Ref Crew from Bengals/Raiders Game Expected to be Benched

JustChip

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,124
Reaction score
5,715
TBH, they ALL suck.

Yet, given the system, I'm surprised they get it right as often as they do.

All very fixable, but they refuse.

I read something where when this is addressed at league meetings they don't want to bother because it has nothijg to do with the bottom line and they can't be wasting time on it....

I REALLY hope that isn't true but someone wrote it, and it wasn't a fan.
The simple solution is make virtually everything challengeable. That won’t make the games linger because the coaches still only have 2 challenges (3 if they win the first 2). But the reviews have to be honest, not that crap like they did with PI after the Rams-Saints debacle. The problem is the referees and their union will undermine it.
 

shabazz

Well-Known Member
Messages
16,422
Reaction score
30,391
So much for the fans on this board that say NFL officials aren’t held accountable.

so much for fans on this board that say NFL officials don’t effect the outcomes of games….
 

KJJ

You Have an Axe to Grind
Messages
56,543
Reaction score
34,787
so much for fans on this board that say NFL officials don’t effect the outcomes of games….

I’ve never heard a fan claim that. Fans claim NFL officials intentionally affect the outcome games. They claim the league is rigged which is BS.
 

Verdict

Well-Known Member
Messages
25,960
Reaction score
20,118
There are only certain categories where New York can chime in and an inadvertent whistle isn't one of them.

RULE 15 INSTANT REPLAY
SECTION 1 INITIATING A REPLAY REVIEW

ARTICLE 2. REPLAY OFFICIAL REQUEST FOR REVIEW. Only the Replay Official or the Senior Vice President of Officiating
or his or her designee may initiate a review of a play:
(a) that begins after the two-minute warning of each half;
(b) throughout any overtime period;
(c) when points are scored by either team;
(d) that is a Try attempt (successful or unsuccessful); and
(e) when on-field officials rule:

(1) an interception by an opponent;
(2) a fumble or backward pass recovered by an opponent or that goes out of bounds through the opponent’s end zone;
(3) a scrimmage kick touched by the receiving team and recovered by the kicking team; or
(4) a disqualification of a player.
Such plays may be reviewed regardless of whether a foul is committed on the play that, if accepted, would negate the on-field
ruling.


The Replay Official may only challenge a play until the next legal snap or kick. The Replay Official may consult with a
designated member of the Officiating department at the league office regarding whether to challenge a play.
And there's this in the same rule:

SECTION 4 NON-REVIEWABLE PLAYS
The following aspects of plays are not reviewable:
(a) Whether an erroneous whistle sounded;
(b) Whether a ball was illegally batted or kicked;
(c) Whether a passer intentionally grounded a pass;
(d) Whether an ineligible receiver was downfield before a pass;
(e) Whether a receiver was illegally contacted;
(f) The spot of a loose ball crossing the sideline;
(g) Whether a block was illegal; and
(h) Any aspect of a play not listed as reviewable in Section 3 of this Rule.
I have never seen New York buzz in to help the Cowboys, but I have seen a couple of times where they reversed a call in favor of the Cowboys that they felt compelled to correct even though under the rules in place at the time it was not a correctable call.

Im not against them fixing a call that goes the opposing teams way, I would just like to see consistency.
 

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,841
Reaction score
16,030
I have never seen New York buzz in to help the Cowboys, but I have seen a couple of times where they reversed a call in favor of the Cowboys that they felt compelled to correct even though under the rules in place at the time it was not a correctable call.

Im not against them fixing a call that goes the opposing teams way, I would just like to see consistency.

Sometimes you don't even know that New York buzzed in so it's impossible to know that "we wuz robbed" all the time.
 

Fritsch_the_cat

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,749
Reaction score
4,138
There are only certain categories where New York can chime in and an inadvertent whistle isn't one of them.

RULE 15 INSTANT REPLAY
SECTION 1 INITIATING A REPLAY REVIEW


(c) when points are scored by either team;

SECTION 4 NON-REVIEWABLE PLAYS

(a) Whether an erroneous whistle sounded;

Those two conflict. Since it was a score it should over-ride the whistle rule.
 

Fritsch_the_cat

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,749
Reaction score
4,138
There's nothing conflicting about "this can't be reviewed." They review a scoring play to make sure the player .... actually scored.

It's conflicting, saying it isn't is just your opinion.

He didn't score, play was blown dead before he caught the ball.
 

MarcusRock

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,841
Reaction score
16,030
It's conflicting, saying it isn't is just your opinion.

He didn't score, play was blown dead before he caught the ball.

Nope. Can't be reviewed so it had to be settled on the field. For whatever reason, they didn't but they absolutely could not review it and could only review whether the player scored on the field as ruled. That's how it works, not my opinion.
 

Fritsch_the_cat

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,749
Reaction score
4,138
Nope. Can't be reviewed so it had to be settled on the field. For whatever reason, they didn't but they absolutely could not review it and could only review whether the player scored on the field as ruled. That's how it works, not my opinion.

I understand that's the rule they went with but I still say the rules conflict.
 

Flamma

Well-Known Member
Messages
21,802
Reaction score
18,666
That 1 second prematurely blown whistle would not have prevented the TD. The nearest DB to the WR who caught the TD was at least 3-4 yards away, not close enough to disrupt the catch.

It wasn't even a second. The ball was almost in the WRs hands. No one had time to react to the whistle.
 
Top