Playoff officiating

[rajncajn]

Just wanted to say, other than the bad calls in the Packers/Giants game, I am very happy to see the officials letting these guys play physical football and keeping those flags in their pocket. I can only hope that they continue that way next year.

[rattsass]

Just wanted to say, other than the bad calls in the Packers/Giants game, I am very happy to see the officials letting these guys play physical football and keeping those flags in their pocket. I can only hope that they continue that way next year.

 

I concur, but Bill Levy trying to screw the Giants on that "non-fumble" was one of the most outrageous things I have seen since he handed the Steelers a Superbowl win over the Seahawks. That d-bag needs to be OUT of the league, and I will be heading up the letter writing campaign to the league to relieve the most crooked ref in the league of his duties. On a side note, if I ever see him on the street I will hit him so hard I will knock his mascara off..

[rajncajn]

Just saw this posted in the Saints forum

 

NFL may employ full-time referees in 2012

 

Associated Press

January 15, 2012

 

BALTIMORE -- Aiming to ensure NFL rules are enforced the same way from game to game, the league will consider making about 10 officials full-time employees next season.

 

As of now, all game officials are part-time employees.

 

Responding to a question about consistency in officiating while speaking to a group of about 75 fans before Sunday's playoff game between the Baltimore Ravens and Houston Texans, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said the proposal would bring a group of officials to the league offices in New York to help review game films and evaluate the calls.

 

They then would be spread out among the crews at games.

 

"Consistency is exactly what every club wants, and I think every fan wants. You want consistency in the way rules are applied," Goodell said. "We are contemplating this offseason taking some of those officials from the field who are now part time -- they have other jobs -- and making a certain number of them, let's say 10, full time."

 

Goodell also told the fans the rules committee will examine whether teams should be allowed to hire assistant coaches who left other teams during the same season, as happened with New England and Josh McDaniels. He returned to the Patriots in time for the playoffs after spending the regular season with the St. Louis Rams.

 

"We've talked to several club executives. I'm not getting a lot of reaction from the other clubs that this is unfair. They don't seem to think it's a big issue," Goodell said. "But it's something we'll talk about."

 

Among other topics Goodell addressed with fans, and later while speaking to reporters:

 

- He hopes the league and the players' union will be able to settle their differences on testing for human growth hormone before next season, but he wouldn't say he's confident that'll happen.

 

"There's certainly enough time. We had a meeting just on Friday between the two parties to try to address those issues," Goodell said. "We understand the issues they've raised. We've answered those questions. ... All of the scientists agree that this test is valid. So we think we have a valid test. It's been proven on a global basis. We hope to get it implemented as quickly as possible."

 

The new labor contract that ended the NFL lockout in August included a provision for HGH testing as soon as this season -- but only once the NFLPA approved the process. That hasn't happened, in part because the NFLPA says it needs more information about the test itself.

 

Asked by a reporter whether he's confident of getting a test in place for 2012, Goodell paused, then replied: "I'll tell you: Sure going to work as hard as we can to get it done, because I think it's important, not just for the game, but also for the players."

 

- He called the latest tweaks to concussion protocols -- including putting certified athletic trainers in booths at games to keep an eye out for possible head injuries, and adding video feeds on sidelines -- "significant improvements" and "two very positive steps."

 

- The new kickoff rules "achieved our objective" by reducing injuries, Goodell said.

[nelsosi]

The roughing the passer calls are getting worse every year. Its getting to the point where some QBs literally cannot be taken to the ground without a flag being thrown.

[detlef]

I'll keep saying this until it happens. They were on the right track with penalizing players after reviewing film even on plays that didn't get flagged. They just needed to include game suspensions.

 

Ironically, I'm guessing the rule got changed because players were complaining, "How could this be a fine if it wasn't even a penalty?" Be careful what you wish for, because now it's both.

 

However, if they truly want to remove needlessly violent play from the game without making it touch football, they can only accomplish that by looking at game film. That's where you can get a much better idea of whether or not the player is launching himself with intent to injure or if it's just a sort of fluky thing. And then, fine the hell out of these guys and suspend them if they keep doing it. I can't see how this would not totally solve the problem without causing the sort of crap where a dude's pinky brushes a QB's helmet and gets the flag.

 

Of course, if it's absolutely blatant on the field of play, go ahead and throw the flag. If a guy has two full steps after the pass and still levels the QB, throw the flag. But they should lay off the ticky tack calls during the game itself.

[The Irish Doggy]

The game is not better this year with all the changes. Too many penalties and too many reviews. I actually did not enjoy watching the NFL as much this year as in previous years and found myself turning it off or watching something else a number of times.

 

And hell yes they need to be more consistent on the field. Especially when it comes to what is and isn't a catch.

Edited January 16, 2012 by The Irish Doggy

[nelsosi]

too many reviews.

This x 1,000

 

I was a huge proponent of instant replay when it came back in the late 90s, but now I'm starting to reverse my position. There are too many reviews and the rules have become so convoluted and counter-intuitive (nobody know what is/isn't a catch or TD anymore) that it takes away from the game. They need to simplify and limit it somehow

[matt770]

The non-fumble call yesterday was a joke. The video was about as conclusive as it could be that the ball came out before the knee was down. Not sure if it was bias or just abject incompetence on the part of the officials, but I'm glad it didn't impact the outcome of the game. Not sure if the ref didn't have the angle that was shown on TV or if he just chose to ignore the clear evidence. Why delay the game for a review if the officials still blow the call?

[nelsosi]

They need to adopt a simple rule:

If it looks like a catch/TD/fumble/whatever and smells like a catch/TD/fumble/whatever, then its a catch/TD/fumble/whatever

Edited January 16, 2012 by nelsosi

[stevegrab]

The only thing I can think of on that non-fumble is that since it wasn't ruled a fumble, the play stood because there was not conclusive evidence according to the ref. While the announcers, most fans and even Mike Pereira thought it was coming out the ref did not. I think his view is that while the ball was moving, the player still had his hand on it and appeared to have control. Not saying I agree with that view, but I can see that happening.

 

No matter what, it still comes down to one person, and their review of the video.

 

I know people feel that there are too many reviews, but I still feel the current system of making the coaches have to challenge is wrong. Refs have changed how they officiate, and often (not in this case) rule a fumble or other things to keep the play going. Then the coach has to challenge something that obviously wasn't a fumble (down by contact, ground can't cause the fumble type stuff).

[The Irish Doggy]

I know people feel that there are too many reviews, but I still feel the current system of making the coaches have to challenge is wrong. Refs have changed how they officiate, and often (not in this case) rule a fumble or other things to keep the play going. Then the coach has to challenge something that obviously wasn't a fumble (down by contact, ground can't cause the fumble type stuff).

 

Agree completely. Refs have now become lazy officiaters IMO. They leave it up to others to make the "right" call. Not sure if this is deliberate or an unintended consequence of replay.

[nelsosi]

Refs have changed how they officiate, and often (not in this case) rule a fumble or other things to keep the play going. Then the coach has to challenge something that obviously wasn't a fumble (down by contact, ground can't cause the fumble type stuff).

I hear ya. But I think this is a direct result of the Ed Hochuli call at the end of the Denver-SD game a few years ago.

Edited January 16, 2012 by nelsosi

[rattsass]

I'm sorry but there is no excuse for the "non-fumble" call. You can paint it any way you want it, but the video shot was perfect and clearly showed a fumble to every non-blind person in America except the crook under the hood. Let's not rationalize criminal activity, because the only legitimate rationalization for blowing that call otherwise is incompetenece, and in either case the individual in charge should no longer be in the position for further monstrosities. I mean, let's call a turd a turd.

[stevegrab]

I'm sorry but there is no excuse for the "non-fumble" call. You can paint it any way you want it, but the video shot was perfect and clearly showed a fumble to every non-blind person in America except the crook under the hood. Let's not rationalize criminal activity, because the only legitimate rationalization for blowing that call otherwise is incompetenece, and in either case the individual in charge should no longer be in the position for further monstrosities. I mean, let's call a turd a turd.

 

Wow, that's pretty far over the top. The crook under the hood, criminal activity?

[Kris N]

the point of all of this is that bill levy should NEVER officiate a playoff game ever again. the league needs to take a long look at his crew's calls and especially his own judgement on reviews & penalties (not just the "fumble" replay but also that roughing call that let another packer drive continue). if he isnt relieved of his duties, then at least limit him and his crew to regular season games. unbelievable calls yesterday. both the fumble and roughing led to packer TDS instead of a turnover or a punt....imagine a 37-6 loss

 

this reviewing EVERY scoring play has gotten really old. go back to how it was......2 reviews per coach. and get someone in the replay booth that isnt afraid to press the buzzer in the last 2 minutes. it takes .4 seconds to decide if a play is close or not....no way teams should be able to line up and snap the ball before they buzz the ref.

 

i know the NFL and goodell are just covering their own behinds with all the head shot penalties, but they need to relax on the flags. when a receiver goes up and the LB/DB leads with their head and lunges at the receiver, then yes thats a penalty. when the receiver catches the ball going across teh middle and ducks to avoid the hit, which causes teh head shot....no penalty. that is great defense and good timing. its going to get to the point where teams cant play zone anymore because every play that they time it perfect will be "defenseless receiver". might as well let the cheerleaders go out there and play a 2 hand touch game with how these rules have limited the hits.

[bushwacked]

I still think the league is better with instant replay than without; let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just f'n fire Bill Leavy, if the Pack could have played half way decently yesterday, he probably would have altered the outcome of another post-season game.

[irish]

Wow, that's pretty far over the top. The crook under the hood, criminal activity?

 

It may seem over the top but then again maybe he's onto something. I mean it has happened before with the same ref. That non-fumble call was insane. Watching replay after replay, I never once got the feeling that he was down before it came out and I didn't think it was close.

[irish]

I still think the league is better with instant replay than without; let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just f'n fire Bill Leavy, if the Pack could have played half way decently yesterday, he probably would have altered the outcome of another post-season game.

 

This is the truth! One less turnover, late fumble by Starks, and the Pack score again and we're looking at an entirely different game. That call could've change the outcome of the game had it not been for the Packers playing poorly. I do have to say that all the attempted onside kicks were bad calls IMO as well.

[CaptainHook]

Are we forgetting the horrible call in the Steelers game where a lateral recovered by the Brocos was ruled incomplete?

Edited January 16, 2012 by CaptainHook

[irish]

Are we forgetting the horrible call in the Steelers game where a lateral recovered by the Brocos was ruled incomplete?

 

Was that Leavy as well?

[Big John]

Was that Leavy as well?

no

[detlef]

I still think the league is better with instant replay than without; let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just f'n fire Bill Leavy, if the Pack could have played half way decently yesterday, he probably would have altered the outcome of another post-season game.

Absolutely. I don't mind the wait and appreciate that they nearly always get the call right. I also like the fact that, when in doubt, you stick with the call on the field. Just fire the idiots who screw it up.

[Ursa Majoris]

Just saw this posted in the Saints forum

 

NFL may employ full-time referees in 2012

This will make zero difference. None, nada, not a bit. The English Premier League went fully pro refs a few years back and it has made no discernible difference whatsoever. Judgment calls are still judgment calls, consistency and lack thereof is entirely in the eye of the beholder.

 

There really isn't that much wrong with the officiating. It's a miracle to me they get so many decisions exactly right when you look at the mayhem going on all over the field.

 

One thing I would definitely change is the horrible way instant replay is dealt with - take it out of the ref's hands altogether and give it to a ref off the field, same as college. Quicker and cleaner.

[detlef]

This will make zero difference. None, nada, not a bit. The English Premier League went fully pro refs a few years back and it has made no discernible difference whatsoever. Judgment calls are still judgment calls, consistency and lack thereof is entirely in the eye of the beholder.

 

There really isn't that much wrong with the officiating. It's a miracle to me they get so many decisions exactly right when you look at the mayhem going on all over the field.

 

One thing I would definitely change is the horrible way instant replay is dealt with - take it out of the ref's hands altogether and give it to a ref off the field, same as college. Quicker and cleaner.

It's like so many other half-baked rules. They leave them where they are to placate stupid insecurities. They're afraid that coaches are going to slow the game down too much so they limit how many they have, even if they're proven right. What the hell? So, if you keep getting jobbed, you can only get a review a few times? Do they really think coaches will be reviewing every other play if they only have a limited number of failed challenges and lose a TO as well?

 

And the "it'll take the game out of the hands of the guys on the field." So? I don't know who these guys are and don't really care. I don't know what ref is in charge of making what call on the field, and just assume they default to the guy with the best angle. I don't give a crap who's making the call, provided the right call gets made. Same with the replay. Someone qualified, up in the booth, has a look, makes the call. We move on. Besides stepping on the toes of some dude whose name I don't know and don't care to know, I don't see how that hurts anything.

[SEC=UGA]

The other call and no-call that got me were these...

The second to last Giants drive, Eli throws the ball, is about to get hit from the front, spins around to put his back to the on rushing defender and a second later gets a helmet to helmet shot from a defender that was initially behind him right in his face... No roughing call... Then they call the hit on Rogers that wasn't even helmet to helmet and happened much closer to the release of the ball.

 

There were a few others in this game that just had me as well.