Speculation - I can’t get excited about football anymore. IMO games are manipulated. (1 Viewer)

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Wasn't this tried for a year or two and it failed miserably?  I think there was some debate on how "clearly defined" it really was for the purposes of replay review.  Basically every deep ball thrown has PI by the letter of the law.  

2019.

It didn't fail because it didn't work. It failed because the NFL wanted it to fail & the refs wanted it to fail. The review was instituted in reaction to the Saints getting completely hosed, and the NFL having a ton of egg on its face for defending the refs call in that playoff game. 

This is a good write-up about the reviewable OPI/DPI and why it was so quickly abandoned: 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-officiating-chiefs-were-the-ones-who-failed-miserably-on-pass-interference-replay-review/1mrdwgn9v98ge148qeo7yj58uk

It wasn't because there's OPI or DPI on every play - that's more holding. There is clearly defined non-penalty contact and penalty contact. It should be reviewable. 

 

[zed2283]

Maybe because they can see something from that angle that the ref in front of the play cannot see (push to back for example)?

I'm talking about the swipe at the ball from behind as the shooter is going up, in which the ref can't possibly see any contact, yet calls the foul every time.

 

[brewer]

When humans and money are involved, anything is possible.  The fact is that on any given NFL play, you could choose to call or not to call holding and/or pass interference.  Add in the fact that an ex-NFL head coach just accused his owner of trying to tank games, I don't think it is unreasonable for the original poster to have those thoughts.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Call on Jackson was correct.  Maybe a little ticky-tacky, but it was OPI.

The holding call was bad, but if I remember correctly when they showed the replay from the referees angle it totally looked like holding.  Like someone said in the thread, much of officiating is angles (which is why I've never understood why they allow basketball referees trailing directly behind a play to call a foul on breakaways.  Every time.).

I will go to my grave disagreeing with you about the DJax push-off. That was not a push-off, nor was it a penalty. And i HATE the Seahawks. I hate hate hate them and wish nothing but terrible calls on them for eternity. But DJax didn't push off by any definition of that penalty. 

And what about the non-call for the blatant block in the back that handed Pittsburgh a 100 yard return?

Here - watch it for yourself & tell me that's not an illegal block in the back at the 18 second mark, by any definition:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqnQwKAI4OE

You can't, because it so clearly was. And it would have ended that play without a TD. 

Now, might the Steelers have gone on to score there anyway? Sure - they might have. It was also only the end of the 2nd quarter, so it didn't decide the game, but it was a completely blown call. 

 

[Gally]

2019.

It didn't fail because it didn't work. It failed because the NFL wanted it to fail & the refs wanted it to fail. The review was instituted in reaction to the Saints getting completely hosed, and the NFL having a ton of egg on its face for defending the refs call in that playoff game. 

This is a good write-up about the reviewable OPI/DPI and why it was so quickly abandoned: 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-officiating-chiefs-were-the-ones-who-failed-miserably-on-pass-interference-replay-review/1mrdwgn9v98ge148qeo7yj58uk

It wasn't because there's OPI or DPI on every play - that's more holding. There is clearly defined non-penalty contact and penalty contact. It should be reviewable. 

Regardless of the reason it failed miserably.  I am in the camp that I don't want those type of things under review as we review now.  I would much rather have an "eye in the sky" that is part of the officiating crew and in contact with the referee that can call down during the ref huddle and overrule/make the calls as needed in real time after maybe one replay so it doesn't take any more time than a normal ref huddle to discuss what everyone saw.  The point is to get the obvious wrong calls made right.  Not to over officiate.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Regardless of the reason it failed miserably. 

Even though the reason was basically, "the NFL felt bullied into doing it, and the Refs resented their judgement being questioned on judgement calls"? I will have to agree to disagree on that point. 

to me that's even more reason to do it.  The refs proved in that Saints game that their judgement was far from infallible, and the NFL moved as fast as they could to sweep that whole ugly incident under the rug. 

I was among those pleased that they instituted that rule. 

I am in the camp that I don't want those type of things under review as we review now.  I would much rather have an "eye in the sky" that is part of the officiating crew and in contact with the referee that can call down during the ref huddle and overrule/make the calls as needed in real time after maybe one replay so it doesn't take any more time than a normal ref huddle to discuss what everyone saw.  The point is to get the obvious wrong calls made right.  Not to over officiate.

But they never do for those calls because they are not reviewable. 

I have never seen the eye in the sky reverse an OPI or DPI call. Granted, I'm not omniscient and have not seen every play in every game, but I'm pretty sure this one is not considered. 

If they did this, and showed that they could be trusted to implement it fairly/equally, then I would be with you on this one. But they don't, and bad OPI & DPI calls still plague the league with massive implications when they get one wrong. Gift wrapping a TD with a massive yardage gain and ball at the stripe is hugely impactful. There's simply no way this can be a judgement call. 

As for slowing down the game, the coaches still have a finite amount of challenges. While above I suggested it should be automatic, that was just my preference. At minimum it should be subject to challenge/review.  But it can't be reviewed by the same ref that made the poor call in the 1st place. Send it to NY for review. 

The way this was implemented/summarily dismissed was an embarrassment to the NFL. 

 

[Gally]

Even though the reason was basically, "the NFL felt bullied into doing it, and the Refs resented their judgement being questioned on judgement calls"? I will have to agree to disagree on that point. 

to me that's even more reason to do it.  The refs proved in that Saints game that their judgement was far from infallible, and the NFL moved as fast as they could to sweep that whole ugly incident under the rug. 

I was among those pleased that they instituted that rule. 

But they never do for those calls because they are not reviewable. 

I have never seen the eye in the sky reverse an OPI or DPI call. Granted, I'm not omniscient and have not seen every play in every game, but I'm pretty sure this one is not considered. 

If they did this, and showed that they could be trusted to implement it fairly/equally, then I would be with you on this one. But they don't, and bad OPI & DPI calls still plague the league with massive implications when they get one wrong. Gift wrapping a TD with a massive yardage gain and ball at the stripe is hugely impactful. There's simply no way this can be a judgement call. 

As for slowing down the game, the coaches still have a finite amount of challenges. While above I suggested it should be automatic, that was just my preference. At minimum it should be subject to challenge/review.  But it can't be reviewed by the same ref that made the poor call in the 1st place. Send it to NY for review. 

The way this was implemented/summarily dismissed was an embarrassment to the NFL. 

They do not do this.  It was my suggestion as a solution to doing replay review on PI calls.  I think a system as I described could work and not be intrusive like current replay review and would correct obviously missed calls.  That is what I am looking for.  

For me, I want obvious bad calls corrected.  The ticky-tack letter of the law things or catch/fumbles that need to be slowed to 1 frame per minute to maybe figure out one way or the other but still can be argued either way needs to be canned.  This doesn't help anything and only frustrates every one.  Get the obvious misses fixed otherwise go with the call on the field and move on.  

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

They do not do this.  It was my suggestion as a solution to doing replay review on PI calls.  I think a system as I described could work and not be intrusive like current replay review and would correct obviously missed calls.  That is what I am looking for.  

For me, I want obvious bad calls corrected.  The ticky-tack letter of the law things or catch/fumbles that need to be slowed to 1 frame per minute to maybe figure out one way or the other but still can be argued either way needs to be canned.  This doesn't help anything and only frustrates every one.  Get the obvious misses fixed otherwise go with the call on the field and move on.  

I'm with you on all of this actually. Agreed. 

 

[Steelers4Life]

I will go to my grave disagreeing with you about the DJax push-off. That was not a push-off, nor was it a penalty. And i HATE the Seahawks. I hate hate hate them and wish nothing but terrible calls on them for eternity. But DJax didn't push off by any definition of that penalty. 

And what about the non-call for the blatant block in the back that handed Pittsburgh a 100 yard return?

Here - watch it for yourself & tell me that's not an illegal block in the back at the 18 second mark, by any definition:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqnQwKAI4OE

You can't, because it so clearly was. And it would have ended that play without a TD. 

Now, might the Steelers have gone on to score there anyway? Sure - they might have. It was also only the end of the 2nd quarter, so it didn't decide the game, but it was a completely blown call. 

First and foremost, thank you for posting that link. I cannot watch that play enough! Was it a block in the back? Might have been, looked borderline between the back and the shoulder because the tackler was turning towards the sideline. Not something that blatantly looks illegal.

No matter how you cut it, what Jackson did was a push off. It was then, it would be today. If he had simply pivoted and turned away, chances are he could've caught the pass anyways. He didn't need to raise his arm. But he did what officials are trained to look for when calling OPI... he extended his arm. He pushed his hand directly into Chris Hope, and when an official sees that arm extended, it's called more often than not. The official has a split second to make a call, and when the WR extends his arm he makes the call an easy one. You can can disagree with that until the day you die, but it doesn't change what Jackson did.

Fact is, others have said it.... bad calls are made in every part of the game and people will focus on what they perceive to be the most impactful ones. Maybe the official has a bad angle because the players are so big and fast, or maybe they're watching something else at that moment. Lots of calls go against both teams every game, and they ALL have an impact on the plays after them and the flow of the game.

The idea that there's some grand conspiracy to fix NFL games is ridiculous. Until they remove human error from the game, people will always have something to ##### about though.

And if the Cowboys' loss really had that big of an impact on you this offseason, well, that was their fault too. If Dak had slid and gotten the ball to the official who has to spot the ball correctly and not to his center, maybe they have an extra second or two to try the field goal. That was just poor execution and a lack of understanding of the situation by Dak and virtually everyone else on the offense. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

First and foremost, thank you for posting that link. I cannot watch that play enough! Was it a block in the back? Might have been, looked borderline between the back and the shoulder because the tackler was turning towards the sideline. Not something that blatantly looks illegal.

No matter how you cut it, what Jackson did was a push off. It was then, it would be today. If he had simply pivoted and turned away, chances are he could've caught the pass anyways. He didn't need to raise his arm. But he did what officials are trained to look for when calling OPI... he extended his arm. He pushed his hand directly into Chris Hope, and when an official sees that arm extended, it's called more often than not. The official has a split second to make a call, and when the WR extends his arm he makes the call an easy one. You can can disagree with that until the day you die, but it doesn't change what Jackson did.

Fact is, others have said it.... bad calls are made in every part of the game and people will focus on what they perceive to be the most impactful ones. Maybe the official has a bad angle because the players are so big and fast, or maybe they're watching something else at that moment. Lots of calls go against both teams every game, and they ALL have an impact on the plays after them and the flow of the game.

The idea that there's some grand conspiracy to fix NFL games is ridiculous. Until they remove human error from the game, people will always have something to ##### about though.

And if the Cowboys' loss really had that big of an impact on you this offseason, well, that was their fault too. If Dak had slid and gotten the ball to the official who has to spot the ball correctly and not to his center, maybe they have an extra second or two to try the field goal. That was just poor execution and a lack of understanding of the situation by Dak and virtually everyone else on the offense. 

User name checks out.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

As someone with no dog in the recent playoffs, I thought they were almost all very entertaining games. Close games that went right down to the wire. Some of the game threads here were hopping with non stop posts. Far more entertaining than those blowouts I witnessed from the NFL's minor league system.

 

[zed2283]

I will go to my grave disagreeing with you about the DJax push-off. That was not a push-off, nor was it a penalty. And i HATE the Seahawks. I hate hate hate them and wish nothing but terrible calls on them for eternity. But DJax didn't push off by any definition of that penalty. 

And what about the non-call for the blatant block in the back that handed Pittsburgh a 100 yard return?

Here - watch it for yourself & tell me that's not an illegal block in the back at the 18 second mark, by any definition:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqnQwKAI4OE

You can't, because it so clearly was. And it would have ended that play without a TD. 

Now, might the Steelers have gone on to score there anyway? Sure - they might have. It was also only the end of the 2nd quarter, so it didn't decide the game, but it was a completely blown call. 

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree.  But it's definitely a push off.  Not only does he extend his arm, he creates separation and stops any movement or momentum by the defender from which there is no recovery.  Obvious push off by any definition.

Not a block in the back.  Borderline at best not something that's usually called on a chaotic play.

I would say this is a lot closer to a block in the back when it comes to Super Bowl interception returns for TDs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM6I7AjCFAY

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree.  But it's definitely a push off.  Not only does he extend his arm, he creates separation and stops any movement or momentum by the defender from which there is no recovery.  Obvious push off by any definition.

Not a block in the back.  Borderline at best not something that's usually called on a chaotic play.

I would say this is a lot closer to a block in the back when it comes to Super Bowl interception returns for TDs. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM6I7AjCFAY

I agree to disagree with both of those.

 

[BoltNlava]

I can certainly see how these sentiments persist. There are the late game calls that have been mentioned and that's against the backdrop of the sometimes inexplicable momentum shifts that happen in games. It has to be hard for casual fans to reconcile how offences / defences can dominate for long stretches and then suddenly can't make a single play. To be clear, I don't believe this is happening but games like KC - CIN where Mahomes comes back after half time and seemingly can't remember which shoe goes on which foot do leave the door open for some to speculate.

Isn't that what halftime is for though? Regroup and start a come back if behind? Stratigize and reconfigure the defense to stop what has transpired beforehand? On the other hand teams who are ahead might go in and celebrate the dominance of the other team and just figure it's over. 

I get what your saying but halftime is not for rest it is for hope. Hope that you will still dominate or hope that a team who is behind still has 30 minutes to snap victory out of the jaws of defeat. That in itself is the drama we all crave and sometimes the football gods give us a drink of that nectar. Wildcard weekend was just that. A glimmer of what is good about the sport we love. Making more of that is just folly.

In my humble opinion the extensive rules have given us more questions than answers.

 

[zed2283]

I agree to disagree with both of those.

What about the third one?  Should that have been called?

 

[Chaka]

Tim Donaghy - yeah, that dude was a problem.

but worth noting, on some of the most controversial games, Donaghy wasn’t reffing.

My dad is convinced that the NBA was rigged. I’ll never forget watching the Lakers/Kings game 6 in 2002 with him (a Dubs fan who grew up in Sac, so he has a soft spot for the kings) - the 4th quarter was so, so, sooooo badly officiated, all in heavy favor of the Lakers. Scot Pollard had fouled out in only 11 mins of play, every one a ticky tacky nothing foul. That was bizarre & impactful.   The most egregious non-call was on an inbounds by the Kings with seconds on the clock, Derek Fisher essentially tackled (I forget who the recipient of the inbound was) and no whistle was blown. It was insane. Fisher took him to the hardwood and the refs swallowed their whistles. He turned to me & said, “the fix is in”. That was the most disgusted I’ve ever seen my father, and I’m pretty sure he skipped game 7 & never watched another basketball game. 

The officiating in that game was so poor and so heavily favoring the Lakers in the 4th quarter that Ralph Nader later called for an investigation.

Looked like a clean play to me.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

What about the third one?  Should that have been called?

The block in the back in the link you shared? Absolutely - I didn’t see any difference between that & 56’s block in the back. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Looked like a clean play to me.

Lakers fan? 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree.  But it's definitely a push off.  Not only does he extend his arm, he creates separation and stops any movement or momentum by the defender from which there is no recovery.  Obvious push off by any definition.

By the way, John Madden also disagreed with that push-off call being a penalty. 

And for the record, Bill Leavy also agrees that it was a blown call. And he should know - he's the official who made it. 

A trip to Seahawks camp on Friday gave referee Bill Leavy a chance to get something off his chest that he’s probably wanted to say for a while.

“It was a tough thing for me,” Levy said in reference to his infamous performance in Pittsburgh’s 21-10 win over the Seahawks in Super Bowl XL.  “I kicked two calls in the fourth quarter
and I impacted the game and as an official you never want to do that. It
left me with a lot of sleepless nights and I think about it constantly.
I’ll go to my grave wishing that I’d been better.”

(It’s right about here Seahawks fans say: Only two?  The Darrell Jackson pass
interference in the first quarter and the upheld Ben Roethlisberger
touchdown late in the first half also looked questionable.)

“I know that I did my
best at that time, but it wasn’t good enough,” Leavy continued. “When we make mistakes,
you got to step up and own them. It’s something that all officials have
to deal with, but unfortunately when you have to deal with it in the
Super Bowl it’s difficult.”

We’re not sure how Seahawks fans will feel about Leavy’s mea culpa, but we give him a lot of credit.  The game clearly haunts him like it probably haunts Matt Hasselbeck, Mike Holmgren, and Seahawks fans.

Leavy owned up to his failings.  Four years later, the city of Seattle may as well admit Leavy was just one of many reasons why their team lost.

 

[zed2283]

By the way, John Madden also disagreed with that push-off call being a penalty. 

And for the record, Bill Leavy also agrees that it was a blown call. And he should know - he's the official who made it. 

Which call?  It doesn't say.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Which call?  It doesn't say.

He specifically says the Darrell Jackson push-off, and the Roethlisberger TD. 

 

[zed2283]

He specifically says the Darrell Jackson push-off, and the Roethlisberger TD. 

He doesn't say that, the article does and makes it sound like they assume that's what he's referring to.  But he didn't make the call on Jackson.

ETA: He's probably talking about the holding call.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

He doesn't say that, the article does and makes it sound like they assume that's what he's referring to.  But he didn't make the call on Jackson.

ETA: He's probably talking about the holding call.

The article is clearly citing him, referencing the 2 specific calls he said he messed up. 

 

[zed2283]

The article is clearly citing him, referencing the 2 specific calls he said he messed up. 

I guess we'll just agree to disagree again  .

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

I guess we'll just agree to disagree again  .

 

 

[BoltBacker]

I lean towards the refs are lousy because the NFL's bloated rulebook has  possibly caused these guys to brainlock at key times.  I believe they're still part time as well, not sure if that plays a role.  Also the game is so much bigger and faster than before, a lot of refs seem too young or too old...I don't know, just spitballin here.

Agreed. Too many rules that don't add enjoyment/safety to the game, the refs on the field are expected to monitor too much on every play, the review system is completely broken.

- Who cares if the OT was "uncovered" at the snap? Most of the illegal formations, and I'd go as far as to say a fair amount of illegal motion penalties, aren't what the fans came to see. Too many people in the huddle? The refs holding the ball so that the defense can make substitutions. It completely halts the momentum of a drive in the closing minutes. Just let all that stuff go. Most of these lead to more scoring anyway which is what most fans and the league seem to want anyway.

- The refs on the field need pre-snap help from a ref(or more) off the field up in the booth. How many guys are on the field for each side. False start/encroachment penalties. Guys lining up offsides. The play clock running out before the ball is snapped. The guys on the field just miss too many of these calls and a ref in the booth should help on a lot of this stuff. Why on earth isn't there an actual play clock that shows fractions of a second? If 0.5 seconds is a thing then why not have a play clock that shows 0.00 and a horn goes off and a light goes off if the ball hasn't been snapped? How many times have we heard the stupid explanation, "The ref looks at the clock and when it hits zero then the look down at the ball and if it hasn't been snapped blah blah blah". Just enforce the rule consistently all game long and the players will adjust.

- If each coach just had ONE replay that allowed him to challenge any play and any rule, but he got another one if his challenge held up then I think you would get the best of both worlds. The coaches would only challenge the most obvious mistakes by the refs because they don't want to lose that replay and they would be more prone to use that one replay on the biggest play(s) in the game because those are the calls the fans want to get right anyway. If refs get too many calls overturned there has to be a strike system to get newer, younger blood officiating games. I mean if a coach was somehow able to overturn FIVE plays in a game then there has to be a consequence for that ref or crew to weed out the bad officials. There is supposed to be a grading system... so why is it secret? Good refs should get recognized and paid a lot more. As a fan I would value a good ref way more than whatever goodell is payed to do.

I'm not saying the game isn't great. Just saying it could be much better with just a few minor adjustments. 

 

[BoltBacker]

It's can sometimes be dangerous to assume reasonable behavior. But that's my reason why I put zero stock in there being anything fishy going on.

There are billions upon billions of dollars to lose if they get caught.

But if most of the income is based on TV ratings and TV contracts then there is also the potential to make billions of more dollars if certain teams/markets/players play more playoff games.

I don't recognize much of it in the NFL but as has been mentioned in this thread multiple times in this thread Tim Donaghy DID GET CAUGHT, and there were next to no ramifications for it for the league. The damning evidence in that case wasn't even in the games that HE OFFICIATED, but the games where he could accurately tell organized criminals the likely outcome of games he didn't even officiate. People just say, "well, yeah there was ONE bad ref and......" but that wasn't even the problem in my eyes. That and the fact that in big series(like the Kings/lakers series referenced in this thread) the league would send a memo reminding the refs of certain rules that they wanted to see officiated more closely/loosely. I don't think the NBA ever even bothered denying it. Getting the lakers into the finals absolutely had a direct effect on viewership, ratings, and their next TV deal.

As I said earlier I don't recognize it happening in the NFL nearly as often but if you were a 36yo PK I'm sure you could make an absolute monstrous amount of money missing an XP and FG in a playoff game. I'm sure it happens plenty in the college game where you have 20yo's that are completely broke and they are watching the number of minutes of their athletic career expiring in front of their eyes because they will never make it to the pro game. And it's only going to get worse as we sit on our couches and gamble in real time on everything happening in front of us in real time. Not that I'm against gambling but I think billions are also on the line off the field as well.

 

[Joe Bryant]

But if most of the income is based on TV ratings and TV contracts then there is also the potential to make billions of more dollars if certain teams/markets/players play more playoff games.

Sure. It's like anything else. Is the potential gain worth the negative ramifications of the risk.

In my my opinion, the negatives far outweigh the potential gains. 

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Sure. It's like anything else. Is the potential gain worth the negative ramifications of the risk.

In my my opinion, the negatives far outweigh the potential gains. 

You know how greed works. People get arrogant and think they’re above board. How many times have we read how a filthy rich corporation breaks the law or bends the rules just for a few dollars more? 

Nothing would shock me. 

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Sure. It's like anything else. Is the potential gain worth the negative ramifications of the risk.

In my my opinion, the negatives far outweigh the potential gains. 

Re-reply.....

Im not sure there are any negatives. As evidence in this thread, its so outlandish that nobody would believe it anyway. 

In the spirit of the WWE and any publicity is good publicity - I believe the NFL also LOVES and invites controversy. Deflate Gate, Dez catch, no catch, Saints non PI call, etc. These types on controversy has even casual non fans interested in the sport. 

 

 

[Steelers4Life]

He specifically says the Darrell Jackson push-off, and the Roethlisberger TD. 

Read the article.

That's not what it says at all.

Levy specifically says he missed 2 calls in the 4th quarter that he regrets.

Jackson's OPI was in the 1st quarter and Ben's TD was in the 2nd.

That part referencing those two penalties were inserted by the author of the article and wasn't a quote from Levy. He doesn't say which call he's referring to that he thinks he messed up on, but he does say they were in the 4th quarter.

And I fully acknowledge that Jackson didn't NEED to extend his arm and didn't gain much of an advantage by doing it. He stopped Hope's momentum and started his own momentum away from him. But in the split second the official had to make that call, the extended arm = OPI a majority of the time. It may have been an incorrect call, but it wasn't a bad one because Jackson gave him the look of OPI.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Re-reply.....

Im not sure there are any negatives. As evidence in this thread, its so outlandish that nobody would believe it anyway. 

In the spirit of the WWE and any publicity is good publicity - I believe the NFL also LOVES and invites controversy. Deflate Gate, Dez catch, no catch, Saints non PI call, etc. These types on controversy has even casual non fans interested in the sport. 

 

No worries. We'll just disagree if you think there aren't negatives. 

Much bigger thing though - these are extremely serious accusations. Please be super careful on this. If you don't know it for a fact or have good reasons to back up why you're saying something here, please don't accuse without substantial backup. Thanks. 

 

[Gally]

By the way, John Madden also disagreed with that push-off call being a penalty. 

And for the record, Bill Leavy also agrees that it was a blown call. And he should know - he's the official who made it. 

Leavy wouldn't have made the call for PI as he was the referee for that game.....not the back, field, or side judge who would be making the PI call.  

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Leavy wouldn't have made the call for PI as he was the referee for that game.....not the back, field, or side judge who would be making the PI call.  

Maybe it was the holding. 

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Read the article.

That's not what it says at all.

Levy specifically says he missed 2 calls in the 4th quarter that he regrets.

Jackson's OPI was in the 1st quarter and Ben's TD was in the 2nd.

That part referencing those two penalties were inserted by the author of the article and wasn't a quote from Levy. He doesn't say which call he's referring to that he thinks he messed up on, but he does say they were in the 4th quarter.

And I fully acknowledge that Jackson didn't NEED to extend his arm and didn't gain much of an advantage by doing it. He stopped Hope's momentum and started his own momentum away from him. But in the split second the official had to make that call, the extended arm = OPI a majority of the time. It may have been an incorrect call, but it wasn't a bad one because Jackson gave him the look of OPI.

Upon re-reading he was likely referring to the hold - I missed that he said “in the 4th quarter”. 

my bad. 

That said, Madden was emphatic about it not being OPI, and that’s enough for me.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

No worries. We'll just disagree if you think there aren't negatives. 

Much bigger thing though - these are extremely serious accusations. Please be super careful on this. If you don't know it for a fact or have good reasons to back up why you're saying something here, please don't accuse without substantial backup. Thanks. 

I understand. I will edit the OP to state that this is only my opinion, pure speculation and I have no proof of wrongdoing. 

With that said, I did post this in the OP:

“The web of laws applicable to sports, such as the Sports Bribery Act of 1964, only prohibits gambling-related corruption. There is no federal law explicitly preventing the clandestine manipulation of sporting events to enhance suspense. This gap is problematic. As with certain televised quiz shows decades ago, the in-game action of sporting events can be contrived in profit-maximizing ways. The federal law passed in the wake of the Quiz Show Scandal does not explicitly include televised sports; it only forbids deception of the public in connection with contests of an "intellectual" nature. Wheel of Fortune, Jeopardy!, and Who Wants to Be A Millionaire are covered by the law. Football, basketball, and baseball are not.”

So while these are serious accusations and we all know the potential outcome if true, the NFL (as well as other sports leagues) are fully within their legal rights to manipulate games however they see fit, provided it isn't related to gambling. 

Additionally - While admittedly some may have an axe to grind, there are several former NFL players who have made similar accusations:

(Vontaze Burfict) Current NFL Star Drops Bomb: ‘NFL Games Are Rigged’

(Larry Johnson) Ex-NFL Player Says The Super Bowl Was Rigged For Tom Brady And The Bucs

(Benny Cunningham) Former Chicago Bears Running Back Calls NFL "Scripted"

T.J. Lang calls out Roger Goodell, says NFL is fixing games against Detroit Lions

(Dwight Smith) Former Bucs SB Champ Says NFL's Rigged & Tampa Bay's '03 Title Illegitimate

Brian Flores' Lawsuit Accuses Dolphins Owner Stephen Ross Of Paying Coach $100,000 For Every Loss

 

[Gally]

- If each coach just had ONE replay that allowed him to challenge any play and any rule, but he got another one if his challenge held up then I think you would get the best of both worlds. The coaches would only challenge the most obvious mistakes by the refs because they don't want to lose that replay and they would be more prone to use that one replay on the biggest play(s) in the game because those are the calls the fans want to get right anyway. If refs get too many calls overturned there has to be a strike system to get newer, younger blood officiating games. I mean if a coach was somehow able to overturn FIVE plays in a game then there has to be a consequence for that ref or crew to weed out the bad officials. There is supposed to be a grading system... so why is it secret? Good refs should get recognized and paid a lot more. As a fan I would value a good ref way more than whatever goodell is payed to do.

I completely disagree with this.  The point of the replay challenge is to get the call correct so if a coach challenges and the call is changed to the correct call then that is better for the game and gives the replay a purpose.  If it is not changed then there should be some consequence.  I have never understood why there is a limit in challenges if you are getting them correct.  I would make the change to as long as there is a time out available to lose if you are wrong about the challenge you can challenge as many times as you want.  As long as you keep being right then you can challenge 100 times.  The point is to get the call right after all.  

Now I would change how calls are reviewed as the purpose should be to change any obviously bad calls.  To me that means a call that you watch at half speed (at the slowest) and have 30 seconds to overturn.  If you can't figure out what the call should be in that time it isn't an obviously missed call and the call on the field should stand.  Any time you slow down to 1 frame per minute you can make anything look like a catch/fumble/no catch/no fumble etc.  It's too slow and therefore muddies up the situation.  Get in and get out.  If you can't overturn in 30 seconds at half speed then the call stands.  Move on.  

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

I completely disagree with this.  The point of the replay challenge is to get the call correct so if a coach challenges and the call is changed to the correct call then that is better for the game and gives the replay a purpose.  If it is not changed then there should be some consequence.  I have never understood why there is a limit in challenges if you are getting them correct.  I would make the change to as long as there is a time out available to lose if you are wrong about the challenge you can challenge as many times as you want.  As long as you keep being right then you can challenge 100 times.  The point is to get the call right after all.  

Now I would change how calls are reviewed as the purpose should be to change any obviously bad calls.  To me that means a call that you watch at half speed (at the slowest) and have 30 seconds to overturn.  If you can't figure out what the call should be in that time it isn't an obviously missed call and the call on the field should stand.  Any time you slow down to 1 frame per minute you can make anything look like a catch/fumble/no catch/no fumble etc.  It's too slow and therefore muddies up the situation.  Get in and get out.  If you can't overturn in 30 seconds at half speed then the call stands.  Move on.  

If I were to make a suggestion it would be for the NFL to hire ~30 people to watch every game and check all plays and turnovers in real time, make all decisions from afar and let the refs just manage the game. Make it super transparent and explain the calls and show the replays on the TV/in game stadium screens. This would get the calls "right" and speed up the games. the red flags are completely comical anyway. 

The current system of a ref looking at a 12" tablet being held by some dude on the side of the field, sometimes in direct sunlight and/or rain is inexcusable. the same goes for the NBA replay system. These sports leagues make BILLIONS of dollars and they cant do better than this? 

 

[Steelers4Life]

Upon re-reading he was likely referring to the hold - I missed that he said “in the 4th quarter”. 

my bad. 

That said, Madden was emphatic about it not being OPI, and that’s enough for me.

Might have been. It was a softer penalty to be sure, but there's a still frame out there that looks like the text book definition of holding with Haggans getting grabbed by the shoulder by the RT, who'd been clearly beaten around the edge.

It was just a small tug, but if the official was looking at it from that angle, all he saw was a blitzing linebacker being pulled from the side by an offensive tackle, and it definitely gave Hasselbeck an extra half second to throw the ball.

It's a penalty that no one anywhere would've had anything negative to say about... except it negated a big play, which wasn't known in the instant when a flag was thrown.

It was a split second.

 

[Chaka]

Re-reply.....

Im not sure there are any negatives. As evidence in this thread, its so outlandish that nobody would believe it anyway. 

In the spirit of the WWE and any publicity is good publicity - I believe the NFL also LOVES and invites controversy. Deflate Gate, Dez catch, no catch, Saints non PI call, etc. These types on controversy has even casual non fans interested in the sport. 

 

The NFL does anything and everything it can to maintain the image of zero controversy. They always bury investigation reports and destroy documents. Don't forget the NFL is effectively a legal monopoly that the Feds ignore. They don't want to do anything that would jeopardize that status.

Let's see how the WFT congressional investigation plays out and decide how much the NFL likes controversy.  There is already a bill in Congress to remove federal tax subsidies for new stadiums and the public will be more than okay with that. It could get a whole lot worse than a few subsidies if Congress thinks they can get public support for smacking down a bunch of billionaire oligarchs.

 

[Chaka]

If I were to make a suggestion it would be for the NFL to hire ~30 people to watch every game and check all plays and turnovers in real time, make all decisions from afar and let the refs just manage the game. Make it super transparent and explain the calls and show the replays on the TV/in game stadium screens. This would get the calls "right" and speed up the games. the red flags are completely comical anyway. 

The current system of a ref looking at a 12" tablet being held by some dude on the side of the field, sometimes in direct sunlight and/or rain is inexcusable. the same goes for the NBA replay system. These sports leagues make BILLIONS of dollars and they cant do better than this? 

 The tablet replay review has got to be one of the most obtuse "solutions" in the history of sports.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

The NFL does anything and everything it can to maintain the image of zero controversy. They always bury investigation reports and destroy documents. Don't forget the NFL is effectively a legal monopoly that the Feds ignore. They don't want to do anything that would jeopardize that status.

Let's see how the WFT congressional investigation plays out and decide how much the NFL likes controversy.  There is already a bill in Congress to remove federal tax subsidies for new stadiums and the public will be more than okay with that. It could get a whole lot worse than a few subsidies if Congress thinks they can get public support for smacking down a bunch of billionaire oligarchs.

You are making the argument for me. I mean they have verbal only reports now. Doesn't get any shadier than that. 

 

[Chaka]

You are making the argument for me. I mean they have verbal only reports now. Doesn't get any shadier than that. 

No doubt they do everything they can to maintain the veneer but the way they come down on teams and pkayers when they get "caught" cheating, even if the evidence suggests there was no cheating, shows it is highly unlikely (virtually impossible) any sort of league sanctioned manipulation is happening.

ETA: You don't jeopardize the Golden Goose.

 

[BoltBacker]

The NFL does anything and everything it can to maintain the image of zero controversy. They always bury investigation reports and destroy documents. Don't forget the NFL is effectively a legal monopoly that the Feds ignore. They don't want to do anything that would jeopardize that status.

I disagree here. If they were truly trying to squash controversy they wouldn't destroy any evidence(like with the "deflategate" data). They would try to make everything as transparent as possible.

At this point it's not a legal monopoly so much as it's a fiefdom and they want to enforce anything as arbitrarily as they choose. As we've seen during the covid era they are more than willing to make the rules up as they go along. 

 

[BoltBacker]

The current system of a ref looking at a 12" tablet being held by some dude on the side of the field, sometimes in direct sunlight and/or rain is inexcusable. the same goes for the NBA replay system. These sports leagues make BILLIONS of dollars and they cant do better than this? 

Isn't that just a five minute microsoft commercial anyway though? I thought the actual ruling on the review was taking place in New York. The TV audience watching the head ref peaking up the skirt of microsoft tablet isn't actually anything more than theater. The ref could be staring at the bottom of a pringles can or playing candy crush if they were willing to pay enough as sponsors. He's just waiting for New York to tell him what the ruling is.

While I'm not quite at the spot you are of leaving the game imo the commercials will eventually drive me away from watching the game at some point and I'll likely just watch 2-minute summaries of the game on youtube. As it is I pay for an NFL package to watch all the commercials cut out...... only to have more commercials sprinkled into the game coverage itself. It always amuses me when I watch redzone and they tout that it's 6 hours of commercial free football..... BROUGHT TO YOU BY AWS. I'm not sure if they even know what commercial free even means anymore. It would be less insulting if the players just wore sponsor patches like NASCAR and they just showed you the game without all the interruptions. but of course they will eventually do both. I honestly think the electronic yellow first down marker will eventually be used to put a taco bell symbol next to the yard markers. It will never end.

 

[BoltBacker]

I completely disagree with this.  The point of the replay challenge is to get the call correct so if a coach challenges and the call is changed to the correct call then that is better for the game and gives the replay a purpose.  If it is not changed then there should be some consequence.  I have never understood why there is a limit in challenges if you are getting them correct.  I would make the change to as long as there is a time out available to lose if you are wrong about the challenge you can challenge as many times as you want.  As long as you keep being right then you can challenge 100 times.  The point is to get the call right after all.  

I think we agree with more than you think.

The replay is important, but too much can completely destroy the flow of watching a game. At some point it's the bad officiating and officials that need to be held accountable. Eliminate some rules and add some off field refs to help with the enforcement of some rules and I think the quality of officiating would go up quite a bit.

 

[BoltBacker]

Im not sure there are any negatives. As evidence in this thread, its so outlandish that nobody would believe it anyway. 

That's where I am at as well.

There was very, very little push-back by fans of the NBA. It has been very well documented what went on there and at the end of the day people just shake their head and say, "Rogue ref?!". Most fans just don't care enough to find out what really happened, and the people that are invested enough to follow up on it are so invested in the NBA they will follow it even if there is a Black Sox level scandal.

Same holds true for football or any other sport. Casual fans don't really know and die hard fans.... well, are die hards. There is really no negative for the league. There is a much bigger negative if there is a strike/lockout and those still happen in just about every sport.

 

[Chaka]

I disagree here. If they were truly trying to squash controversy they wouldn't destroy any evidence(like with the "deflategate" data). They would try to make everything as transparent as possible.

At this point it's not a legal monopoly so much as it's a fiefdom and they want to enforce anything as arbitrarily as they choose. As we've seen during the covid era they are more than willing to make the rules up as they go along. 

Yeah. I'm all in favor of releasing the ~600k WFT emails (~597 I actually as they used three if them to assassinate Jon Gruden).

But total transparency at this point, would open far, far too many scars which could cause the NFL to bleed out.

I think any form of league sanctioned game manipulation is simply too stupid to be all but impossible. However there has to be tanker loads of shady #### perpetrated by individuals and maybe even from any of the 32 oligarchs who own the individual teams.

Racism, drug abuse promoted by team doctors, sexual misconduct of any and every stripe and, yes, criminal attempts (and successes) to manipulate game outcomes by individual players, trainers, referees even coaches, maybe even owners ala the Brian Flores allegations (are the Bengals worth more or less with Joe Burrow under center) to...the list is likely endless. If it all came out, and it thankfully may finally be happening (anyone who wants transparency should support Flores btw), the league could, maybe, possibly be devastated. It would most likely recover, and quickly, but...maybe not.

What I don't believe is the Commissioner is orchestrating, with or without owner consent, game outcomes on any level. It would be bad business.

Does anyone think, for even one second, that a Tennessee v Minnesota Super Bowl wouldn't be the most watched television show of whatever year, in whatever magical, fantasy world that event may occur? Of course it would be.

Green Bay has, by far, the smallest market in the league. Anyone tuning out a GB Super Bowl appearance?

There are many bigger & a few smaller markets but that hasn't stopped the Steelers from appearing in eight Super Bowls. The same number as the mighty Cowboys. And the Nation's #1 media market team, the New York football Giants, has been in five  Super Bowls (six if you want to include the Jets).

The NFL simply does not need to manipulate outcomes because we watch no matter what. When olds like us finally stop watching we simply get replaced.

Shadiness? Absolutely! Game manipulation from the top down? No ####### way!

 

[brewer]

I'm hearing a lot of, too much money to risk, but I don't think the original post is accusing the NFL or any one person or group.  Simply saying there are many curious things which happened.

I remember the online poker community saying there was no way the sites would risk their money by allowing rigged games either, until the evidence all came out.  And by the way, they are all now back in full force.

I love the NFL, I don't believe that any player or coach is involved in any level of game fixing or manipulation. I sincerely enjoy the product that we see, but there are some things that make you say hmmm.  If you think that's too close to treading the line JB, I'll bow out as well. I totally understand your position.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

As long as the NFL employs part timers as refs, incompetence will continue to be confused with crookedness.