|
|
Post by FredFan7 on Jun 7, 2019 10:24:51 GMT -5
www.footballzebras.com/2019/06/reviewable-pass-interference-continues-to-take-shape-as-offseason-enters-its-late-stages/From the article: "To be blunt, this is a very big change to instant replay. The potential success, or lack thereof, of this rule may influence public opinion about the judgment call more than it already has since this past postseason. Unlike any rule changes of its kind, the Officiating Department is taking meticulous steps in order to make the rule as close to perfect as it can be." I am worried that this rollout will be more bumpy than the roughing the passer controversy last year. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Jun 7, 2019 15:53:02 GMT -5
RTP rollout is likely why they have so much involvement prior to the first games. The biggest issue with PI is the difficulty in drawing the line of what is and is not reviewable. After all, every missed call is important to somebody and who is to say that a miss call early in the game doesn't ultimately change the outcome? My personal opinion is that it should be a 15 yard penalty unless done to prevent a catch that was about to take place or prevented a clear path (in other words the defender pulled a guy down when the defender was otherwise beat). In the latter two cases it can be a spot foul with a minimum of 15 yards. Also, you can then draw the line clearer for purposes of replay by saying that only spot foul PI can be reviewed (calls or non-calls). After all, the Rams/Saints non-call would fit squarely into one of my spot foul categories.
|
|
|
|
Post by FredFan7 on Jun 11, 2019 23:27:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FredFan7 on Jun 12, 2019 10:43:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FredFan7 on Jun 13, 2019 14:30:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FredFan7 on Jun 13, 2019 14:31:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FredFan7 on Jun 13, 2019 15:14:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FredFan7 on Jun 19, 2019 10:20:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by FredFan7 on Jun 20, 2019 10:06:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by zebrablog on Jun 20, 2019 12:08:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ramsfan79 on Jun 27, 2019 12:27:59 GMT -5
What about Hail Marys? And I’ve heard this rule change was really problematic for the CFL - any other pitfalls? Thanks !
|
|
|
|
Post by frugaldeac on Jul 27, 2019 3:30:37 GMT -5
Hello again. I'm back FredFan and I hope you're having a good off season. This post of yours on Jun 19 is by far your best, imho.
In case you don't remember me FanFred7 , I'm the one who thought the obviously missed PI and Helmet to Helmet call in the NFC Championship game robbed the Saints of the Super Bowl. I had the audacity to suggest that officials were expected to get the obvious calls right and those who didn't should be FIRED. (I know, how dare I?)
You want thoughts, so I'll give you mine. I've read all of the posts and links on this thread and I keep coming back to this. All of this bumpiness that is being worried about (a replay official buzzing down to have the head referee check for clear and obvious PI in the the last 2 min and OT, how the officials will actually implement this rule change procedure, and extra long games because of this rule change), etc) could have all been avoided if those officials in New Orleans had got that 1 call correct. Well, well, well.
Look I don't want any 4-5 hour games, but if that is what it takes to get "clear and obvious" calls right, I can live with it. I ALWAYS want to see the team win that deserves it, not the one that "lucks out" on a bad call(s). Obviously, I'm not a Rams fan. (I'm actually a Panthers fan that doesn't have any love for the Saints). So that's that.
frugaldeac
|
|
|
|
Post by zebrablog on Jul 28, 2019 11:05:35 GMT -5
It is fair to advance your opinion that the covering officials in the NFCCG should be fired. It is also fair in a forum dedicated to officiating, that there would be counteropinions on how that would be a bad idea.
If these officials were dismissed, it does absolutely nothing to help officiating. The message such an action would send is that an official who is ranked in the top tier (potentially #1) at his or her position based on 150 plays per game in 15-16 games is still only one mistake away from losing their job. Additionally, the firing would also predicated on the fact that the disadvantaged team was unable to establish a lead earlier in the game, couldn't play a 2-minute defense to prevent the tie, allowed the opponent to get the ball by turnover in overtime, and couldn't keep the opponent out of the fringe of field goal territory. It is a big nothingburger if it happens in the first quarter or at the end of the game with no impact on the result.
If we further add that pass interference was definitely called a little looser in the same game and other playoff games, we can conclude that such consistency is only the result of instruction from the league office. This would explain why the head of officiating never commented or tweeted about the call during the game and maintained silence until after the rule change took effect. It still is a miscall, but it is a closer miscall than it appears if this scenario is correct.
I really think this is an overcorrection to the issue. This opens Pandora's box into a whole host of subjective calls and risks a coach to "weaponize" the challenge system in a way that it wasn't intended. A huge gain can be wiped out by a receiver's push at the line that was not much in real time, but is technically "there" in replay. In other words, it wouldn't be judged PI under normal conditions, but with multiple looks, there's the possibility that the play gets wiped out. On the flip side, the replay official is constrained to only 15 seconds with a running clock, less than 10 if the offense is in a hurry-up, and it creates a huge burden on the replay official. But the mob got what it wanted, and let's see how it plays out this year. We can only live with the rules as they are on the books.
|
|
|
|
Post by frugaldeac on Aug 13, 2019 19:21:15 GMT -5
Greetings! Back again to post on the unofficial NFL Officials Fan Club website. Looks like I've gotten another administrator's attention. Btw, who has more stroke? (FredFan or zebrablog). Or are they equal in status? Inquiring minds would like to know.
Look, I read zebrablog's post more than once and I have some questions.
1. What would you have done in response to the blown call in the NFC Championship Game? My prediction based on your post would be something like "Too bad and so sad Saints fans (and other fans who desire to see the correct call made). Our 'top-tier' official (Gary Cavaletto I believe) blew an obvious call but he's only human and we're sure he's very sorry about it". "Also all of our officials will try extra hard this season not to blow "clear and obvious" calls. But there's no way we're going to overreact and do something to correct clearly and obviously missed calls."
2. Why haven't you addressed at all whether helmet to helmet calls should be reviewed? I remember watching NFL games where helmet to helmet occurred and wasn't flagged, but the guilty defender still ended up getting fined by the league and Commissioner Goodell a few days after it happened. Also, I went to college games last year where targeting occurred, the officials didn't call it, but before the next snap the replay official buzzed down and it ended up being reviewed, corrected, and getting called. I know helmet to helmet and targeting are not exactly the same thing, but I believe both involve a defensive player using his helmet incorrectly.
One thing I wish to make clear is I'm not 'anti-official'. I go to college games with a group of friends and if there is a questionable call(s), I'm the one that the other guys ask what's going on with the officials. Many times I'm the one who ends up defending the officials. ('The late substitution rule' where the defense is allowed to also substitute after the offense sends out a late substitute, is a real doozy to explain, based on my experience). Anyway, I digress.
I really would like answers to my questions above please. I must have a good point or two, based on the fact that the league decided to put in a rule that allows 'clear and obvious' missed pass interference to be reviewed. Also, I still believe that if the one official had called EITHER pass interference or personal foul helmet to helmet on the play in question in the NFC CG, this 'overcorrection' you speak of would have NEVER come about.
|
|
