Roll call for officiating conspiracy believers

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

12 hours ago, fansince88 said:

I just think they do a crappy job at times. At other times we have crappy opinions. 

 

 

....a fair assessment......the speed and complexity of the game continues to increase as do new rules and/or changes.......I'd be in favor of off season officiating TC and OTA's.....plenty of classroom film study to review prior season's major gaffes, film as to the intent of certain rule(s) as well as "live" on field drills...not sure if "full time" officials or adding to the crew would help.....

[finn]

22 minutes ago, BuffaloBill963 said:

? I love people like you. 

 

There are no unnecessary assumptions being made. Some people, you know, actually research and understand how to get to the most objective source(s). 

 

Based on your post, you're clearly not capable of organic thought. Good luck in life. You need it.

Well, I admit even paranoids have real enemies, so a conspiracy is certainly possible. But I notice you only allude to objective, dispassionate, organic (?) evidence. Care to actually provide it? Or are you not among those who "actually research and understand how to get to the most "objective source(s)"?

 

Thanks for the good wishes, btw. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

12 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

Agreed that better teams traditionally seem to get the benefit of the doubt.   One of the things not discussed often with officiating is the reality that refs are anticipating how plays are going to go down before they even happen.   Doing so helps slow the game down and hone in on details.   Anticipating can lead to bias....particularly in favor of the perceived better team.  Anticipating the outcome can even cause outright confusion........which IMO was the case when NRC committed that egregious PI in the NFC Championship and the official got an eyeful of what didn't look anything like anyone imagined would happen.

 

I think there's an element of this, for sure.  It's like the old saw "let a man get a reputation as an early riser, and he can sleep until noon".  Allen has a reputation as a guy who will put his shoulder down and truck people, so they are slow to call "unnecessary roughness" on him even when he's clearly giving himself up and sliding.   We are less likely to get DPI calls because our receivers don't have a reputation for being able to go up and get or run under the deep stuff.

 

Hughes has earned himself a reputation as a hothead with the refs.  They don't see it when he's being strip-searched by the OL.

 

I also think it's possible that the refs have bias at times.  Even if they aren't themselves betting or playing, they have friends and family members who are, and that may creep into things.

 

NFL referees as I understand it, earn between $25,000 and $70,000 per year. 

 

That's not a lot of money for a game where betting (including offshore) is estimated by some to run close to half a billion dollars per game and vet minimum can run 10x that

 

 

[fansince88]

5 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

....a fair assessment......the speed and complexity of the game continues to increase as do new rules and/or changes.......I'd be in favor of off season officiating TC and OTA's.....plenty of classroom film study to review prior season's major gaffes, film as to the intent of certain rule(s) as well as "live" on field drills...not sure if "full time" officials or adding to the crew would help.....

Or even full eyecare coverage.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

 

....a fair assessment......the speed and complexity of the game continues to increase as do new rules and/or changes.......I'd be in favor of off season officiating TC and OTA's.....plenty of classroom film study to review prior season's major gaffes, film as to the intent of certain rule(s) as well as "live" on field drills...not sure if "full time" officials or adding to the crew would help.....

 

I think you get at the root of the issue.  The NFL does not have full time referees.  They started such a program, and quickly suspended it.

 

If the NFL had full time referees who were required to spend off-season in classroom study, to review film and discuss/harmonize how calls should be made every week, and were held accountable for repeated blown calls and mistakes, I think the situation would improve quickly.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

Just now, fansince88 said:

Or even full eyecare coverage.

 

....maybe Goodell signs up "America's Best" as a sponsor??.......

[fansince88]

1 minute ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

....maybe Goodell signs up "America's Best" as a sponsor??.......

Love it!

[Foxx]

the only possible solution is to remove objectivity from the equation. how exactly you do that in a game played and guided by humans, i don't rightly know. however, i do know that with today's technology, we could go an awful long way towards that end. would it make the game more appealing is up for debate though.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I think you get at the root of the issue.  The NFL does not have full time referees.  They started such a program, and quickly suspended it.

 

If the NFL had full time referees who were required to spend off-season in classroom study, to review film and discuss/harmonize how calls should be made every week, and were held accountable for repeated blown calls and mistakes, I think the situation would improve quickly.

...even if they balk at full time refs because the League can't afford it (COUGH), couldn't you still require the current part timers to attend officiating TC and OTA's while getting paid for it?.....then again, that may NOT be in the "budget".....

[Scott7975]

The real problem is that there is no real accountability for referees. Hell there are even rules in place to protect referees from being spoken against. 

[Big Gun]

There is money to be made betting on games and or player stats, fantasy football etc.  It's naive to think some refs don't partake in that stuff.

 

Didn't an NBA ref get busted years ago fixing games because he had a gambling habit. To think it doesn't happen, I have some water front property for sale in Florida!

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...just had cataract surgery.....the new lens is CRYSTAL clear (HINT)...hell even I can now tell the difference between offensive PI versus defensive holding....thinkin' this could be a prerequisite to getting hired??.......

[Sherlock Holmes]

6 hours ago, mykidsdad said:

I think there are various biases that come out from certain referees. I think it is undeniable; and, although, it is unlikely that a widespread conspiracy exists, these spirits of bias sometimes produce results that might appear consistent with a conspiracy. If any conspiracy actually does exist it would probably be because league forces might imply a desire for certain results. For example, an official may be less likely to call a penalty on a star player or may feel there is pressure to keep a game moving by letting things go uncalled at the end of game. These biases can end up being strung together to help or hurt teams that may have fewer stars or need fair calls in crucial moments. Bottom line, whether intended or not, referees are human and the bad calls tend not to balance out, because biases that favor some over others do exist. Tim Donaghy of the NBA seems to be an interesting case study. While everything he has said on this point needs to be taken with a grain of salt, I think some bias to benefit the league as a whole is pervasive in every professional league. While long term strategy should mean refs putting the integrity of the league first by making fair calls, I speculate that benefit to the league through short term, tactical, officiating that benefits a certain team or player happens in the NFL. This kind of bias may be followed by a slew of other biases like a belief that certain players and teams are good or bad, likeable or unlikable, etc. As an example of plain old biases that are largely innocent on the face, on Thursday Josh Allen was not protected by the refs when he slid but Dak was protected when he did not slide. Why? Perhaps because of the bias the refs have regarding an unknown player compared to a star. These decisions are made in an instant, and I think it is impossible for them to be made in a vacuum, so influences of all kinds sometimes produce unfair officiating.

 

I also would not be surprised if from time to time gambling played a role in how games are called.

 

If this makes me a conspiracy guy, so be it. 

Oh mykidsdad... 

 

wait, I agree!

[NewEra]

58 minutes ago, Stranded in Boston said:

I don't believe in conspiracies or rigged games, and I think the refs are doing the best job they can do as humans observing a very fast, chaotic game. But there is *implicit* bias in sensory perception (it's my line of work -- don't ask!). Lots of experimental evidence suggests that our perceptual interpretations are influenced not only by the objective sensory information entering our brains (visual, auditory, etc.), but also by our *expectation* of what should happen/usually happens. For any experts out there, this falls under the rubric of Bayesian inference, in which the perceptual decision -- the "posterior probability" -- is a computed (according to Bayes' theorem) from incoming information AND a "prior probability" encapsulating bias, expectation, etc. Just like us fans, refs undoubtedly have priors about which teams are "better", "more disciplined", etc., that tip the balance in interpreting virtually identical plays. Unfortunately, the Bills have a reputation of being a mediocre, undisciplined team for some 20 years, which impacts referees' decisions on a moment-by-moment basis. Stephon Gilmore is a good example: you can see how confidently he interferes with receivers now, since he left the Bills for the Pats (I've heard claims that he is flagged as much in NE as he is with the Bills, but to my eye he also engages in much more contact with receivers.) Another example is the Cowboys only getting a sideline warning for spearing Josh on his slide rather than a flag (see the Cowboys' mic'd up highlights), whereas the current Bills would be penalized 100% for that infraction. I also remember the Bills getting away with a lot of calls in the early 90s, when they were usually considered the more "disciplined" team on the field.

 

Implicit bias is a tough problem in refereeing, but what to do about it? I imagine that refs discuss this a lot in training, but it's pretty hard to resist something that's been burned into our brain circuits over eons of evolution! Maybe we'll have real-time machine-vision/AI solutions in the future. I have colleagues working on this now, LOL. 

the problem being, the nfl would have to choose to implement this into their game.  Never happen.
 

The NFL could put additional officials in the booth in front of a monitor with additional camera angles.  They prefer not too.  

[clayboy54]

Having worked NFL, MLB, NHL and NASCAR, I can tell you that the games are not fixed. I will also tell you that each league makes upper level decisions to influence the games for their best interests. This is found in rule changes, and in the memos that instruct officials to enforce specific infractions. In the NFL this is referred to as “point of emphasis.” 
 

Now I ask you, in the NFL, who ultimately makes these decisions? The owners. Not Goodell, who answers to the owners, not Al Riveron, who answers to the owners, etc. Who are the most powerful and influential owners? Robert Kraft is #1 by far. Then Jerry Jones. Perhaps Daniel Snyder, as was brought up in another thread. There’s likely a couple more that I don’t know. But, it sure as hell ain’t Kim & Terry Pegula.

 

So at the end of the day, the game is slanted in the direction that these few most powerful owners decide is best for them. Now don’t get me wrong. There is no intent to fix games. There is every intent to do whatever makes the game more profitable and makes them more money. Sometimes that means parity. Sometimes that means “America’s Team.” Sometimes that means worst-to-first. Whatever makes more money in souvenirs, jerseys, tickets, viewership, concessions, and all the rest of the industry. But, it will seldom benefit any club that does not have the fan base to substantially drive profitability. And, the worst part is that these powers-that-be always try to drive the less profitable clubs toward more profitable destinations. Bob Kraft would like nothing more that to see the Bills relocate to a bigger city, as an example. It would make him much more money.

 

The best we can hope for is to survive with the tables tipped against us. The worst case is that it becomes unsustainable.

[BearNorth]

Problem with more refs, either on the field or in a booth, is they all think they need to do something to justify their existence.  Game is nearly unwatchable now with the random nature of offensive and defensive holding calls, hands to the face, roughing the passer etc.  Calls are all over the place.  Why did Josh not get a PF roughing call at the end of his run when he slid, yet Jordan Phillips playing through the whistle gets called for UR.

[GTownBills]

Come on, does everyone actually think that when you watch the NFL, you are seeing the "best team" win all the time?

 

Certain teams make more money for the NFL than others. Those moneymakers will get help from officials along the way. There are certain storylines that draw big ratings for the NFL, and the officials will help along the way for those, too.

 

This isn't to say that officials are "on the take" or that they have been given instructions from Goodell to make sure one team or the other wins. They aren't taking orders to fix the games...they are doing it because they can tell that it's supposed to happen.

 

However, they know who butters the NFL bread. They know that their careers with the NFL will go more smoothly...better scheduling, bigger games...if they nudge the outcomes into the right direction during games.

 

Now, the refs cant always swing the outcome in the "right" direction. That's why nobody can say the NFL is "fixed." Because sometimes, teams play well enough to overcome unfair officiating.

 

Most fans will NOT want to admit all of this because they want to believe that the best team on a given day wins. It doesn't work like that. Never has.

 

Seriously. Do you REALLY think Belichick and Brady are SOOOO GREAT that they can dominate the NFL for freaking 16 years, season after season, with a rotating cast of characters around them? And NOBODY has ever figured them out? It doesn't work that way. It never has in the history of ANY pro sports. It's just a very good coach and very good QB who are cheating their way into the record books with WEEKLY assistance from the officials. Good lord, it's been happening for years and years and years...the Pats always getting those perfectly timed holds, PIs, etc....right when they need them, week in and week out. Their O-line holds everyone all day long and rarely get flagged. Does that mean they would suck without help from the refs? No, of course not. But NO WAY would they have 6 rings and counting. NO WAY.

 

The Pats mean ratings, and money, for the NFL, as long as they keep winning, and the NFL will do everything to keep that going.

 

It's EXTREMELY easy for officials to effect the outcome of a game without being as blatant as they are sometimes. The ones who can do it without being blatant are rewarded.

 

With all this said, I still enjoy the games, I just don't have the naive belief that I'm watching a fair contest where the best team will always win and the refs are neutral.

[LABILLBACKER]

2 hours ago, entropyrules said:

Not an organized or even disorganized conspiracy. I agree with those who feel its an internal/unconscious bias that some officials have for teams with either winning records, at home, or have large followings (i.e Cowgirls as an example)..the corollary to that is also a bit true in that "downtrodden" teams like the Bills are probably considered fodder by some of the officials.

 

No matter what The Pats definitely get more breaks than normal and whats stupid about that is they really don't need those breaks with the coach and QB they have.

I think once Josh establishes himself as a top qb in the league,  the NFL will recognize the marketing value Bills games will have. And therefore calls will slowly come our way. I don't ever see the Bills joining that elite "darling" club of the NFL, but as this team and qb improve,  the love will follow. Ask Michael Jordan....ask Tom Brady...it's human nature. 

Edited November 30, 2019 by LABILLBACKER

[Rc2catch]

4 hours ago, Moose said:

Can you give even one example of that in the last 22 years?

Watch the games. I don’t have archive footage saved on my phone lol. 
The pats don’t get every call. As I said the refs blow calls across all games and each teams fan base complains. Read patriot fans comments on Facebook and see how much they cry about the refs being against kraft and against the patriots 

[Capco]

2 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

I'd be in favor of off season officiating TC and OTA's.....plenty of classroom film study to review prior season's major gaffes, film as to the intent of certain rule(s) as well as "live" on field drills...not sure if "full time" officials or adding to the crew would help.....

 

I think one of the issues is that the officials are not full time employees.  Most of them are professionals (lawyers, engineers, businessmen), and those professions leave very little time to master officiating.  I'd feel a lot better if the refs were full time.  Hell I'd even apply to be one if they'd agree to never let me officiate a Bills game ?

 

Interestingly enough, the fact that many are professionals theoretically makes them less susceptible to bribes.  Corrupt judges and police are less common in places where they are paid enough to live comfortably, for example.  Bribes are much more tempting when you are struggling to put food on your family's table.  That's partly why corruption is so rampant in the developing world.