time.  The human brain sometimes can't process a play quick enough.  Maybe he thought they got there at the same time or was afraid to throw a flag at a crucial moment of the game.   Human error with officials will always be part of the game.  Maybe giving the coaches one challenge under five minutes in the 4th quarter to use on any play that they thought should/shouldn't be a penalty could've prevent this from happening in the future without significantly slowing down the game would be prudent, but that's about all I'd be for as the game is long enough.  

[judman]

On 1/22/2019 at 5:52 PM, yungmack said:

I think the Head Coach should be allowed to challenge every single play but would be limited to 3 challenges total for the game, OT included.

This. 

 

But have one review per coach in OT instead of auto-booth review.  Make OT more like college.

[BobbyC81]

On 1/22/2019 at 3:46 PM, One Buffalo said:

What if instead of giving the teams challenge ability, they have a ref challenge- someone who is monitoring the feeds and can stop the play based on something they see on the screen.  They could define parameters in such a way that it would only be used to catch situations like this, not used in the scenarios that are judgement calls.  

 

That was a judgement call. It was just poor judgement.  From the replays, I don’t know what the refs were looking at.

[formerlyofCtown]

On 1/22/2019 at 5:18 PM, LabattBlue said:

Clearly they can't enforce it by the letter of the law.  Much like there is OL holding on every play, there is hand fighting on every pass play between the DB and the WR.  If they allow that ticky tack stuff to be reviewed and enforced, teams will save their challenges for the 4th quarter, heave bombs, and if no catch or no flag, throw the challenge for a potential 40-50 yard gain.

 

It is somehow going to have to be written in the rules that the PI has to be blatant(good luck defining that).  

 

They may regret going down the road of opening up replay challenges to more plays than currently allowed.

The only acception to this I think would be to overturn a call that was made.  A phantom call.  It sucks when a call is missed but I sincerey believe there is hanky panky going on with these phantom calls.  People think its the Bookies but if it is truely intentional it is more than likely the NFL itself trying to create "whats best for the league" and ratings.

I wonder how mich more attention they get when things like this happen.  Look at the plot for the SB, they wiil be able to hype NE and LA better than they would have been able to do so with  KC and NO.  Its a Big cospiracy theory but it makes sense, at least in my head.

Edited January 24, 2019 by formerlyofCtown

[BobbyC81]

22 hours ago, mattynh said:

I guess I am ok with making PI reviewable for both non calls and called penalties.  I also think called penalties in general should be reviewable.  For instance the phantom roughing the passer on Brady.  They can get that corrected and it is clear.  What I dont think they should do is make non calls in general reviewable.   If they did, anytime there is a TD of 30+ yards you could through the flag and say the LG held and get it reversed...that would suck.  At the end of the day, no system will be perfect but they should continue to improve it.

 

Yeah, remember when the NHL instituted the delayed replay on Offside. There would be a close Offside not called, the offensive team had the puck in the zone for about a minute before scoring and then the ppposing coach challenged the Offside to wipe out the goal.  That was a ridiculous nightmare.

[CommonCents]

If you want to have an honest conversation about the possible reviewing of penalties you need to use the view point of the league. This games popularity is driven by gambling, like it or not. Any changes would have cater towards that. 

 

There is zero chance they are going to allow league employees to phone down and change calls that were made on the field. Using examples of tennis and other sports were replay is used to determine right and wrong is also misleading, the NFL has discretionary calls. It’s a bit different than did the ball hit the white line or not. 

 

They definetly could improve things but I’m not sure replay is the way to go. The biggest thing they could do is drill the refs on calling the games the same way every game, even in the playoffs. I like the hockey approach of swallowing the whistle/flag in the playoffs but you need refs that can manage that and still see the obvious when a play like the NRC one occurs.

 

Needed to make that call. Preseason or SB, it was blatant. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, papazoid said:

Thanks to Andy Reid and Saints nation, whining is the new national pastime of the 'No Fair League'

It actually started two November’s ago and the whining, protesting, resisting, pouting, and nonstop tantrums are still going strong today.

[Ramza86]

You cant do it. Every play would be a PI.

 

There needs to be more power from the refs in New York. 

 

They should be able to radio in the refs and say...hey throw the flag. It was a PI.

 

Hell... give them a different color flag to throw so we know its from the booth. 

[PromoTheRobot]

Maybe you only do it in playoff games, and each team only gets one review, just to keep it from becoming a zoo.

[mjt328]

There are basically two types of penalties.  Objective and Subjective.

 

Objective calls (Offside, delay of game, facemask, etc.) are clear, obvious and indisputable.  Either a guy is over the line before the snap, or he isn't.  Either the facemask is grabbed, or it isn't.  These types of plays should always be immediately reviewed by a referee upstairs in the booth, who can rewind and watch the play again within seconds of it happening.  He can radio down to the crew if a call is missed and get it changed before the next play.

 

Subjective calls (like taunting) are the ones which are completely up to the refs discretion.  One player does a dance or uses a cuss word near the ref and gets a 15-yard penalty.  Another player does the same thing and nothing happens.  These kinds of calls need to be 100% eliminated from the game.  If you want to stop taunting from happening, then issue fines afterwards.  Don't let those calls affect the game itself.

 

The tricky ones are the calls/penalties which can sometimes be in either category, like pass interference or holding.  These are places where NFL has somewhat vague rules in place, where penalties are sometimes very clear (the Robey-Coleman play) and sometimes dependent on how strict the the game is being officiated (the Gronkowski no-call).  The best thing you can do is try taking out the subjectivity of those calls.  For instance - allow holding and pass interference.  Obviously, this would drastically change how the game is played.  But it would also help lower penalties and give officials a smaller impact in the outcome of games.

 

 

 

[Doc]

22 minutes ago, mjt328 said:

There are basically two types of penalties.  Objective and Subjective.

 

Objective calls (Offside, delay of game, facemask, etc.) are clear, obvious and indisputable.  Either a guy is over the line before the snap, or he isn't.  Either the facemask is grabbed, or it isn't.  These types of plays should always be immediately reviewed by a referee upstairs in the booth, who can rewind and watch the play again within seconds of it happening.  He can radio down to the crew if a call is missed and get it changed before the next play.

 

Subjective calls (like taunting) are the ones which are completely up to the refs discretion.  One player does a dance or uses a cuss word near the ref and gets a 15-yard penalty.  Another player does the same thing and nothing happens.  These kinds of calls need to be 100% eliminated from the game.  If you want to stop taunting from happening, then issue fines afterwards.  Don't let those calls affect the game itself.

 

The tricky ones are the calls/penalties which can sometimes be in either category, like pass interference or holding.  These are places where NFL has somewhat vague rules in place, where penalties are sometimes very clear (the Robey-Coleman play) and sometimes dependent on how strict the the game is being officiated (the Gronkowski no-call).  The best thing you can do is try taking out the subjectivity of those calls.  For instance - allow holding and pass interference.  Obviously, this would drastically change how the game is played.  But it would also help lower penalties and give officials a smaller impact in the outcome of games.

 

I was with you until allowing holding and PI.  Sure that would make it easier to judge but that's not where you want to go.  But there are clear examples of PI, like NRC's was.

[freeagentqb]

21 hours ago, Logic said:

Not sure if anyone has said this yet, but the CFL gives each head coach ONE flag (separate from the usual challenge flags) with which to challenge a pass interference call. Since this rule was instituted, the average time of games in the CFL has actually gone DOWN.

I don't see why we can't give each coach one flag -- say it's blue, just for the sake of argument -- and that's all they get. They can each challenge ONE pass interference play a game. Is that REALLY going to add a bunch to the length of games? I say no.

If you're going to let PI be a spot foul, you have to let it be challenged.

I think that scenario would drive the coaches crazy.  OK when do I throw this one-time flag?  If Reid had thrown it earlier in the game, then what?  So I think they would probably keep it in their pocket until the last few minutes of a close game and probably never even use it.  I've seen so many replays of  passes where the db and receiver are hand fighting the whole time.  More often than not receivers are giving a push on the db when running an out pattern.  Like so many have said, pi (off or def) could be called on probably 90 percent of passes.  I've watched football for over 50 years and played for 10 and still have no real answers for handling PI.  Don't think you can review every one.

Edited January 24, 2019 by freeagentqb
spelling