"Every scoring play reviewed" (1 Viewer)

[Homer]

If every scoring play is indeed reviewed, why are the extra points kicked immediately after TD's? The "reviews" are cursory glances, 5 seconds or less.

New Indy interim coach was flagged for 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct play trying to challenge James Jones TD, which wasn't crystal clear. Time from TD call to announcing penalty to kicking extra point was less than 45 seconds, and Fox didn't even show a replay of the scoring play until after the extra point was kicked.

 

[Mario Kart]

You okay?

 

[ConnSKINS26]

The boothe reviews it. The Fox replay that we finally see has nothing to do with it. The boothe starts reviewing it immediately.

 

[solorca]

Booth reviews are quick, because they look at it as soon as the play happens...and most of the time it's a fairly easy call.

Personally, I think all reviews should be handled that way. It's much more efficient.

 

[SSOG]

Boothe reviews are quick, because they look at it as soon as the play happens...and most of the time it's a fairly easy call. Personally, I think all reviews should be handled that way. It's much more efficient.

That's how college does it. If coaches feel like a play should be reviewed even more, he can call a timeout. If the play gets overturned, his timeout is refunded, which makes it functionally identical to the NFL challenge system except (a) it's quicker, (b) plays can still be challenged after the 2 minute warning, and © there's no silly 2-challenge limit. Basically, a superior system in all respects.

 

[Homer]

Good info, SSOG, but NFL current system is willy-nilly ad-hoc. 5 second eye test isn't a "review".

For the naysayers, time the next extra point after a TD and tell me it's not more than 30 seconds and then tell me how the scoring play was "reviewed".

 

[WisWolvrns]

if it is an obvious Td, the check doesn't have to be anything more than a quick second look.

if it is a too close to call situation, the booth pages down to the officials and they stop play for a full review by the officials under the hood.

the james td in question was pretty clearly broke the plane, so it doesn't surprise me it wasn't called down for a full booth review...

 

[Run It Up]

Good info, SSOG, but NFL current system is willy-nilly ad-hoc. 5 second eye test isn't a "review".For the naysayers, time the next extra point after a TD and tell me it's not more than 30 seconds and then tell me how the scoring play was "reviewed".

So your problem with the rule is the NFLs definition of the word review in the context of this rule doesnt match your definition of the word review?

 

[Beerguzzler]

The booth officials are working with all the angles in real time. It's really not that hard to quickly confirm a scorin play.

 

[davearm]

Boothe reviews are quick, because they look at it as soon as the play happens...and most of the time it's a fairly easy call. Personally, I think all reviews should be handled that way. It's much more efficient.

That's how college does it. If coaches feel like a play should be reviewed even more, he can call a timeout. If the play gets overturned, his timeout is refunded, which makes it functionally identical to the NFL challenge system except (a) it's quicker, (b) plays can still be challenged after the 2 minute warning, and © there's no silly 2-challenge limit. Basically, a superior system in all respects.

The college system is inherently flawed and contradictory.The booth is supposed to call for a review on any call on the field that is potentially incorrect (and is reviewable/reversible).There should never ever EVER be a reason for a coach to call for a challenge. By definition there is no possibility for a reversal since the booth didn't stop play and call for a review. No booth review = no question whether the correct call was made.On the occasions where the coach calls for a challenge, and the call is reversed, then the booth has failed. Miserably. There was a questionable call that they let go. Not only questionable, but ultimately shown to be incorrect. How does that happen?!?The way that whole deal is set up just pisses me off. Perhaps you could tell.

 

[crystal]

If every scoring play is indeed reviewed, why are the extra points kicked immediately after TD's?

Also, why aren't extra points themselves all reviewed? They're scoring plays, aren't they?So many things wrong with the way the NFL does things...

 

[davearm]

Yeah lots of controversial PATs.

 

[SSOG]

Boothe reviews are quick, because they look at it as soon as the play happens...and most of the time it's a fairly easy call. Personally, I think all reviews should be handled that way. It's much more efficient.

That's how college does it. If coaches feel like a play should be reviewed even more, he can call a timeout. If the play gets overturned, his timeout is refunded, which makes it functionally identical to the NFL challenge system except (a) it's quicker, (b) plays can still be challenged after the 2 minute warning, and © there's no silly 2-challenge limit. Basically, a superior system in all respects.

The college system is inherently flawed and contradictory.The booth is supposed to call for a review on any call on the field that is potentially incorrect (and is reviewable/reversible).There should never ever EVER be a reason for a coach to call for a challenge. By definition there is no possibility for a reversal since the booth didn't stop play and call for a review. No booth review = no question whether the correct call was made.On the occasions where the coach calls for a challenge, and the call is reversed, then the booth has failed. Miserably. There was a questionable call that they let go. Not only questionable, but ultimately shown to be incorrect. How does that happen?!?The way that whole deal is set up just pisses me off. Perhaps you could tell.

There has to be a cutoff. You can't say to the booth officials "stop play any time you're not 100% sure", because the games would then run 8 hours long. So there has to be a certain level of uncertainty allowed. Maybe you say to them "if you're 90% certain that the call was correct, then let play continue". The problem, then, is that 90% certain also means 10% uncertain, which means there are plays that are called incorrectly that will not get reviewed because, on first blush, it looked like they were called correctly. Of course, college football also gives head coaches a means to rectify any such omissions or oversights as they occur- if a head coach thinks that a booth official was too hasty in confirming a play, he can effectively "force" an extended review by calling a timeout, and if it turns out he was right, his timeout will be refunded.I really think the college system is ideal. It operates so much more quickly and accurately than the NFL system, while at the same time giving coaches far more chances to protest if they feel they've been erroneously punished by a bad call. In the NFL, not only are more calls going unreviewed, but it is literally impossible for a team to seek redress if they have 4 calls go against them in a single game. When a system has proven itself over time to be quicker, fairer, AND more accurate, it's surprising to me that other leagues haven't made any effort to copy it.

 

[Homer]

Good info, SSOG, but NFL current system is willy-nilly ad-hoc. 5 second eye test isn't a "review".For the naysayers, time the next extra point after a TD and tell me it's not more than 30 seconds and then tell me how the scoring play was "reviewed".

So your problem with the rule is the NFLs definition of the word review in the context of this rule doesnt match your definition of the word review?

5 second, one angle "eye test" is indeed a freaakng joke...

 

[Homer]

Boothe reviews are quick, because they look at it as soon as the play happens...and most of the time it's a fairly easy call. Personally, I think all reviews should be handled that way. It's much more efficient.

That's how college does it. If coaches feel like a play should be reviewed even more, he can call a timeout. If the play gets overturned, his timeout is refunded, which makes it functionally identical to the NFL challenge system except (a) it's quicker, (b) plays can still be challenged after the 2 minute warning, and © there's no silly 2-challenge limit. Basically, a superior system in all respects.

The college system is inherently flawed and contradictory.The booth is supposed to call for a review on any call on the field that is potentially incorrect (and is reviewable/reversible).There should never ever EVER be a reason for a coach to call for a challenge. By definition there is no possibility for a reversal since the booth didn't stop play and call for a review. No booth review = no question whether the correct call was made.On the occasions where the coach calls for a challenge, and the call is reversed, then the booth has failed. Miserably. There was a questionable call that they let go. Not only questionable, but ultimately shown to be incorrect. How does that happen?!?The way that whole deal is set up just pisses me off. Perhaps you could tell.

There has to be a cutoff. You can't say to the booth officials "stop play any time you're not 100% sure", because the games would then run 8 hours long. So there has to be a certain level of uncertainty allowed. Maybe you say to them "if you're 90% certain that the call was correct, then let play continue". The problem, then, is that 90% certain also means 10% uncertain, which means there are plays that are called incorrectly that will not get reviewed because, on first blush, it looked like they were called correctly. Of course, college football also gives head coaches a means to rectify any such omissions or oversights as they occur- if a head coach thinks that a booth official was too hasty in confirming a play, he can effectively "force" an extended review by calling a timeout, and if it turns out he was right, his timeout will be refunded.I really think the college system is ideal. It operates so much more quickly and accurately than the NFL system, while at the same time giving coaches far more chances to protest if they feel they've been erroneously punished by a bad call. In the NFL, not only are more calls going unreviewed, but it is literally impossible for a team to seek redress if they have 4 calls go against them in a single game. When a system has proven itself over time to be quicker, fairer, AND more accurate, it's surprising to me that other leagues haven't made any effort to copy it.

Old NFL system worked better, where challenge flag was mostly an option? College system you described certainly better than this "trust the eye in the sky who looked it at ONCE" cr ap

 

[Run It Up]

You guys are crazy, the addition of scoring play reviews has been the best addition to the NFL in my lifetime.

Review of all turnovers is the second best...

I believe the eye test is a reasonable method for determining if an actual review is necessary.

 

[davearm]

Boothe reviews are quick, because they look at it as soon as the play happens...and most of the time it's a fairly easy call. Personally, I think all reviews should be handled that way. It's much more efficient.

That's how college does it. If coaches feel like a play should be reviewed even more, he can call a timeout. If the play gets overturned, his timeout is refunded, which makes it functionally identical to the NFL challenge system except (a) it's quicker, (b) plays can still be challenged after the 2 minute warning, and © there's no silly 2-challenge limit. Basically, a superior system in all respects.

The college system is inherently flawed and contradictory.The booth is supposed to call for a review on any call on the field that is potentially incorrect (and is reviewable/reversible).There should never ever EVER be a reason for a coach to call for a challenge. By definition there is no possibility for a reversal since the booth didn't stop play and call for a review. No booth review = no question whether the correct call was made.On the occasions where the coach calls for a challenge, and the call is reversed, then the booth has failed. Miserably. There was a questionable call that they let go. Not only questionable, but ultimately shown to be incorrect. How does that happen?!?The way that whole deal is set up just pisses me off. Perhaps you could tell.

There has to be a cutoff. You can't say to the booth officials "stop play any time you're not 100% sure", because the games would then run 8 hours long. So there has to be a certain level of uncertainty allowed. Maybe you say to them "if you're 90% certain that the call was correct, then let play continue". The problem, then, is that 90% certain also means 10% uncertain, which means there are plays that are called incorrectly that will not get reviewed because, on first blush, it looked like they were called correctly. Of course, college football also gives head coaches a means to rectify any such omissions or oversights as they occur- if a head coach thinks that a booth official was too hasty in confirming a play, he can effectively "force" an extended review by calling a timeout, and if it turns out he was right, his timeout will be refunded.I really think the college system is ideal. It operates so much more quickly and accurately than the NFL system, while at the same time giving coaches far more chances to protest if they feel they've been erroneously punished by a bad call. In the NFL, not only are more calls going unreviewed, but it is literally impossible for a team to seek redress if they have 4 calls go against them in a single game. When a system has proven itself over time to be quicker, fairer, AND more accurate, it's surprising to me that other leagues haven't made any effort to copy it.

The college system is not quicker, and it's definitely not more accurate. There are far more head-scratching video review outcomes in college than in the NFL, IMO.I suppose you could call it fair, since both teams are equally subject to the booth's whims about what gets reviewed and what doesn't.The NFL should use its own last-two-minutes rules all the time, where all reviews are initiated upstairs and the coaches have no influence at all.

 

[GregR]

http://www.steelersfever.com/nfl_replay_rules.html

"Our goal is to take advantage of advanced technology to create the most efficient replay system possible," said NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue. "We believe we have developed that type of system. It uses advanced technology, but it is simple to operate. We did not want to bring back replay with the same system as 10 years ago. There will be a noticeable positive difference in the overall replay operation."

The system begins with the replay booth receiving a "live" feed from the network television control truck covering the game.

The technician in front of the live-feed monitor cues up the live play by pressing the "make play" button on his console as the ball is snapped. That automatically puts the play on a "touch-screen monitor" positioned in front of the replay assistant. When a replay comes up from the truck, the technician presses a "make replay" button and that automatically pops up on the touch-screen monitor. The monitor can accommodate six replay angles of a single play.

The replay assistant is positioned in front of the touch-screen monitor. This person decides which replays will be relayed to the field monitor for review by the referee after a coach's challenge is issued, and whether an official's time-out will be called for a play review in the final two minutes of each half and overtime.

The video operator at the instruction of the replay assistant, will tap the touch-screen monitor (similar to a bank's automatic teller machine that prompts commands by the tapping of its screen) to transfer one of the replays to the booth's third monitor that is positioned between him and the replay assistant. The video operator can control the speed of the playback on this monitor by the turn of a dial. This is the monitor on which the replay assistant will view all replays. The video on this monitor is what the referee on the field will see.

The communicator is the replay booth's eyes to the field. While the technician, replay assistant and video operator are doing their jobs, the communicator, stationed in back of the other three, is watching the field. He will advise the replay assistant who is busy viewing the monitor that "they're in the huddle," "they're on the line" and "the ball is snapped" so the replay assistant will know that the next play has started, negating the possibility of a replay. He will also report to the replay assistant if an official ruling (e.g. holding, illegal procedure, etc.) has been made on the field following a play that might eliminate the need for a replay.

The communicator also is the timer of the 90 seconds allocated to the referee to make a decision on a replay. Once 90 seconds are reached, the communicator will hit a red button on the console in front of the replay assistant that will automatically shut off the field-level monitor, signaling to the referee that the 90 seconds has expired and the review is over. The referee must then announce his decision.

If needed, the communicator will also explain a referee's ruling to the TV truck and to the teams' public relations directors in the press box for dissemination to the media.

A buzzer system will be utilized to signal the call for a replay. Before the final two minutes, the head coach will buzz the referee and replay booth that he challenges a play and wants a review. Within the final two minutes, the booth will buzz the referee, calling for a replay. The head coaches will wear a belt pack containing a buzzer. When pressed, the buzzer will simultaneously signal the referee, umpire and replay booth that a replay is being requested.

There will be three replay monitors at field level in open-air stadiums. Two will be positioned at opposite 20-yard lines near the sideline wall. A third will be in a runway, for use if there is inclement weather. Two monitors will be used in domed stadiums.

As the referee approaches the monitor, his first replay will await him. His 90 seconds for a decision begins when he puts on the headphones that put him in contact with the replay booth.

 

[Homer]

I'm sorry, any system that says "trust the zebras" and doesn't allow challenges is hugely flawed. And when the reality is that there is ZERO delay after scoring plays is the proof in the pudding.

 

[Rovers]

Good info, SSOG, but NFL current system is willy-nilly ad-hoc. 5 second eye test isn't a "review".For the naysayers, time the next extra point after a TD and tell me it's not more than 30 seconds and then tell me how the scoring play was "reviewed".

So your problem with the rule is the NFLs definition of the word review in the context of this rule doesnt match your definition of the word review?

5 second, one angle "eye test" is indeed a freaakng joke...

I've never seen a PAT attempted within 5 seconds of a TD. You have to wait for the players to stop dancing. Then, the kicker has to run from what, the thirty yard line? Kickers don't run that fast. Then the kicker has to walk to the ball, take 3 steps backwards, then two to the left... that has to be at least 8 seconds...

 

[ConnSKINS26]

This thread is stupid.

 

[DoubleG]

Good info, SSOG, but NFL current system is willy-nilly ad-hoc. 5 second eye test isn't a "review".For the naysayers, time the next extra point after a TD and tell me it's not more than 30 seconds and then tell me how the scoring play was "reviewed".

So your problem with the rule is the NFLs definition of the word review in the context of this rule doesnt match your definition of the word review?

His problem is that someone scored a TD against his team (either NFL or fake football) - the play didn't get overturned like he hoped it would, so now he's in here to ##### about it.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

This thread is stupid.

His problem is that someone scored a TD against his team (either NFL or fake football) - the play didn't get overturned like he hoped it would, so now he's in here to ##### about it.

These.

 

[Johnny Rock]

I have to say I thought the same thing when I saw the JJones TD live. Even after seeing the replay I thought it was enough to warrant a longer review. There was no replay that I saw that showed he "clearly broke the plane" as another poster said. Maybe in the booth but not on TV.

 

[Mario Kart]

You guys realize that the replay booth has more screens with more views than what is on your tv, right? They have better access to the replays than do the tv station to then broadcast a replay onto your tv. You do realize that their setup is just a bit different than your living rooms, right?

 

[davearm]

You guys realize that the replay booth has more screens with more views than what is on your tv, right? They have better access to the replays than do the tv station to then broadcast a replay onto your tv. You do realize that their setup is just a bit different than your living rooms, right?

They might be at Buffalo Wild Wings