Blandino on MNF Calls

[FredFan7]

Official review.

End of game call was wrong.

IW - Officials did their best to make chicken salad.

Please avoid rude nicknames, etc., when referring to Blandino. Please refer to posting rules for guidelines. It is OK to criticize, but avoid rudeness.

operations.nfl.com/the-officials/inside-nfl-gameday-central/official-review-with-dean-blandino/

[theglenn]

I appreciate Blandino not saying the official was "wrong" at the end of the game...but that it was a judgement call and the wrong call. 

And I still don't see why the IW happened.

Even if Ryan obstructed his view for a split second.

[zebrablog]

I think that it is possible that the knee jerk reaction to pull Rex Ryan back was a hit of the whistle, which is what you would do in a dead-ball period. I don't think that it is because he lost sight of the ball.

[Deleted]

Geez captain obvious stating the obvious 36 hours too late.

[cj]

While there was little that could be done about the iw, Blandino, monitoring the game at 345 Park and the replay official should have intervened which is what I have been saying continuously. The clock is reviewable in the last seconds of the game, right? So by elasticity he and the replay official had the obligation to correct the error; just like he could have corrected the error on the last play of the Jaguars-Ravens and the error in the Seahawks-Lions. You have instant replay and the ability to correct obvious errors. There is no earthly reason why they don't do it. We'll give it a rest till the next time something happens that Blandino could and should correct on the spot.

[tj888]

I just have a question. The amount of turnover in the last 2 year was extremely high (23 officials hired and 20 officials retired/let go). Is this due to Blandino wanting a younger group of officials or is this because of this new development program and that they must hire some officials from that program every year so that the program can function. I may recall that an official can only be in the development program for 3 years only. What happens if for three years none of the umpires retired, does that mean all of the umpires in the development program gets released and new ones are selected OR does it meant that the NFL/Blandino will force some retirements to create openings for hirings to be made from the development program? I think that they are forcing still good officials to retire simply because they want to hire younger and cheaper officials and keep the development program going.

[zebrablog]

Nov 25, 2015 17:53:40 GMT -5 cj said:

While there was little that could be done about the iw, Blandino, monitoring the game at 345 Park and the replay official should have intervened which is what I have been saying continuously. The clock is reviewable in the last seconds of the game, right? So by elasticity he and the replay official had the obligation to correct the error; just like he could have corrected the error on the last play of the Jaguars-Ravens and the error in the Seahawks-Lions. You have instant replay and the ability to correct obvious errors. There is no earthly reason why they don't do it. We'll give it a rest till the next time something happens that Blandino could and should correct on the spot.

You say elasticity, I say slippery slope. I get the idea of correcting the error in judgement. But where does it end? What happens if the Bills throw up a Hail Mary on the :02 play that the replay official gave them, plus a game-ending 2-point conversion, when the rule clearly says that the clock is not reviewable (except in a heavily caveated provision)? The defense is that the replay official (who maybe was "promoted to" replay to get him off the field) substituted his judgement for the guy right on top of the play, justified the position by elasticity, which is really saying you're bending the rules, which gets spun in the Boston media as cheating. (This is while said league and said team are still engaged in a lawsuit over the allegation of playing fast and loose with rules and fair-play procedures.)

Much like life, unfortunately, not all mistakes can be undone.

[cj]

Nov 26, 2015 2:30:29 GMT -5 zebrablog said:

Nov 25, 2015 17:53:40 GMT -5 cj said:

While there was little that could be done about the iw, Blandino, monitoring the game at 345 Park and the replay official should have intervened which is what I have been saying continuously. The clock is reviewable in the last seconds of the game, right? So by elasticity he and the replay official had the obligation to correct the error; just like he could have corrected the error on the last play of the Jaguars-Ravens and the error in the Seahawks-Lions. You have instant replay and the ability to correct obvious errors. There is no earthly reason why they don't do it. We'll give it a rest till the next time something happens that Blandino could and should correct on the spot.

You say elasticity, I say slippery slope. I get the idea of correcting the error in judgement. But where does it end? What happens if the Bills throw up a Hail Mary on the :02 play that the replay official gave them, plus a game-ending 2-point conversion, when the rule clearly says that the clock is not reviewable (except in a heavily caveated provision)? The defense is that the replay official (who maybe was "promoted to" replay to get him off the field) substituted his judgement for the guy right on top of the play, justified the position by elasticity, which is really saying you're bending the rules, which gets spun in the Boston media as cheating. (This is while said league and said team are still engaged in a lawsuit over the allegation of playing fast and loose with rules and fair-play procedures.)

Much like life, unfortunately, not all mistakes can be undone.

First of all, the clock should be reviewable especially in the last minutes of the game and the display, just like in the NHL and NBA be in tenths of a second. Ever watch an NHL game where in the last minute, they are constantly setting the clock to make sure they get it right? But be that as it may, the replay official is a member of the crew in a way and is in contact with Blandino or Reveron or another supervisor in NY during all games and with Blandino alone on the prime time games and playoff games. Now let's say on that last play the deeper official had come over and said to the hl I think you got it wrong and they discussed it and changed the call. We would say great job. So why not the replay official saying while he's talking with Blandino I think they got this wrong and commnicating with the referee to ask the hl if indeed he remembered the rule. Same thing would have been true in the Detroit/Seattle game. Blandino to the replay official to the referee just ask the bj if he remembered the rule about batting the ball backwards. Replay not changing the call but helping get the right call. We have speculated, never denied, that Jeff Triplette in the pening game of the season between the Rams and Seahawks was told by the replay official the disputd kick off never hit the ground.

I'll just throw another one at you and which sums up my whole problem with replay and something I said before on this board. Let's go back to last year's Dez Bryant catch. Green Bay had to use a challenge early in the game and only had one left. Let's say for argument sake they had to use another challenge earlier in the game. Would Blandino, remember this is a playoff game, be able to sit at 345 Park and not intercede when he could see clearly Bryank had not completed the act of the catch? To me, that would have been morally wrong.

Now I understand this whole coach's challenge thing to avoid 4 hour games. But egregious errors that can be corrected should be corrected say in the kast 7 1/2 minutes of the game when a wrong call can leave a team with no way of overcoming it. Remember the disputed last play field goal a few years ago where one official said the kick was no good (it hit the center bar supporting the camera) and the other said good and Morelli (I think it was him) was not sure and sought help from the replay who said the call was not subject to replay. That was totally, in my opinion, asinine. There should be a few things not reviewable especislly when judgment is cncerned but very few. The issues we have had on the game ending plays were not judgments, they were simply blown calls and could have been and should have been corrected. It's also better for the officials not to be subject to the ridicule they get over some of these calls and also puts Blandino on the spot who was also quite responsible for the fact that on the Dez Bryant play, the clock was not reset because the ruling was changed to incomplete pass. I wonder if Steratore was dinged for that.

Unfortunately, this is the 21st century and these errors are magnified because they are covered so thooughly. Why nt correct a clear wrong?

[cj]

Just one other thing zebra. You make the innuendo that the replay officials were all "promoted" just to get them off the field. That may be true but in some cases it's because they were no longer able to keep up with the world class athletes playing the game today. Of course, that could also mean they bring years of experience to assist and be a member of the crew. Why not use his experience? The attitude should not be the replay official is changing the call but rather hey guys we might have gotten this one wrong. Let's talk it over especially on game changing and ending plays. I don't need the replay official intervening on a 4 yard completion at the side line midway through the second quarter. That can remain a coach's challenge. Even Jimmy D. on one of the podcasts Fred referred us to made the point that many things have to be done differently at the end of the game and pointing to that Buffalo play and the question of whether a player was pushed backward out of bounds said the unwritten rule at the end of the game was to give the player the benefit of the doubt and mark him out of bounds which had some of the twitter Monday morning quarterbacks screaming you shouldn't do things differently in the 4th quarter than you do in the first quarter. We should all know there is a big difference.

[Deleted]

Nov 26, 2015 8:14:29 GMT -5 cj said:

Just one other thing zebra. You make the innuendo that the replay officials were all "promoted" just to get them off the field. That may be true but in some cases it's because they were no longer able to keep up with the world class athletes playing the game today. Of course, that could also mean they bring years of experience to assist and be a member of the crew. Why not use his experience? The attitude should not be the replay official is changing the call but rather hey guys we might have gotten this one wrong. Let's talk it over especially on game changing and ending plays. I don't need the replay official intervening on a 4 yard completion at the side line midway through the second quarter. That can remain a coach's challenge. Even Jimmy D. on one of the podcasts Fred referred us to made the point that many things have to be done differently at the end of the game and pointing to that Buffalo play and the question of whether a player was pushed backward out of bounds said the unwritten rule at the end of the game was to give the player the benefit of the doubt and mark him out of bounds which had some of the twitter Monday morning quarterbacks screaming you shouldn't do things differently in the 4th quarter than you do in the first quarter. We should all know there is a big difference.

Tommy Moore is a good example. He was part of the fired officials from the 03 purge but has been in replay ever since.

[zebrablog]

I never said all replay officials came into the position that way. But some certainly did.

The other issue is we are conflating in the discussion what the replay official can do in Week 11 of this season and what the Competition Committee can propose in February. I wholeheartedly agree that the replay procedure needs to be looked at, but it can't be done on the fly in midseason.