Bad Officiating this year...lots of complaints but (1 Viewer)

[nerangers]

Been hearing the complaints...and rightly so for the most part. The real question is how would you fix it?

Been hearing they want to have full time Referees. Is that enough?

Is more technology needed? (Goal line cameras?)

More challenges for the Coaches?

All plays should be considered reviewable?

What do you sharks think?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

It's ridiculous to me that there's a strict "penalties are not reviewable" rule. There are plenty of penalties that are either clearcut enough or missed badly enough that you can tell by replay they were way off.

 

[Islander]

All plays (almost) should be reviewable, including penalties.

Electronic chip in the ball to allow checking 1st downs and TDs with less controversy.

More technological measurement of first downs than using sticks and metal chains.

More camera angles.

Hire refs full time and pay them well. The NFL has enough money for this. By paying them well, they will have lots of applications. If you don't pay much, people making 100k per year will not quit their job to be NFL refs. Train those refs 12 months per year. Make them ref other leagues during the NFL offseason.

 

[thesurfshop19]

It's ridiculous to me that there's a strict "penalties are not reviewable" rule. There are plenty of penalties that are either clearcut enough or missed badly enough that you can tell by replay they were way off.

Agree 100%. I can understand partially the "once you allow us to review judgment calls, the system goes crazy!" argument ... but on the other hand, why should a judgment be more valid during the first view in real time than repeat viewings in slow motion?If it's within the current challenge system, you're really not going to see coaches go all out with challenges unless they're game-changing or flagrant calls. And you'd have to see indisputable visual evidence that the call was wrong (i.e., we probably wouldn't overturn the Locklear holding or Jackson PI calls since you could argue by the letter of the law that they were the right call).

I also think the last 2 minutes thing is silly. I understand it's to protect coaches from running out of challenges if they don't have timeouts left, but change it so that in the last 2 minutes either the booth or a coach can challenge a play. If a coach challenges in the final 2, they still lose a timeout, so there's no advantage gained by 'saving' the challenges.

 

[steviey]

Regardless of the call on the field if the video replay is inconclusive (one way or the other) about whether or not the player scores, then no TD.

 

[jimweldy]

Modify the pass interference rule to be more like the facemask rule - minor contact gets you 10 yards and an automatic first down. Blantant pull a guy down so he can't make the TD penalty is a spot foul. Too many of these ticky-tack pass interference calls are having major impacts on the outcome of games!

 

[brettdj]

All plays (almost) should be reviewable, including penalties.

Electronic chip in the ball to allow checking 1st downs and TDs with less controversy.

More technological measurement of first downs than using sticks and metal chains.

More camera angles.

Hire refs full time and pay them well. The NFL has enough money for this. By paying them well, they will have lots of applications. If you don't pay much, people making 100k per year will not quit their job to be NFL refs. Train those refs 12 months per year. Make them ref other leagues during the NFL offseason.

You will lose Hochulli and others going full time. They already use NFL Europe and Arena football for officials training.I actually feel they did well this year. The better solution is probably informing the fans of the rules. Maybe some clinics in all of the NFL cities.

Another idea is Officials press conferences or a Full 1 hour show from the NFL on officiating. Going over different rules and what each official does. This would also get some more people excited about doing officiating.

 

[BoltBacker]

Electronic chip in the ball to allow checking 1st downs and TDs with less controversy.

More technological measurement of first downs than using sticks and metal chains.

I'm always surprised you don't hear more support for this idea.The sticks and metal chains don't bother me near as much as a ref running in from 20 yards away and putting his foot where he thinks the ball was at the bottom of the pile when forward progress was stopped.

 

[BoltBacker]

I actually feel they did well this year. The better solution is probably informing the fans of the rules. Maybe some clinics in all of the NFL cities.

I agree they do a better job than MLB or the NBA every year and maybe that makes the NFL's bad calls stand out more.The fans don't need the clinic nearly as much as some broadcasters that don't seem to understand some of the rules. You'll be sitting there listening to a broadcaster chatter away while a play is reviewed wondering WTF the broadcaster is talking about and how he can't understant what's being replayed over and over right in front of him. It only fans the flames of the fans that are sure they are getting "robbed" by the refs.

 

[SoloMatisse]

-put 10 more cameras on the field...

-place an age limit of 50 on NFL refs.....you hit 50, youre done.

 

[AB in DC]

Hand-held viedo thingy for the refs to review plays whenever he wants.

Alternatively, and this is something I haven't heard mentioned -- on an instant replay challenge, both the head ref and and the official who made the challenged call gets to look at reviews. Head ref gets the final call, but the other official gets to say "whoops, I thought the ball crossed the plane, but that's really his helmet" rather than having the head ref divine what is indisputable and what isn't.

 

[The Jerk]

I would like to see the NFL develop a centralized instant replay system. A group of people could be assigned to league headquarters to either make the actual decision on calls that are challenged or assist the referee in making the decision. In theory, the process of reviewing plays would become more standard and consistent rather than relying on individual replay officials and referees. The disadvantage is that conspiracy theorists would potentially blame every replay decision they didn't like on the NFL office wanting a certain team to win. By the way, a centralized review system is in place in the NHL for reviewing questionable goals and apparently is being received fairly well, at least so far.

I would also like to see the NFL eliminate rules interpretation where possible. An obvious example is the "football move" required to rule a completion or incompletion, but their are others. I think that would eliminate confusion in everyone's mind concerning certain calls: players, coaches, media and fans.

 

[Godsbrother]

Remove instant replay and go with whatever is called on the field. Keep the game moving. Close calls have always been part of the game. What is hurting it is seeing the play from 100 angles, slowed down frame by frame, and analyzed by announcers that in some case don't know the rules.

Make the call and get on with the next play. You get a bad call, tough, overcome it. It is a football game, not brain surgery, quit over analyzing it. Not having Instant Replay is one of the few things MLB has done right.

 

[mad sweeney]

Full time refs. I can't imagine with all the billions the NFL makes they can't afford to pay them more than 5K a game.

PI should be reviewable. Most devastating penalty in the book and it's a full speed judgement call usually.

 

[Osaurus]

Public ridicule of each officiating crew in the town square may help. Maybe make them full time emplyees and let them train in the off season.

 

[Duke1948]

Modify the pass interference rule to be more like the facemask rule - minor contact gets you 10 yards and an automatic first down. Blantant pull a guy down so he can't make the TD penalty is a spot foul. Too many of these ticky-tack pass interference calls are having major impacts on the outcome of games!

 

[Refbuz]

I am proably in the minority but I don't think that the officiating was that bad this year. They had more good games than bad games. Unfortunately, the bad ones always get more pub than the good ones, but that is the nature of the beast.

Full time officials is just not a feasable option, because there are just not enough games to work. Being on the field in game situations is the one of the most important ways that an official can get better. They already go to training camp for a couple weeks with teams, not to mention 2 or 3 clinics in the offseason. What else would you like to see them do? Football season runs from August (training camp) to early january. What are they supposed to do in the other 7 months of the year, sit in a class room and watch film?? How do you do that when your workforce is spread out across the country??? It's not like any other sport where there's a ton of games to work each week

The NFL started NFL Europe and they have a vested interest in the arena league, I don't think they'll shell out too much more money to start up another league just so they can have full time officials. Besides, they are already using both of these leagues as training grounds for their younger officials, with some of the current NFL referee's doing a "tour" in europe. If you have your current officials working in those leagues, where are you going to get your "new blood" from???

One thing that I would like to see is the NFL develop a clininc where the fans see the game through the eyes of the official, so that they can understand what each official's responsibility is on the field.

 

[P Boy]

Just get rid of the refs & play "Call your own fouls".

Or better yet, randomly pick fans each game who claim to be knowledgeable and give them the zebra shirts.

Even better yet, let the announcers call the games from the booth while watching numerous slo-mo replays between each play.

Seriously, make the refs full-time and then have performance meetings from the previous game with vet refs every week - maybe Tuesdays. Then put together a weekly "call" video from the all the previous week's play that reffing teams can review the rest of the week.

 

[B-Deep]

Regardless of the call on the field if the video replay is inconclusive (one way or the other) about whether or not the player scores, then no TD.

This gets the award for dumbest sugestion ever.."sorry, we saw the TD break the plane but the camera was blocked by a big lineman, so no TD"

 

[Refbuz]

... then have performance meetings from the previous game with vet refs every week - maybe Tuesdays. Then put together a weekly "call" video from the all the previous week's play that reffing teams can review the rest of the week.

The NFL already does this...

 

[P Boy]

... then have performance meetings from the previous game with vet refs every week - maybe Tuesdays.  Then put together a weekly "call" video from the all the previous week's play that reffing teams can review the rest of the week.

The NFL already does this...

But with reffing being a part time job, how much can really be devoted to review with these guys holding down other full time positions? I would also think that extended team review would be much more effective than individual review.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Regardless of the call on the field if the video replay is inconclusive (one way or the other) about whether or not the player scores, then no TD.

This gets the award for dumbest sugestion ever.."sorry, we saw the TD break the plane but the camera was blocked by a big lineman, so no TD"

I'll never understand how the side judge stands at the goalline, makes no call, runs up to the pile then decides if it was a TD or not.You either saw the ball cross the plane in real time or you DIDN'T.

 

[Refbuz]

But with reffing being a part time job, how much can really be devoted to review with these guys holding down other full time positions?

You'd be surprised...

 

[steviey]

Regardless of the call on the field if the video replay is inconclusive (one way or the other) about whether or not the player scores, then no TD.

This gets the award for dumbest sugestion ever.."sorry, we saw the TD break the plane but the camera was blocked by a big lineman, so no TD"

My apologies, oh great one! I just thought it would avoid the situation where 100 people could watch the same replay over and over again and 50 people would say the ball crossed and 50 people would say it didn't. If that rule had been in place 8 days ago we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

 

[nerangers]

Good Info....

I always wondered if they would put a chip in the Football eventually to help with placement of the ball, and also to tell if it crosses the goal line. I figured it would be too expensive to put in all 32 stadiums though. The current system is not the most accurate, but it sure is affordable.

I am not sure how many refs are on the field, but increasing that number would not hurt. If not during the regular season, at least during the play offs.

I don't know where all of the cameras are located, but I would think they could put a few more at the goal line to make sure the ball crosses the line. Mount one right into the goal post aimed right at the line.

All plays should be reviewable. On that line of thinking, all TDs should be reviewed by the officials automatically. You should not have to waste a challege to make sure it is a TD or not.

 

[Refbuz]

I am not sure how many refs are on the field, but increasing that number would not hurt. If not during the regular season, at least during the play offs.

There are currently 7 guys that work an NFL game. The problem is where would you put an 8th, 9th or 10th guy with out cluttering up the field??? The common rule of thumb in officiating is 1 official per 3 players. This ratio is pretty much the standard at the pro level, but varies dependint on the sport in college. Putting an extra official or 2 in the booth doesn't gurantee a different outcome either, look at what happened in the Texas game... Granted, they had a techichal problem, but they couldn't review the play.

I don't know where all of the cameras are located, but I would think they could put a few more at the goal line to make sure the ball crosses the line. Mount one right into the goal post aimed right at the line.

Camera location varies on the level of game, In your better games you may have 6 or 8 cameras, while in a battle of 0-fers in week 12 might only have 3 or 4 cameras. I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to add a goalline camera of some sort though. It just seems like the logical thing to do.

 

[Dancing Bear]

I would say that they should make penalties reviewable; including those missed by the zebras and caught by the cameras.

I would also say that they need to get rid of the down by contact cop out.

I think that the referrees need to be more consistent with regards to what constitutes a penalty. Too often you can see a Pass Interference penalty called for blowing in a guy's ear in one game and then turn the channel to see a MLB basically tackling a guy like Tony G. after 5 yards without a whistle.

Also I hate seeing Michael Vick get all of the Illegal Contact or Unsportsman Like penalties when a guy kisses him, but then a guy like Griese has his season ended because Z. Thomas takes him out low after the play is basically over. Three premium QB's lost their seasons this year to the same kind of play! I would rather have them get rid of the slidding rule and tell the Defense that they can hit the QB again as long as they do not hit him below the waist.

The Roethlisberger TD is a really good example I think of the fact that no matter how many cameras you have you could not have seen the ball. The ball was totally obscured, and to me there was no indisputable evidence that could have overturned the call on the field.

I think that sensors or chips or any sort of electronics would be ridiculous as there is little chance that they could withstand the punishment and be reliable. The QB's headsets are good example of how fragile even that system works.