Inconsistency with NFL officiating

[halfback20]

Did the ref mean to call it on 31 instead of 21? Because even though that would have been a bad call too. The hit by 31 was to the head at least a little. Collins was diving to make a pick. That was a horrible call.

 

No, they called it on 21. And a different replay shows that 31 didn't hit helmet to helmet either. He missed completely, it just looks like they hit from that video.

[theguru]

It has been a tough year for the NFL on the officiating front.

 

I feel we are in the infancy of some sort of transition phase where everything comes from above.

[rjs4470]

It has been a tough year for the NFL on the officiating front.

 

I feel we are in the infancy of some sort of transition phase where everything comes from above.

 

I typically defend officials, however I’ve seen calls throughout the playoffs and in big games this year that leave me scratching my head. Last nights missed PI/defenseless receiver call in the Rams/Saints game might be the worst call at the worst time in the history of the league. Literally legacy changing for Brees and Payton and the Saints. And a “we blew that call” apology from the league isn’t good enough. I think we may be at the point where replay needs to be used to look at penalties.

[halfback20]

This stuff happens every year. The NFL needs to hire full time officials.

[FSfan]

I was watching a CFL game earlier this year and their coaches can challenge anything. I think they have 3 challenges and one coach challenged that there was pass interference on his receiver which wasn’t called and the officials reviewed it and called the PI. NFL could easily do the same thing.

[rjs4470]

This stuff happens every year. The NFL needs to hire full time officials.

 

I keep hearing that, but will that really make officiating better? How does that eliminate missed calls like the one in the Saints game, or the phantom roughing the passer in the Patriots-Chiefs game?

[UKMustangFan]

I was watching a CFL game earlier this year and their coaches can challenge anything. I think they have 3 challenges and one coach challenged that there was pass interference on his receiver which wasn’t called and the officials reviewed it and called the PI. NFL could easily do the same thing.

 

Games would literally be 5 hours long. I'll pass on that.

[FSfan]

Maybe someone out there can answer these questions for me. I never played in high school so I’m not up with everything, but why is there a limit to how many players on offense you can have on or not on the line? Also, why can you not “cover” someone on the line on offense... such as when a trio of receivers lines up, usually the middle one has to be off the line?

 

The rule about having a minimum of 7 men on the offensive line of scrimmage is one of the very first player safety rules ever made. It was to stop what were called “mass momentum” plays which were prevalent in the earliest days of football. The flying wedge play was often used where only the center would be on the line and the other blockers would line up in a v-formation behind him often with arms interlocked. The ball carrier would get in behind them and it would look like a rugby scrum. There were many more serious injuries and even deaths back then and no less than President Teddy Roosevelt spoke out against it vociferously. Seven men on the line prevents this from happening.

[FSfan]

Games would literally be 5 hours long. I'll pass on that.

 

Yeah I don’t want every play reviewed cause it will be like college basketball is now. But if they keep it to 2 or 3 challenges by the coach like

it is now but let them challenge anything it wouldn’t be too bad. But the problem would come in the last two minutes when the booth official could stop it for anything. That’s when the game would get drawn out way too long.

[TheDeuce]

I do think we should be able to take a second look at penalties or no-calls, but I’m not sure how it would be done logistically. We definitely can’t give coaches to ability to challenge everything. Maybe keep the current challenging system, but allow them to challenge penalties as well?

 

Bad calls/no-calls happen in every game. The non-call on PI in the Rams/Saints game was MUCH worse than the RTP in the Pats game. I think we could do something where both of those calls could be looked at without slowing down the game too much. Maybe the booth looks at plays like those like they do scoring plays.

[CincySportsFan]

I do think we should be able to take a second look at penalties or no-calls, but I’m not sure how it would be done logistically. We definitely can’t give coaches to ability to challenge everything. Maybe keep the current challenging system, but allow them to challenge penalties as well?

 

Bad calls/no-calls happen in every game. The non-call on PI in the Rams/Saints game was MUCH worse than the RTP in the Pats game. I think we could do something where both of those calls could be looked at without slowing down the game too much. Maybe the booth looks at plays like those like they do scoring plays.

 

This is where I'm at. With coaches, there's too much communication that has to occur (from the reviewer to the coach, and then the coach to the official). Just have the booth buzz the official.

[Jumper_Dad]

On the subject of using replay to look for penalties...no way!

 

You could have a replay official call holding every play just about. You could have hand fighting between WR and CB called nearly every play. Hands grazing an opponents face mask could be called hands to the face every play.

 

I like replay to cerify catches, spot of the ball, ball possession and unsportsmanlike penalties...but not much more.

[halfback20]

I keep hearing that, but will that really make officiating better? How does that eliminate missed calls like the one in the Saints game, or the phantom roughing the passer in the Patriots-Chiefs game?

 

It wont make it perfect, but nothing will. There will always be human error.

 

But I think it would help.

[rjs4470]

It wont make it perfect, but nothing will. There will always be human error.

 

But I think it would help.

 

I guess my question is, how would it help? What does a “full time” official look like? What does making him full time allow him to do that an official isn’t currently able to do?

 

To me, the phrase “full time official” is just a buzz word that doesn’t have much substance attached to it.

[tcjkbt]

Replay reviews are way too long. If the officials can't decide after 1 minute, the play on the field stands.