Pace of play and reviewing penalties

[waldoputty]

We have all been upset about refs screwing up.
There has been proposals about allowing coaches to challenge everything including penalties.
The league is resisting probably due to pace of play concerns.

In the game with the Vikings, it may have thrown the game in our advantage early and Thorton's hit on the QB's face probably would not have matter.
Correcting bad penalties surely would give the league more credibility - seem to me...

 

[jchap]

If teams have the ability to challenge for penalties then no big play will ever stand and the pace of play will be even worse.

 

[waldoputty]

If teams have the ability to challenge for penalties then no big play will ever stand and the pace of play will be even worse.

I meant challenging called penalties, not asking for more penalties, which would be a nightmare. Yes that would not cover the penalty to the face of the Vikings QB...

 

[Risen Star]

Horrible idea.

 

[Fritsch_the_cat]

Games would take days to play at that pace.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

We have all been upset about refs screwing up.
There has been proposals about allowing coaches to challenge everything including penalties.
The league is resisting probably due to pace of play concerns.

In the game with the Vikings, it may have thrown the game in our advantage early and Thorton's hit on the QB's face probably would not have matter.
Correcting bad penalties surely would give the league more credibility - seem to me...

Thornton's hit should have never occurred as the Vikings LT clearly made a false start. It wasn't even remotely close, the refs just missed it.

I think most of this stems from poor training of refs led by a head of officiating who has never refereed a game of football on ANY level (pro, semi-pro, college, high school or Pop Warner).

I think the Dez 'no catch' is a perfect example. That was indeed a catch by the definition of the rules at that time which stated if the player advances the ball at any point...it's deemed 'an act common to the game' (aka a football move) and it is a catch.

That is pretty simple.

If you catch it and the ball is deemed to fall out as the player goes to the ground...if they advanced the football (which Calvin Johnson could not do since he was in the end zone)....it's a catch.

But, the league didn't understand the rule that they created which is incredible and changed the rule. Then when it was pointed out to them, they decided to cover their butts and do a spin job.

Now the rule becomes confusing and when they change the rule the new rule is much more ambiguous.

And all of that stuff takes away from time to be spent on important matters like being able to recognize the illegal picks that the Skins, Patriots and Saints set all of the time or things like snapping the ball when the play clock reads 0 or missing obvious holding calls.

I also think that the league has gone overboard of their protection of QB's. Like the hit to the helmet on Durant versus Aaron Rodgers. It was a hit to the helmet, but Rodgers ducked his head into it and there's nothing with reason a defender can do in that situation. And again...with all of the focus on the QB...it takes away from other parts of the game involved with the refs.





YR

 

[SDCowboy]

If teams have the ability to challenge for penalties then no big play will ever stand and the pace of play will be even worse.

The pace of play would be exactly the same assuming challenging penalties counted as a regular challenge. A team would still only have 2-3 challenges.

 

[bark]

Horrible idea.

Yes if a coach had unlimited challenges.
Belichick has proposed allowing a coach the ability to challenge any call on the field limited to three challenges per game.

 

[MRV52]

Every turnover with a penalty should be able to be challenged.

 

[SDCowboy]

Games would take days to play at that pace.

Again, they would take no longer than they currently do. You don't get extra challenges to be able to challenge penalties. It would change nothing in terms of game time nor pace or any other concern.

 

[Satchel89]

I'm sick of hearing about the no-call on Bradford. The first Escobar holding penalty was terrible. The 42 yard run by Zeke got nullified by a terrible call on Free. Did Scandrick really put a devastating hand to the face when Hitchens got the interception? Not just this game but we've seen Martin get called for holding because he just dominates the guy and the refs can't understand that. Of course, Any time Cowboys fans complain on Twitter, We're the worst fan base in the NFL. Never mind all the calls Sherman and the Seahacks get. Remember that obvious Pass Interference against Jones in the Atlanta game? I cannot believe how blatant that was. We see teams get hosed all the time up there. Every team gets screwed. I know that it's going to happen but I'm tired of the calls against the Cowboys that don't need to be called. There's holding on every play. Does the NFL want refs involved in the game that much? It's just been a really bad year for the officiating. Actually, It's been terrible.

 

[TheHerd]

The pick plays are the worst to me. Some teams have figured out how to coach to the rules, written and unwritten, and it gives them a huge advantage. Why we don't do this, I'll never know.

Watch how many wide open short passes Brady or Brees complete with huge yac because no defender is around, and you'll know what I'm taking about.

 

[DallasCowboys2080]

Go back to 1985 rules. except for rules on concussion.

 

[links18]

PI is challengeable in the CFL and there isn't a huge delay in the game. PI is such a huge, game changing penalty that it should probably be challengeable, but you are never going to remove human judgement from the game with technology-- just wont happen.

 

[links18]

Thornton's hit should have never occurred as the Vikings LT clearly made a false start. It wasn't even remotely close, the refs just missed it.

I think most of this stems from poor training of refs led by a head of officiating who has never refereed a game of football on ANY level (pro, semi-pro, college, high school or Pop Warner).

I think the Dez 'no catch' is a perfect example. That was indeed a catch by the definition of the rules at that time which stated if the player advances the ball at any point...it's deemed 'an act common to the game' (aka a football move) and it is a catch.

That is pretty simple.

If you catch it and the ball is deemed to fall out as the player goes to the ground...if they advanced the football (which Calvin Johnson could not do since he was in the end zone)....it's a catch.

But, the league didn't understand the rule that they created which is incredible and changed the rule. Then when it was pointed out to them, they decided to cover their butts and do a spin job.

Now the rule becomes confusing and when they change the rule the new rule is much more ambiguous.

And all of that stuff takes away from time to be spent on important matters like being able to recognize the illegal picks that the Skins, Patriots and Saints set all of the time or things like snapping the ball when the play clock reads 0 or missing obvious holding calls.

I also think that the league has gone overboard of their protection of QB's. Like the hit to the helmet on Durant versus Aaron Rodgers. It was a hit to the helmet, but Rodgers ducked his head into it and there's nothing with reason a defender can do in that situation. And again...with all of the focus on the QB...it takes away from other parts of the game involved with the refs.





YR

The problem with the Dez catch is that they overturned the ruling in the field w/o indisputable evidence. That's the rule the NFL "forgot."

 

[xwalker]

We have all been upset about refs screwing up.
There has been proposals about allowing coaches to challenge everything including penalties.
The league is resisting probably due to pace of play concerns.

In the game with the Vikings, it may have thrown the game in our advantage early and Thorton's hit on the QB's face probably would not have matter.
Correcting bad penalties surely would give the league more credibility - seem to me...

The on-field replay booth is stupid. Guys upstairs or at the home office could do it much faster than having the on-field ref review it.

They should have video ref that is viewing (not just reviewing) all plays. He could be in constant communication with the on-field refs and could overturn any penalty and could even call penalties.

The refs union fights againt improvements and technology. A video ref would make the on-field guys seem less important and the union hates that concept.

 

[conner01]

PI is challengeable in the CFL and there isn't a huge delay in the game. PI is such a huge, game changing penalty that it should probably be challengeable, but you are never going to remove human judgement from the game with technology-- just wont happen.

Rather than make it challenge I'd rather see it be the same as offensive PI
But CB would commit more of them if they were beat for a td

 

[links18]

The on-field replay booth is stupid. Guys upstairs or at the home office could do it much faster than having the on-field ref review it.

They should have video ref that is viewing (not just reviewing) all plays. He could be in constant communication with the on-field refs and could overturn any penalty and could even call penalties.

The refs union fights againt improvements and technology. A video ref would make the on-field guys seem less important and the union hates that concept.

That is not a great way to improve the credibility of the league when it comes to officiating. Have some faceless guy from the cloud making calls? Not likely. For how bad the refs are, better to have a visible game official on the field assume responsibility for the calls. This business about them having communications with NY is already shady enough.

 

[waldoputty]

The pace of play would be exactly the same assuming challenging penalties counted as a regular challenge. A team would still only have 2-3 challenges.

I agree to a certain extent, but it may be easier to tell from replay whether something is a penalty.
So this could increase the number of challenges.

 

[waldoputty]

The on-field replay booth is stupid. Guys upstairs or at the home office could do it much faster than having the on-field ref review it.

They should have video ref that is viewing (not just reviewing) all plays. He could be in constant communication with the on-field refs and could overturn any penalty and could even call penalties.

The refs union fights againt improvements and technology. A video ref would make the on-field guys seem less important and the union hates that concept.

They still need someone to place the ball lol
And stop fights...