CFZ A few ways to improve officiating

[DogFace]

I'll answer that question if you answer my original one first:

There were 10 flags thrown against Philly...more yds...more 1st downs penalized. HOW MANY FLAGS DO YOU THINK SHOULD HAVE BEEN THROWN AGAINST THEM? A number....not just some vague way to circumvent it.

I agree the Eagles benefited from some calls and non calls. I also think Dallas did. I think this is common occurrence in almost all games. Do you think Dallas benefited from any non calls against them...?

So...what's your number of flags that SHOULD have been thrown against Philly. 10 were thrown...what should the number have been?

(Ignore caps lock sentence up there....not sure why all caps lock but don't want to retype)

If they continue to break the rules, 137.

But you’re unwilling to follow the point. Had they called some—any early in the game—they’d have stopped so it wouldn’t reach that number. Not sure an easier way to explain that.

You tell me some bad calls that benefited the Cowboys and I’ll listen. Provide some video if you can.

So yeah. Explain the picked up flag. And I’m pretty sure there was another one Seth Joyner. I know it’s you. It’s not too often blatant flags are picked up. We’ve had two big ones this year. Show me some for the Eagles that were picked up with no explanation. Or hell and team. Show me.

 

[MarcusRock]

It's hilarious that you're saying that to Marcus when he's one of the ones on here that gets quite adamant when a call goes our way. He's one of the more down the line posters. If anything, he should be a ref with his knowledge of the rules.

Was just going to tell him, "there's a time for schtick and a time to pause it for a moment depending on who you're talking to." Lol.

Kudos for the shout out but if I were a ref I'd never call offensive holding. I'd tell all D-Linemen, "You used a rip move, bro. That's an exemption. Play on." Lol.

 

[MarcusRock]

It was OPI before DPI anyway

But it was also holding before OPI before DPI.

Offset and replay that 3rd Down.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Sorry. You maybe mentioned it earlier.

So any close call is automatically reviewed? A guy watching on monitors with many angles etc?? In real time?

Sounds good

From what it seemed like while I was at a game, yes. They had one play that was reviewed for a possible catch along the sideline, and they noticed a push off. So, they called OPI. It was cool because we could hear in the stadium what the replay officials were watching and what they saw. Then, they directed the ref to throw a flag. I think it's a great system that way.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Was just going to tell him, "there's a time for schtick and a time to pause it for a moment depending on who you're talking to." Lol.

Kudos for the shout out but if I were a ref I'd never call offensive holding. I'd tell all D-Linemen, "You used a rip move, bro. That's an exemption. Play on." Lol.

Yup lol, we have our disagreements at times, but I respect that you always go to the rule book. Plus, it was hilarious that he was going after you of all people for "bias" lol.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Very good points, sir...

It is my belief that the NFL simply wants variability and human error. It sells. Controversy sells. It is how the media makes money - they sell controversy and make some up if it isn't already there... It is all about the money.

It explains why they will not hire full time professional refs. It explains why they will not use currently available technology (see VAR for Premier Soccer or US Open Tennis - exact precision of whether a ball crosses a line or not. Down to the milimeter. Exact replay of players on a field or pitch, in exact positions, with exact locations of hands, arms & feet - that allows precision in determining whether a penalty is awarded or not).

The NFL could do these things but they don't.... why?

One reason... money... secondary reason... gambling...

I wasn't going to say VAR because it's disliked in the PL lol, but the use of replay should be much more. But, as you said, the money and controversy is worth more to the NFL (apparently) than making sure the calls are correct.

 

[CowboysLakerBamaFan]

If they continue to break the rules, 137.

But you’re unwilling to follow the point. Had they called some—any early in the game—they’d have stopped so it wouldn’t reach that number. Not sure an easier way to explain that.

You tell me some bad calls that benefited the Cowboys and I’ll listen. Provide some video if you can.

So yeah. Explain the picked up flag. And I’m pretty sure there was another one Seth Joyner. I know it’s you. It’s not too often blatant flags are picked up. We’ve had two big ones this year. Show me some for the Eagles that were picked up with no explanation. Or hell and team. Show me.

"If they continue to break the rules" is not an answer to my question...of what the number should have been against them in this game...as it was played.

If you're not sure what the number should have been...or what number (above the 10 that were thrown) would have been the correct number in your eyes....then we are just going in circles.

Oh well....on to the Giants!

 

[MarcusRock]

Yup lol, we have our disagreements at times, but I respect that you always go to the rule book. Plus, it was hilarious that he was going after you of all people for "bias" lol.

It's almost as funny as people taking Risen's sarcasm seriously and getting upset over it. One of the finer things on these boards, lol.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

It would work on scoring opportunities. The second the ball crosses the goal line, a light would go on. Replay could confirm any marginal situations where the knee may be down before ball crossed goal line.

It’s not perfect but better than what we currently have.

Exactly, plus, if it's near a first down, the chip can show where the ball is in a pile. That would help with those sorts of calls.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

It's almost as funny as people taking Risen's sarcasm seriously and getting upset over it. One of the finer things on these boards, lol.

Or the Dexter Coakley classics lol

 

[erod]

I think it's been said many times and ways that the officiating in the NFL is bad. This thread is not about that. In fact, I think it's worth checking out a video from 5 Point Vids (a Giants fan tbf) who did a video about the science about bad officiating. I think it will help understand why officiating has it's issues. One of the big issues that is mentioned is the vantage point and the lack of use of technology. After all, the refs are human. They only have two eyes each for a crew of about 6-8 refs on the field. So, that's about 12-16 eyeballs that are on the field that have to be able to make the calls. That's basically where this thread comes into play. This thread will examine a few ways to improve officiating. Most of these will be tech solutions as these are the best ways that I can think of to help.

• Put a chip into the ball - football is a game of inches, and where the refs spot the ball makes a massive difference between a TD, first downs, Turn over on Downs, etc. Sometimes, as was the case in the Rams Steelers game or on the Hurts scramble against us, the refs might not be able to tell, based on an angle, where the ball was when the knee hit. If the ball had a chip in it, then there could be a signal that gets sent to the replay booth to show exactly where the ball was when the knee hit. Thus, when a player is in a pile, then they just have to match up where the chip is compared to the knee. This should make spotting the ball much easier. Besides, in European Football/soccer, the match balls have a chip in them to help the refs to be able to know if the ball did indeed cross the line. They can do something similar in the NFL.
• Make penalties/plays where a penalty could be called reviewable - this doesn't necessarily mean that a coach would have to challenge it, though this could be useful if the refs don't pick it up. Rather, similar to how the refs will be told quickly by the replay officials that a turnover should be quickly overturned, they can be told quickly by someone with a controller who can quickly spot an infraction on a replay. For example, when Schoonmacher was hit prior to the ball getting there, the hit could be part of the review so that they can make the correct call based on the entirety of the play, as opposed to just reviewing the parts that they can review with the current rules.
• Make the refs full time - this would help because, as opposed to having the refs have side jobs, they can spend their offseasons getting better and honing their craft. They can attend seminars where they can focus on certain aspects that they may not be able to focus on at this time.
• Better technology for replays - the replay speed in the XFL and USFL is impressive compared to the NFL. If you have watched an XFL game, you'll notice that they have people with an Xbox controller who can zoom in and do all kinds of different things in a rapid time to spot different things in a replay. Pat McAfee has pointed this out several times on his show. I think using some of the technology the XFL uses would help improve the NFL because all aspects of the play could be more rapidly reviewed. This means that they are able to review the play and get back to play more quickly. Thus, the concern for questionable officiating can be reduced because the technology used is better able to help the refs make the right calls.

The NFL makes hand over fist weekly. Surely they can afford these techniques if even the XFL is able to afford it. I think these methods would help improve officiating immensely.

The easiest way to help the referees is to get rid of 75% of the rule book.

That, and put an age limit on them. Papa and Uncle Cooter don't need to be running around with 22-year-old world-class athletes.

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

The chip in the ball is a no brainer. The technology is there and I don't believe the cost is out of the means of the NFL.

Replay for penalties should be implemented but not as coaches challenges. There are too many penalties called to ask the coaches to give up time outs to review penalties. When a penalty is called there is always a time out. The refs usually discuss the penalty and the spot of the ball which gives the replay booth people a chance to review the play. I don't expect many reversals of penalties but we all see the ones they call that are pretty bad. Maybe they reverse one or two a game. It is still better than what we see now. I don't think this works for penalties not called though. Here I would go with the idea someone else posted. If a replay for a TD, fumble, INT or other call is used and the refs see an obnvious penalty, like PI, facemask, etc. then the penalty should be called. This would help get call right, it might also cause coaches to refrain from unnecessary replays.

Replay should also be used for illegal formation calls, encroachment, offsides and false start penalties. So amny times you see a defensive lineman get a good jump and the refs call it offsides, but the replay shows he did not enter the neurtral zone beofre the ball was snapped. Replay could fix these calls. Other times we see OTs move early and it is not called. I have no idea why refs decided to stop calling these false starts but you see it a lot now around the league. Lane Johnson does it several times per game and rarely if ever gets called. The Eagles OL is successful on that Tush Push because they are really quick at the snap. It is a huge advantage to an offensive linement to get out of his stance before teh DL can get his hands on him.

The problem in the NFL is probably as much penalties that are not called as much as penalties that are called.

I also think they need to go back to the rules and call penalties according to the rules - or change the rules. For example, an uncatchable ball should negate any PI called. You rarely see the ref signal an uncatchable ball anymore.

For illegal contact, call it every time or change the rule to allow it. We complain about the refs because one play we see a receiver get mugged downfield, and the next play we see minor incidental contact 6 yards beyond the LOS called.

Hands to the face is either allowed or not allowed. It is called sometimes, but a lot of times you see it and the refs let it go. Holding is another one. Everyone grabs the sholderpads when they block and it they stay squared it is not called, but then if the guy being blocked turns and the blocker does not let go immediately, the refs call holding - sometimes. Other times they ignore it. Consistency would go a long way to calming everyone's concerns about penalties.

Finally, it is the refs. full time refs that get together and work on penalties calls, review videos, and get instruction in practical labs would improve the officiating. But they are still humans so they will made big mistakes. Major league baseball umpires are full time and they made some ball calls too.

Sure, but the science of refs video that I mentioned explained why the refs making bad calls can happen. That's why more technology is critical. The refs need as much help as they can get with how tough it can be, especially when it's a pile up.

 

[CowboysLakerBamaFan]

Was just going to tell him, "there's a time for schtick and a time to pause it for a moment depending on who you're talking to." Lol.

Kudos for the shout out but if I were a ref I'd never call offensive holding. I'd tell all D-Linemen, "You used a rip move, bro. That's an exemption. Play on." Lol.

No schtick.... just engaging in serious discussion.

You seem like a level headed person....if I misunderstood you or came off as schtickty Def not my intention.... so I will accept the flag on that one (too soon?)

I agree with ur statement you just posted

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

The easiest way to help the referees is to get rid of 75% of the rule book.

That, and put an age limit on them. Papa and Uncle Cooter don't need to be running around with 22-year-old world-class athletes.

They do need to simplify the rule book. That would reduce a great deal of the issues. As for the age situation, that's why I suggested maybe having a pipeline for ex players. They'd still be in good shape, and they'd be better able to use tech.

 

[LonnieElam]

You want to hear something crazy? I've hung out with a front office guy, Todd Williams, and drank a few beers with him. I asked him, "so when Dallas and Washington got fined for front-loading contracts while there was no cap during the lockout, that was just Goodell sticking it to Jerry, right?"

He said (I'm paraphrasing here), "Absolutely, and had I known that was going to happen, I would have dumped even more into the contracts and taken the fine."

 

[CowboysLakerBamaFan]

They do need to simplify the rule book. That would reduce a great deal of the issues. As for the age situation, that's why I suggested maybe having a pipeline for ex players. They'd still be in good shape, and they'd be better able to use tech.

Yes I agree...the refs are put in an impossible situation.

I need to watch a game from the 1960s and see what is was like back then.... granted, almost everything was allowed back then.

It seems they've doubled or tripled the rules since then...but not changed the number of offials at the game (to my knowledge)

 

[Whirlwin]

More stoppages and more booth reviews won't make games faster, that's nothing but wishful thinking on your part.

The stoppages would be much faster

 

[RustyBourneHorse]

Yes I agree...the refs are put in an impossible situation.

I need to watch a game from the 1960s and see what is was like back then.... granted, almost everything was allowed back then.

It seems they've doubled or tripled the rules since then...but not changed the number of offials at the game (to my knowledge)

I may actually make a thread about some rules that could be simplified.

 

[kskboys]

I think it's been said many times and ways that the officiating in the NFL is bad. This thread is not about that. In fact, I think it's worth checking out a video from 5 Point Vids (a Giants fan tbf) who did a video about the science about bad officiating. I think it will help understand why officiating has it's issues. One of the big issues that is mentioned is the vantage point and the lack of use of technology. After all, the refs are human. They only have two eyes each for a crew of about 6-8 refs on the field. So, that's about 12-16 eyeballs that are on the field that have to be able to make the calls. That's basically where this thread comes into play. This thread will examine a few ways to improve officiating. Most of these will be tech solutions as these are the best ways that I can think of to help.

• Put a chip into the ball - football is a game of inches, and where the refs spot the ball makes a massive difference between a TD, first downs, Turn over on Downs, etc. Sometimes, as was the case in the Rams Steelers game or on the Hurts scramble against us, the refs might not be able to tell, based on an angle, where the ball was when the knee hit. If the ball had a chip in it, then there could be a signal that gets sent to the replay booth to show exactly where the ball was when the knee hit. Thus, when a player is in a pile, then they just have to match up where the chip is compared to the knee. This should make spotting the ball much easier. Besides, in European Football/soccer, the match balls have a chip in them to help the refs to be able to know if the ball did indeed cross the line. They can do something similar in the NFL.
• Make penalties/plays where a penalty could be called reviewable - this doesn't necessarily mean that a coach would have to challenge it, though this could be useful if the refs don't pick it up. Rather, similar to how the refs will be told quickly by the replay officials that a turnover should be quickly overturned, they can be told quickly by someone with a controller who can quickly spot an infraction on a replay. For example, when Schoonmacher was hit prior to the ball getting there, the hit could be part of the review so that they can make the correct call based on the entirety of the play, as opposed to just reviewing the parts that they can review with the current rules.
• Make the refs full time - this would help because, as opposed to having the refs have side jobs, they can spend their offseasons getting better and honing their craft. They can attend seminars where they can focus on certain aspects that they may not be able to focus on at this time.
• Better technology for replays - the replay speed in the XFL and USFL is impressive compared to the NFL. If you have watched an XFL game, you'll notice that they have people with an Xbox controller who can zoom in and do all kinds of different things in a rapid time to spot different things in a replay. Pat McAfee has pointed this out several times on his show. I think using some of the technology the XFL uses would help improve the NFL because all aspects of the play could be more rapidly reviewed. This means that they are able to review the play and get back to play more quickly. Thus, the concern for questionable officiating can be reduced because the technology used is better able to help the refs make the right calls.

The NFL makes hand over fist weekly. Surely they can afford these techniques if even the XFL is able to afford it. I think these methods would help improve officiating immensely.

Get Vegas out of their pockets.

Refs aren't missing calls, they're ignoring calls w/ a clear agenda, makes the games closer. It's not about bad calls, it's about ignoring calls and/or making calls at key times. For instance, when the refs kept extending Philly's last TD drive. We stopped Philly, but then the yellow came a'flyin'.

 

[kskboys]

If the NFL could figure out a way to make money off the replay system, it would be perfect almost immediately

Good stuff!!!

However, they make money off the refs calls, so they manipulate them to attract more fans. It's plain as day if you start looking at it from that perspective.