Pretty soon they'll have a "smart ball" with a tracker in it that tells exactly how far the ball went on scrum carries and in-out of bounds reaches and OOB punts etc. Chain gang will be on the street looking for jobs. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
A person can claim conspiracy or incompetence or unconscious bias or simply that the game has become too complicated.
While I think more than one of those things exist, I think a very simple answer is that the game has become too complicated. Because we now have instant replay and reviews, we have to make the rules more and more precise, which them makes every play a penaltyfest. The officials call the ones that are blatant or that they think they should call ('he touched Tom!') and leave others alone. No wonder everyone is dissatisfied.
They need to simplify the rules. Allow holding on both offense and defense, but then give the other side some other rules concession to combat it. Make fewer things penalties and you'll call fewer penalties.
Holding calls are 75 percent of the problem these days if you really look at it, and the other 25 percent is personal fouls and pass interference. No one complains about offsides or illegal motion or any of the other 500 rules in the book. So addressing those calls and finding a solution other than calling a penalty is the key.
The game is rapidly becoming unwatchable. I bet 25 to 35 percent of the Chiefs' offensive plays in the first quarter were nullfied due to penalties. No one wants to watch that.
I think an obvious difference why pass interference is so huge is the yardage. You can slam my QB into the ground and it’s 15 yards. Defender gets there a split second early, 40 yard penalty.
As far as holding goes, I never understood how lineman were allowed to wrap their arm completely around Hali’s neck and hold him back. But, this guy is bull rushing using his arm as leverage on his shoulder pad, that’s a penalty? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
A person can claim conspiracy or incompetence or unconscious bias or simply that the game has become too complicated.
While I think more than one of those things exist, I think a very simple answer is that the game has become too complicated. Because we now have instant replay and reviews, we have to make the rules more and more precise, which them makes every play a penaltyfest. The officials call the ones that are blatant or that they think they should call ('he touched Tom!') and leave others alone. No wonder everyone is dissatisfied.
They need to simplify the rules. Allow holding on both offense and defense, but then give the other side some other rules concession to combat it. Make fewer things penalties and you'll call fewer penalties.
Holding calls are 75 percent of the problem these days if you really look at it, particularly defensive holding, and the other 25 percent is personal fouls and pass interference. No one complains about offsides or illegal motion or any of the other 500 rules in the book. So addressing those calls and finding a solution other than calling a penalty is the key.
The game is rapidly becoming unwatchable. I bet 25 to 35 percent of the Chiefs' offensive plays in the first quarter last week were nullified due to penalties. No one wants to watch that.
I think I saw a stat or heard a stat in the beginning stages of the Houston game, where the Chiefs had ran 9 plays or something, and already had 5 penalties. Something ridiculous like that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Dayze:
I think I saw a stat or heard a stat in the beginning stages of the Houston game, where the Chiefs had ran 9 plays or something, and already had 5 penalties. Something ridiculous like that.
The Chiefs had 5 offensive penalties in the first 5 minutes of the game, i believe, then picked up their 6th on their very next offensive play after the Texans following possession. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Bellicheck wants everything reviewable. Which makes sense because your limited in the number of challenges available. But, what if they challenge 5 times and win all? Now they are getting 8 challenges, slowing down the game.
They’d have to impose a limit on total challenges even if they are successful.
If you want a system to overturn poor calls on the field, then sure. But I'm just warning you, you don't want a system where every single call is analyzed and changed. It will make games 5 hours long and unwatchable. The games aren't perfectly played https://t.co/KBdGPvoAWS
Ten years ago the NFL averaged 11.8 penalties for 97.3 yards per game. Five years ago the averages were 13.2 penalties for 111.1 yards. This season NFL games average 14.9 penalties for 124.5 yards. The more the flags, the worse the game.
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
Bellicheck wants everything reviewable. Which makes sense because your limited in the number of challenges available. But, what if they challenge 5 times and win all? Now they are getting 8 challenges, slowing down the game.
They’d have to impose a limit on total challenges even if they are successful.
You can't penalize a team simply because the refs fucked them one too many times. [Reply]
If the NFL isn't careful, they are going to turn football into baseball and no one is watching that slowed down shit these days. Attendance declines year after year after year. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TinyEvel:
Pretty soon they'll have a "smart ball" with a tracker in it that tells exactly how far the ball went on scrum carries and in-out of bounds reaches and OOB punts etc. Chain gang will be on the street looking for jobs.
The sky judge is the only way they can fix this. A ref that can look at thrown flags and say whether it was the right call or not. Would only used for black and white type of flags only though. Like the hands on the face penalties yesterday. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
I know it's not a silver bullet, but I still don't understand why the full-time ref concept wouldn't work. If nothing else, these guys should be reviewing calls and talking about it every week. Refs should have film review and practice just like the players.
I don't think the problem is that they're not full-time. The problem is that the game moves entirely too fast for them and most people. The only reason we know they fucked up most times is because we see the replay in slow mo. They don't. So them being full time wouldn't really fix anything. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
I don't think the problem is that they're not full-time. The problem is that the game moves entirely too fast for them and most people. The only reason we know they ****ed up most times is because we see the replay in slow mo. They don't. So them being full time wouldn't really fix anything.
That's my thinking as well.
I think the biggest problem is inconsistency, though. Maybe extra training would help with that. And I think the inconsistency is a particular issue because it exposes the natural bias that refs have. It's why Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers get calls in their favor that other players don't get.
We didn't have these controversies in the past because we couldn't go back and watch to see if the ref was right. They were probably just as inconsistent in the 1970's, but no one could prove it. Now we can.
Honestly, I don't know why anyone would be an NFL ref. It's a thankless job, and it requires split-second reasoning and an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules. I'm surprised we don't see more basic errors like misinterpreting a rule or placing the ball incorrectly on a penalty. It's a very hard and very high profile job. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
The sky judge is the only way they can fix this. A ref that can look at thrown flags and say whether it was the right call or not. Would only used for black and white type of flags only though. Like the hands on the face penalties yesterday.
Except that this would probably be used similarly to how the challenges on PI are being handled this year. They won't overturn shit! [Reply]