Make penalties challengeable already

[Reverend Conehead]

Before anyone accuses me of being sour grapes over the loss, I was planning on posting this even if we pulled off a win. The roughing the passer penalty on Micah Parsons was bogus. I can see how the ref thought it was roughing. It looks like it is in real time, but when you watch it in slow-mo, it clearly isn't. You're allowed to challenge the spotting of the ball, and whether or not the catch was made. Why would it be any different for a penalty? If we could have challenged that play, I have no doubt we would have gotten a reversal. I remember it was an Oilers versus Steelers playoff game in which the Oilers scored a TD to Mike Renfro, and he clearly got both his feet in bounds, but he was incorrectly ruled out of bounds. That was the game that was the strongest argument for allowing the use of replay to overturn calls. I think this is the game that is a strong argument for allowing penalties to be challenged. I would say allow a challenge of a penalty call as well as a non-call. They tried allowing the challenge of PI and non-PI calls, but they went about it in a stupid manner, which made it not work. They said to only overturn egregious violations. That was ridiculous. They should overturn the call simply if the ref on the field didn't get it right. For PI or non-PI, it should be handled with simplicity. If the defender arrives before the ball, and it's not incidental contact where he's looking back for the ball, it's PI. If he arrives simultaneously with the ball, or after the ball, it's not PI. Roughing the passer calls would be similar. If roughing was called, but the replay shows it wasn't roughing (as was the case in this game), overturn it. I'm not quite sure why the league thinks allowing a challenge to penalties won't work. Clearly, it will. We would have won that challenge. Parsons did not rough the passer. The Dolphins may also have won a challenge when they were called for roughing the passer. I'm going to need to give that one another look. I didn't think that one was as obviously a bad call, but the announcers seemed to think it was. I'll check it out again.
...
But the point is, the use of replay has helped to overturn bad calls where the receiver trapped the ball and it should not have been ruled a catch and vice versa. There's no reason that it can't help with bad penalties or bad non-calls.

 

[1942willys]

While many penalties are BS, the REAL problem is all those that are NOT called.

 

[Brax]

Before anyone accuses me of being sour grapes over the loss, I was planning on posting this even if we pulled off a win. The roughing the passer penalty on Micah Parsons was bogus. I can see how the ref thought it was roughing. It looks like it is in real time, but when you watch it in slow-mo, it clearly isn't. You're allowed to challenge the spotting of the ball, and whether or not the catch was made. Why would it be any different for a penalty? If we could have challenged that play, I have no doubt we would have gotten a reversal. I remember it was an Oilers versus Steelers playoff game in which the Oilers scored a TD to Mike Renfro, and he clearly got both his feet in bounds, but he was incorrectly ruled out of bounds. That was the game that was the strongest argument for allowing the use of replay to overturn calls. I think this is the game that is a strong argument for allowing penalties to be challenged. I would say allow a challenge of a penalty call as well as a non-call. They tried allowing the challenge of PI and non-PI calls, but they went about it in a stupid manner, which made it not work. They said to only overturn egregious violations. That was ridiculous. They should overturn the call simply if the ref on the field didn't get it right. For PI or non-PI, it should be handled with simplicity. If the defender arrives before the ball, and it's not incidental contact where he's looking back for the ball, it's PI. If he arrives simultaneously with the ball, or after the ball, it's not PI. Roughing the passer calls would be similar. If roughing was called, but the replay shows it wasn't roughing (as was the case in this game), overturn it. I'm not quite sure why the league thinks allowing a challenge to penalties won't work. Clearly, it will. We would have won that challenge. Parsons did not rough the passer. The Dolphins may also have won a challenge when they were called for roughing the passer. I'm going to need to give that one another look. I didn't think that one was as obviously a bad call, but the announcers seemed to think it was. I'll check it out again.
...
But the point is, the use of replay has helped to overturn bad calls where the receiver trapped the ball and it should not have been ruled a catch and vice versa. There's no reason that it can't help with bad penalties or bad non-calls.

Unfortunately for the refs it’s played in real time. Let’s see after every play have the refs review it and call all the infractions they see. Was the Dak roughing call bad too? This let’s review non calls or bad calls is crazy, the games will be 4 hours or more longer and you all would still complain with the outcome, calls are missed on both sides. Players complaining about the refs isn’t doing them any favors, also in real time it looks like what is today a roughing the passer, everyone has see much worse calls on roughing the passer.

 

[ghst187]

They can’t make penalties reviewable because every penalty would get reviewed and the league nor the officials want to be constantly challenged or else the game falls apart

 

[Reverend Conehead]

Unfortunately for the refs it’s played in real time. Let’s see after every play have the refs review it and call all the infractions they see. Was the Dak roughing call bad too? This let’s review non calls or bad calls is crazy, the games will be 4 hours or more longer and you all would still complain with the outcome, calls are missed on both sides. Players complaining about the refs isn’t doing them any favors, also in real time it looks like what is today a roughing the passer, everyone has see much worse calls on roughing the passer.

It won't make the game 4-hours long to make penalties challengeable. It would still be within the challenge system, so they wouldn't be reviewing everything. You could even increase a coach's challenges to 5, and it still wouldn't make for 4-hour games.

 

[Brax]

It won't make the game 4-hours long to make penalties challengeable. It would still be within the challenge system, so they wouldn't be reviewing everything. You could even increase a coach's challenges to 5, and it still wouldn't make for 4-hour games.

But you want non calls reviewed too, most calls are judgmental calls so let’s see every illegal contact missed holding PI you name it. What needs to happen is rules need to be changed to eliminate infractions especially illegal contact and throwing the ball away outside the tackle box.

 

[805BoysInBlue]

The refs ego wouldn't allow for this. If you're allowed to only have 2 challenges then you better believe the refs will make you pay once those are used up. I don't have a problem with what they call, I have a problem with the timing of their calls and their lack of calls.

 

[Lutonio]

They already tried this. Officials pitched such a fit that they got together and colluded to never overturn pass interference challenges no matter how bad they were. Coaches eventually stopped wasting their challenges, and now it’s not a thing anymore.

The same thing would happen with other challenges. Officials do not like being questioned.

 

[LBPick]

They need to go with the SkyGod model where the booth ref(s) can quickly call down to the field when they see something or see something better. If we can all see it on the broadcast there’s no reason NFL officials can’t play the same role to intervene when necessary.

 

[glimmerman]

I had mentioned this a while back. Give each team a flag to be used to challenge a penalty. Can’t really challenge non calls. Would give some relief to bad calls. But not much to do about non calls. A flag could be thrown on most every play..Someone somewhere is holding. It wouldn’t help the non calls on Parsons. That’s unreal.

 

[Vandyr]

That RTP when Dak pulled off his best Patrick Mahomes impression was bs too

 

[DallasEast]

Controversial calls drive up both good and bad interest in the league, exactly what the owners want. Rules have always been constantly tweaked. Practically all rules are judgmental and judged by imperfect (and sometimes unqualified) officials, which riles up the league's audience even more when flags fly.

Improvement, even through out-of-the-box thinking, does not profit the owners. More dispute calls drives more talk. More talk drives more interest in the games. More interest in games drives desire to attend games in person and to watch them from afar. It is a win-win situation for the owners' mutual bottom line.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

But you want non calls reviewed too, most calls are judgmental calls so let’s see every illegal contact missed holding PI you name it. What needs to happen is rules need to be changed to eliminate infractions especially illegal contact and throwing the ball away outside the tackle box.

Oh, for sure. I've been for getting rid of illegal contact penalties ever since they started them in 1978. IMO, that's a terrible rule. I'm also not for reviewing every play. That's just not practical.

 

[Jake]

While many penalties are BS, the REAL problem is all those that are NOT called.

Yes, more flags would be great for the game.

 

[TheMightyVanHalen]

Was the Dak roughing call bad too?

No. The stupid announcers disagreed with the call since they failed to see that the defender picked Dak up off his feet. That's a penalty. The Micah flag was SB though.

 

[Brax]

Oh, for sure. I've been for getting rid of illegal contact penalties ever since they started them in 1978. IMO, that's a terrible rule. I'm also not for reviewing every play. That's just not practical.

Unfortunately the NFL wants lots of points so the defense keeps getting castrated

 

[DUO_CORE]

With all of the camera angles, a ref's job only needs to be spotting the ball and breaking up fights.

 

[Reverend Conehead]

Unfortunately the NFL wants lots of points so the defense keeps getting castrated

That's the biggest reason why I refuse to pay them any money. Their idea that you should handicap the game for the offense because everyone supposedly wants high-scoring games is nonsense. I remember when the Cowboys beat the Lions 5 to 0 in the playoffs, and it was an exciting game. By the time they met the 49ers in the NFC Championship, they had gone 22 quarters without allowing any team to score a touchdown. The 49ers broke that streak, but the Cowboys won that game, which was another low-scoring affair. I guess the league thinks those weren't good games, but they were. I won't pay to go to a game. I watch for free. And I only buy used merch. They're not getting a cent from me unless they stop this nonsense.

 

[Brax]

That's the biggest reason why I refuse to pay them any money. Their idea that you should handicap the game for the offense because everyone supposedly wants high-scoring games is nonsense. I remember when the Cowboys beat the Lions 5 to 0 in the playoffs, and it was an exciting game. By the time they met the 49ers in the NFC Championship, they had gone 22 quarters without allowing any team to score a touchdown. The 49ers broke that streak, but the Cowboys won that game, which was another low-scoring affair. I guess the league thinks those weren't good games, but they were. I won't pay to go to a game. I watch for free. And I only buy used merch. They're not getting a cent from me unless they stop this nonsense.

I miss the the equal playing field great D great O but it’s money that drives the NFL not the quality of the games, the rules want points and parity so fan bases keep interested

 

[Cowboysheelsreds058]

They can’t make penalties reviewable because every penalty would get reviewed and the league nor the officials want to be constantly challenged or else the game falls apart

Would turn into a 5 hour game.