Sky Judge, the NFL & the Cowboys

[cristglo]

I could see an extra set of eyes in playoff games

All of my post didnt show but IMO it would create more problems then it would help and the 3 hr game would turn into 4 hrs and be boring with all the non/calls

 

[Pompey-Cowboy]

I like the premise but doubt 3 people could watch replays from 3 different angles and then agree to make a stoppage in under 30 or so seconds successfully.

 

[DandyDon52]

Sky Judge (as I defined it) is not a single camera (That's a Sky Cam).

The Sky Judge concept is about people watching the video being an active part of the officiating process instead of just reviewing specific plays.

They would have all camera angles available.

The most critical issue is to allow "video refs" to call penalties or over-turn penalties without making the games longer.

Fans at home and the commentators often see a replay between the end of a play and the next snap.

Often everybody but the refs can clearly see if a penalty should be called or not or see if a receiver was really in bounds. This often happens just during the time between plays without stopping the game.

I can often rewind the DVR multiple times to review a play before the next snap.

The current officiating and replay process is archaic despite the fact that the technology to modernize the process is already in place.

The NFL already has a central review center with all camera angles in high-def in place but the process they use does not take advantage of the technology.

It's like giving an architect super computers and the best computer monitors in the world but forcing him to use a pencil and paper.

The architect is only allowed to use the technology for 5 minutes per day and the start of that 5 minute period is random every day and unknown ahead of time.

Well that sounds ok, I LOL that the refs are using the small surface screens to analyze the plays down on the field.
Then you have to wonder if they really want the games officiated better ??

 

[conner01]

It’s a sound concept but as the league has went farther in trying to define a catch, that really created a mess
The saints play deserves some kind of response
But we have to be careful about have another eye in the sky calling penalties
Reviewing calls is fine but if they actually call penalties which would have been required in the saints game, it need to be very limited
My fear is the number of penalties going up
I know most fans feel there are more penalties now but they’ve actually stayed fairly steady
As you have more parity then penalties have a bigger impact
We’ve seen good intentions go terribly wrong with the catch, we’ve seen new rules that don’t get called like runners lowering their head
I just don’t want to see a mess like the catch rule again
What ever they decide I hope we test it a couple years in pre season first

 

[Future]

The problem is that you'd have to go back and call EVERY penalty. Using the Rams/Saints PI...

If the "sky judge" were to review that play and determine there was pass interference, it would also have to review the offensive line play. Chances are, they'd find holding.

It would never accomplish anything except create a whole new can of worms, just like instant replay has.

 

[ItzKelz]

The problem is that you'd have to go back and call EVERY penalty. Using the Rams/Saints PI...

If the "sky judge" were to review that play and determine there was pass interference, it would also have to review the offensive line play. Chances are, they'd find holding.

It would never accomplish anything except create a whole new can of worms, just like instant replay has.

I think fans are over analyzing what the sky judge would do. It would be no different than college and a whole lot quicker than a ref conducting IR.

 

[McKDaddy]

There is definitely a need for incorporating more technology into the officiating of the game. With high def cameras, better communication & gps technology it shouldn't be that hard to get better & maybe even speed up the pace. We shouldn't need a chain gang & 5 minutes to spot the ball. I don't need a full "on microphone" explanation of every call by the on field ref. Maybe rather than throw a flag when something is questionable, refs on the field just talk to the booth on something they aren't sure of & the booth gives them the verdict

As for the ref union, why not just take some of the refs off the field & put them in the box monitoring cameras of their area of responsibility? These refs could be in stadium. Doesn't take away jobs, just reallocates the how & where.

Maybe then you only need one remote official to review \ step in if its a complex situation and the on site crew isn't applying the correct rules.

I don't want longer games but if we can get better quality in the same amount of time or less, I don't see why any sports fan wouldn't want that.

 

[Brax]

The AAF has a Sky Judge. They also broadcast discussions by the Refs.

I think a similar but more advanced concept would help the NFL and the Cowboys.

My concept of Sky Judge for the NFL is to have 3 people at the NFL review headquarters reviewing the game both in real time and then continuing to review replays between the end of a play and the next snap of the ball. The Sky Judge would not stop play unless it found a problem with the on-field refs penalty call or if Sky Cam determined a penalty should have been call that wasn't.

The Sky Judge concept can be a great improvement if implemented correctly.

There are many methods that could keep the Sky Judge from extending games.

1.
The current review process including challenges would be replaced with Sky Judge.

The current review process stops play even when the review agrees with the on-field call.

Sky Judge would not need to stop play in those situations. It would only stop play if it was over-turning the on-field call.

Sky Judge must call the stop of play before the next snap. Since Sky Judge is watching in real time it should easily be able to see at least 1 replay even if the offense does a quick snap. Even without the replay the 3 people that make up Sky Cam all saw the play in real time.

Sky Judge would only call additional penalties on things like holding if the penalty was a "major" penalty and only if it affected the play. A hold on the opposite side of the field from a run would not be called because it didn't really affect the play.

2.
Keep the on-field refs focused on penalties that affect the play during the play and leave the after the play issues to Sky Judge. For example leave late hits or defenseless receiver hits for Sky Cam to call. Let Sky Judge determine if a QB is in or out of the pocket when he throws a ball away.

3.
Have the on-field refs error on the side of conserving time. Example: Call any sideline catches that are not obvious in terms of in bounds or out of bounds as in bounds. If it's out of bounds then Sky Judge can call it out up until the next snap.

4.
Limit the on-field refs on Special Teams penalties. There are a large number of penalties called on returns but many are bogus. All of the bogus ones would go away saving the time required to call those and re-spot the ball, etc..

5.
Have wireless earbuds/mics for all on-field refs.

Have Sky Judge "in their ear" for constant communication.

Advanced Sky Judge concepts
An advanced Sky Cam concept would be to have Sky Judge make note of minor infractions and only call a penalty if the same player had another minor infraction. This allows dirty players to still be penalized but prevents stopping play because a player committed 1 minor infraction that didn't affect the play.

Example: A player shoves another player after the whistle. No need to call a penalty on a player that only had 1 of these types of infractions.

The players that committed the minor infractions once without being penalized can be fined by the league.

It's silly to waste time on relatively minor infractions that don't affect the play. Fines are a good penalty that does not stop play.


Other
There could be a Sky Judge spotter working with the on-field refs. The spotter would just review each spot as it happens and tell the on-field ref he needs to move it forward or backwards by some amount.

This works in conjunction with eliminating challenges.

Technology would allow the Sky Judge spotter to verify 1st downs without ever needing to measure with the chains.


Refs Union
The Refs would adamantly oppose the Sky Judge concept as I've defined it.

The reason it's being done in the AAF but not in the NFL is likely due to the politics of the NFL Refs Union.

The NFL might even have encouraged the AAF to implement Sky Judge.

The NFL can pay multiple remote reviewers for the cost of 1 on-field ref. The Sky Judge reviewers can work multiple games per week instead of 1 for the on-field refs.

If Sky Judge were implemented and refined it could eventually result in less on-field refs required for a game.

If it comes to this, football will be done.

 

[jazzcat22]

Whenever I see "sky judge" all I can imagine is "sky net" and Arnold coming into the stadium after Goodell...to terminate the abomination that he made of the NFL.

 

[northerncowboynation]

The AAF has a Sky Judge. They also broadcast discussions by the Refs.

I think a similar but more advanced concept would help the NFL and the Cowboys.

My concept of Sky Judge for the NFL is to have 3 people at the NFL review headquarters reviewing the game both in real time and then continuing to review replays between the end of a play and the next snap of the ball. The Sky Judge would not stop play unless it found a problem with the on-field refs penalty call or if Sky Cam determined a penalty should have been call that wasn't.

The Sky Judge concept can be a great improvement if implemented correctly.

There are many methods that could keep the Sky Judge from extending games.

1.
The current review process including challenges would be replaced with Sky Judge.

The current review process stops play even when the review agrees with the on-field call.

Sky Judge would not need to stop play in those situations. It would only stop play if it was over-turning the on-field call.

Sky Judge must call the stop of play before the next snap. Since Sky Judge is watching in real time it should easily be able to see at least 1 replay even if the offense does a quick snap. Even without the replay the 3 people that make up Sky Cam all saw the play in real time.

Sky Judge would only call additional penalties on things like holding if the penalty was a "major" penalty and only if it affected the play. A hold on the opposite side of the field from a run would not be called because it didn't really affect the play.

2.
Keep the on-field refs focused on penalties that affect the play during the play and leave the after the play issues to Sky Judge. For example leave late hits or defenseless receiver hits for Sky Cam to call. Let Sky Judge determine if a QB is in or out of the pocket when he throws a ball away.

3.
Have the on-field refs error on the side of conserving time. Example: Call any sideline catches that are not obvious in terms of in bounds or out of bounds as in bounds. If it's out of bounds then Sky Judge can call it out up until the next snap.

4.
Limit the on-field refs on Special Teams penalties. There are a large number of penalties called on returns but many are bogus. All of the bogus ones would go away saving the time required to call those and re-spot the ball, etc..

5.
Have wireless earbuds/mics for all on-field refs.

Have Sky Judge "in their ear" for constant communication.

Advanced Sky Judge concepts
An advanced Sky Cam concept would be to have Sky Judge make note of minor infractions and only call a penalty if the same player had another minor infraction. This allows dirty players to still be penalized but prevents stopping play because a player committed 1 minor infraction that didn't affect the play.

Example: A player shoves another player after the whistle. No need to call a penalty on a player that only had 1 of these types of infractions.

The players that committed the minor infractions once without being penalized can be fined by the league.

It's silly to waste time on relatively minor infractions that don't affect the play. Fines are a good penalty that does not stop play.


Other
There could be a Sky Judge spotter working with the on-field refs. The spotter would just review each spot as it happens and tell the on-field ref he needs to move it forward or backwards by some amount.

This works in conjunction with eliminating challenges.

Technology would allow the Sky Judge spotter to verify 1st downs without ever needing to measure with the chains.


Refs Union
The Refs would adamantly oppose the Sky Judge concept as I've defined it.

The reason it's being done in the AAF but not in the NFL is likely due to the politics of the NFL Refs Union.

The NFL might even have encouraged the AAF to implement Sky Judge.

The NFL can pay multiple remote reviewers for the cost of 1 on-field ref. The Sky Judge reviewers can work multiple games per week instead of 1 for the on-field refs.

If Sky Judge were implemented and refined it could eventually result in less on-field refs required for a game.

I'd train the Sky Judge to pick out the best boobs. Kind of like where's waldo of boob fame. Screw the dumb arse hat, show me caps, peaks, valley's . Sorry @xwalker couldn't resist

 

[northerncowboynation]

Whenever I see "sky judge" all I can imagine is "sky net" and Arnold coming into the stadium after Goodell...to terminate the abomination that he made of the NFL.

. Remember Arnie outside in the non-atmosphere in that movie. That was priceless!

 

[Reverend Conehead]

I think it's conceivable that this could work, but it's not the only option for improving officiating. Another possibility would be to allow coaches to use their red flag to challenge PI calls/non calls.

 

[Fire407]

It’s a sound concept but as the league has went farther in trying to define a catch, that really created a mess
The saints play deserves some kind of response
But we have to be careful about have another eye in the sky calling penalties
Reviewing calls is fine but if they actually call penalties which would have been required in the saints game, it need to be very limited
My fear is the number of penalties going up
I know most fans feel there are more penalties now but they’ve actually stayed fairly steady
As you have more parity then penalties have a bigger impact
We’ve seen good intentions go terribly wrong with the catch, we’ve seen new rules that don’t get called like runners lowering their head
I just don’t want to see a mess like the catch rule again
What ever they decide I hope we test it a couple years in pre season first

I actually think the Saints play doesn't deserve a response. There have been bad calls and missed calls throughout the past 30 years of instant replay use by officials. However, this is the ONLY one that has everyone up in arms enough to call for a rules change. To me that is a really good record. It's the exception that proves the rule. Any changes are only going to create more penalties, and that means more will be called against the Cowboys and slow the game down drastically.

 

[conner01]

I actually think the Saints play doesn't deserve a response. There have been bad calls and missed calls throughout the past 30 years of instant replay use by officials. However, this is the ONLY one that has everyone up in arms enough to call for a rules change. To me that is a really good record. It's the exception that proves the rule. Any changes are only going to create more penalties, and that means more will be called against the Cowboys and slow the game down drastically.

It was probably the most obvious I’ve seen
Two separate penalties right in front of official
But I get the fear of too many penalties for sure