Opinions: reviewable penalty/non-penalty calls

[Fox007]

1 minute ago, Sgt Schultz said:

So what do you think they would be saying when Peyton had exhausted those two challenges prior to the call in question?  I guarantee you they would not be saying that he should have not used both challenges earlier.

Doesn't matter...you get two challenges like now and everything is on the table and the chips fall where they fall. Still an improvement over utter incompetence or actual honest mistakes and most of the games the two challenges aren't even used so actually having uses for those makes them mean even more than they do now.

[davos]

The technology is there to install a system for spotting the ball, easy fix #1.

The other being a booth crew that immediately reviews everything throughout the game, eliminating the stupid hooded review camera on the field and unnecessary challenges. The booth will make it quick, have a direct line to NFL NY, and expedite the overly long review process. They can override penalties and call in missed ones.  If they think a roughing penalty was bs, they phone it into the head ref. 

The only problem with this is that offensive lineman really hold a ton and a lot goes unseen. If they were to call every one that would absolutely ruin the flow of the game. So maybe some restrictions. 

They also need to reassess the defensive holding rules. I don't think a d hold should be an automatic first. PIs, yes...d holds, 5 yards.

A top down penalties and rules assessment  needs to be done by the rules committee. 

[Sgt Schultz]

2 minutes ago, davos said:

The technology is there to install a system for spotting the ball, easy fix #1.

The other being a booth crew that immediately reviews everything throughout the game, eliminating the stupid hooded review camera on the field and unnecessary challenges. The booth will make it quick, have a direct line to NFL NY, and expedite the overly long review process. They can override penalties and call in missed ones.  If they think a roughing penalty was bs, they phone it into the head ref. 

The only problem with this is that offensive lineman really hold a ton and a lot goes unseen. If they were to call every one that would absolutely ruin the flow of the game. So maybe some restrictions. 

They also need to reassess the defensive holding rules. I don't think a d hold should be an automatic first. PIs, yes...d holds, 5 yards.

A top down penalties and rules assessment  needs to be done by the rules committee. 

My major concern about your plan is that it will put this in the hands of the group that has done more damage to professional football than any other entity: the NFL Competition Committee.  They have handled most rules changes about as well as a five-year-old steers an automobile moving at 70mph.

The one thing they did (finally) get right was their approach to redefining what constitutes a catch.  Instead of coming up wiht a half-baked idea and moving forward, this past offseason they brought in a bunch of qualified people (current and ex-players, officials, etc) and showed them a ton of replays and asked, without referencing any rule, "is this a catch or not?"  Then they drilled down to why, and changed the rule accordingly.  While that meant it is somewhat subjective, it is much cleaner and gives the officials a chance to actually call it on the field.

Other than that, the Competition Committee is pretty much 0 forever in getting things right.

[Chaos]

3 hours ago, Palmetto said:

I also don't think the Refs would like this

everyone questioning their calls even more than now

Who cares what the refs like?  The biggest problem with officiating is there is little to no accountability for mistakes made; a more refined review process including "judgement" penalty calls would address that problem right away.

[davos]

27 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

My major concern about your plan is that it will put this in the hands of the group that has done more damage to professional football than any other entity: the NFL Competition Committee.  They have handled most rules changes about as well as a five-year-old steers an automobile moving at 70mph.

The one thing they did (finally) get right was their approach to redefining what constitutes a catch.  Instead of coming up wiht a half-baked idea and moving forward, this past offseason they brought in a bunch of qualified people (current and ex-players, officials, etc) and showed them a ton of replays and asked, without referencing any rule, "is this a catch or not?"  Then they drilled down to why, and changed the rule accordingly.  While that meant it is somewhat subjective, it is much cleaner and gives the officials a chance to actually call it on the field.

Other than that, the Competition Committee is pretty much 0 forever in getting things right.

True, true though it will be interesting given Sean Payton is a member.  The committee changes members a fair amount but here it currently i in a snapshot:

Rich McKay (chairman) – president, Atlanta Falcons 

John Mara – owner, New York Giants

Stephen Jones – owner, Dallas Cowboys

Mark Murphy – president, Green Bay Packers

Ozzie Newsome – general manager, Baltimore Ravens

Mike Tomlin – head coach, Pittsburgh Steelers

John Elway – general manager, Denver Broncos

Sean Payton – head coach, New Orleans Saints

--

Saints, Cowboys, Packers, & Giants all had big issues with the refs this year.  I can see something happening but I'm not hopeful it is going to be good.  

[Palmetto]

7 minutes ago, Chaos said:

Who cares what the refs like?  The biggest problem with officiating is there is little to no accountability for mistakes made; a more refined review process including "judgement" penalty calls would address that problem right away.

 I agree i dont think the NFL wants that type of  spotlight on its officials

[Carolina Cajun]

I have a history on here saying that I just want 1 official in the booth watching the game and replays live.  I don't care if you toss a mechanical arm with a yellow flag on the sideline that can throw the flag, but it could solve all of this trash.  Guys who are headhunting and targeting just get tossed like OBJ in the Norman Fiasco or the myriad of cheap shots that Burfict does.  He literally has until the next play to throw a flag and it can only be thrown for personal fouls or interference, not subjective stuff like holding.  How the hell is it 2018, cars can drive themselves, rockets can land themselves, and we have all the information in world history on a thing the size of a credit card, but we cant have a dipshit sit in a booth and help officiate a game which would make it cleaner and safer.

[pantherclaw]

Do you seriously want to make football that much more unwatchable?

[Shotgun]

3 hours ago, OneBadCat said:

Hell yes. Make PI and personal fouls challengeable.

I keep seeing the argument that it would make the game last too long. Well I'd rather my team not get cheated out of the game if it went  another 30 minutes. The officiating is ruining the NFL product. It can't be denied anymore. Why do these players and coached work so hard if the game can be decided a BS call?

We would still get cheated tough. 

[Shocker]

Let the teams use their challenges on anything.  All for it.

[Palmetto]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-nfl-might-consider-allowing-reviews-pass-interference-saints-fiasco-173552996.html

 

It won’t help the New Orleans Saints feel better, but a report Monday said the NFL could consider making pass interference a reviewable play.

The NFL, constantly reactive instead of proactive, apparently is going to look into changing the challenge rules after the Saints were robbed in Sunday’s NFC championship game. Rams cornerback Nickell Robey-Coleman blasted Saints receiver Tommylee Lewis on a key third down late in Sunday’s game, no call was made, allowing the Rams time to tie the game and eventually win it in overtime. Nobody, not even Robey-Coleman, believes it wasn’t interference. The officials screwed up.

The NFL hadn’t said anything publicly about perhaps the biggest officiating controversy in its history on Monday, but a source did manage to tell Mark Maske of the Washington Post that “NFL leaders and the league’s rulemaking competition committee” plan to consider making pass interference calls subject to challenges and replay review.

Too little, too late to avoid a controversy that will help define the entire 2018-19 NFL season. But perhaps another ridiculous situation could be avoided in the future.

[Woodie]

Adding a reviewable challenge would not have much effect on the length of a game.  They already do this in Canada, and the games actually got shorter.  Not saying that's what would happen, but the point is it won't add much time to the game.

In fact, it wouldn't even necessarily add any time.  Rather than even add a challenge, they could just expand what is already challengeable and keep the same number of team challenges per game.  Nothing really changes except more missed egregious calls would be corrected.  But even if the do add just one more challenge per team, it wouldn't have much effect on the length of a game.
 

[Woodie]

To me there is no question they should add the ability to challenge a wrong or missed call.  However, there would also need to be some limitations.  Holding, for example, happens every play, so you can't have coaches going on a witch hunt to try and find a penalty whenever a play doesn't go their way.  No system is going to be perfect, but they can make it as fair as possible.  

And I get the idea of the human element being a part of the game, but that also means that in many cases the teams are not the ones that effect the outcome of a game, it's the refs (and that idea is ok until it's your team that gets screwed).  The only purpose of the refs is to make sure rules are followed and procedures are enforced, so the use of technology on a broader scale only strengthens the role of the officials and would help limit their direct impact on the game. 

As someone mentioned earlier, these missed calls are often due to the refs not having a clear sight on exactly what happened.  While we fans watching on television or high up in the stands can easily see the play, the refs view may be blocked by players or they could even be looking at something else, depending on their responsibility or what is happening on the field.  So, the use of replay would go a long way to making sure a game isn't decided on a missed call.

[Davidson Deac II]

18 hours ago, Shocker said:

Let the teams use their challenges on anything.  All for it.

Agreed, and add 1 review per half.  And make all plays reviewable in the last two minutes.