This is regarding the challenges that "stood" as called, on the fumble and the interception. Is officiating in today's game now too difficult to the point where non-routine challenges (Interception) get zero explanations on the field? The fans at the stadium at the least deserve an explanation of what happened, and why the call could not be reversed. It's also possible that the referee doesn't know what the fuck he's looking for on the replay, that he just makes a gut feeling decision and since he doesn't know how to explain it, just mentions that the play stands. I understand the aspect that since the plays were initially ruled a fumble and an interception, it could not be overturned without a damning evidence. Still, at the least, the interception needed an explanation in my opinion.
I'm all for getting rid of replay. it just doesn't work the way it should and it slows up the game. How they miss the catch by denver a few weeks ago, the INT yesterday and then watching the NE game late Green-Ellis was clearly down before scoring a TD and they gave NE the TD anyway. It doesn't work.
The INT yesterday was explained that because the call on the field was an INT and not a completion then a fumble you wouldn't be able to over turn the play. In order for there to be a catch and down by contact - which was the result of the play in reality - they would have had to first rule it a catch. It's a gray area in the rule and I probably explained it horribly.
having the same guys who screwed up the call originally be the reviewer of the call is the major defect of the replay system in the NFL they have to come out and publicly announce on national television that they screwed up. Professionals are able to do this (Jim Joyce for example) but we will never see it from these amateur part time high school administrators masquerading as football officials. Covering their ass and not reversing their hideous calls is what gets them playoff and superbowl assignments so in 80 percent of cases, the play stands as called even when it is a screwup like non-interceptions yesterday
I get the explanation(my point was a little different than that of the original post), it was a terrible call though and if replay cannot overturn that obvious terrible call what is it good for? we seem to get screwed w/ replay each week.
Everyone should know that on any borderline call...the Pats will always get the benefit of the doubt. I mean c'mon, the pats will get a flag simply for asking for it. Take Brady for instance. If anyone even comes close to hitting him in the knees, he signlas to the refs and what do you know...a yellow flag comes flying out. Its ridiculous. On that note, officiating has been terrible this season. Too many bad calls. And on the bad calls that were made, they don't take a second look. I'm all for replay, but when the refs come out and don't overturn a call when its clear to everyone else that they should have...its just makes me angry. I think that sometimes when they are doubting a call, they stand on it simply because they want to save face. These guys are getting paid because they are the best at what they do right? Definitely doesn't seem like they are doing such a great job. I personally think that when it comes to big calls, the refs should be fined for making an obviously terrible ruling. Maybe that way they'll pay more attention to what is really happening and spend more time focusing on a call.
they just need to have a team of officials on call to review all of the challenged plays from all of the games ... it speeds up the game and will get the call correct more than these guys will this whole going under the hood thing is retarded, at best
Every year the officiating seems to get worse and worse and the fact that you can't say that without getting fined is totally obsurd(?). I say if a player can get fined for an illegal hit the refs should get fined for a bad call.I mean let's be honest, if we were Dull-Phin fans last week against the Steelers we'd have put a hit out on that officiating crew.
Replay isn't 100% but it beats no replay. If anything, a coach or team should get a third bonus challenge if they win their first two.
I agree with this. The NHL sends all of the replay decisions back to Toronto, and it seems to work. Of course, the calls there are much more black and white (did the puck go in the net or not), which makes it easier. I don't agree at all with the idea of getting rid of replay. If there was no replay all of the bad calls would remain bad calls, so I can't see any argument that that would be better. I think when replay started the delays were much shorter than they are now, because as a result of the mistakes that have been made the referee is under the hood worried about looking bad to millions of viewers at home and the people in the stadium. If there was a nameless faceless group of officials in New York who made these calls, that pressure would be off on them, and the referee wouldn't be the target of anger in cases that it didn't give the right result.
Exactly! The review is to corroborate what has been called or to overturn a call. The explanation was horseshit. I thought I was listening to a politician. He totally spinned it. His explanation actually prevented the ref's from changing the call to the correct one. How can replay oppose itself? Everything is subject to review but not really. I knew we were in trouble when he opened with 'this is an interesting call'.
It's Bullshit that once they call those two plays interceptions that they basically can't be overturned.
Bullshit! Peterson certainly looked like he hadn't crossed the goalline on the earlier challenge. Even the announcers thought it was clear he didn't cross the line. The refs upheld the TD. If the refs aren't 100% sure they uphold the call on the field. You folks and your retarded Pats get all the calls shit is fucking pathetic. Brady has had zero roughing the passer calls this year. If you think the officiating sucks, fine! But the Pats like everyone else, wind up on the bad end of calls just as often as anyone else. BTW, WTF do the calls in the Pats game have to do with the calls in the Jets game?
They should change it to be like in hockey. Have a 3rd party (a group of people in the league) review all such calls. IDK how the ref even sees anything on that small ass screen.
I would like to see all teams get as many replays as they want until they lose a second. Both "interceptions"? against the Jets yesterday were "bad calls", no matter what the bull shit explanation was.
Instant Replay needs to be amended. There is a huge "cost" to the game due to instant replay. It slows down the game. More importantly, as a fan you can not fully go wild on the "in the moment" emotions of many big plays (and many big plays are "close") because you are trained now to first look for the "red flag", look at a replay, look at alternate replay angles, form your own opinion as to the right outcome and then "sweat it out" for ~ 2 or 3 minutes to see if the zebra agrees with your own opinion. Now if the replay "batting average" was 95%+ in getting these calls right, then I would accept that the benefits outweight the "cost" to the game. At present, they don't. Suggested Improvements #1 Eliminate the challenge system. #2 Put a trained replay zebra up in the booth with a couple of technical assistants #3 The play called on the field stands unless the replay zebra buzzes the head official before the next snap. #4 The replay official than has a "60 second clock" to reverse the call. If he can't do it within 60 seconds the call on the field stands. #5 The replay official is trained to not look at "minor calls" even if they might be wrong such as a bad spot (unless a change of possession or TD is at stake), etc. I bet that this system would result in a better pace of play and more correct calls.
But that's the thing, the tie goes to the offense, just like in baseball. In both cases they were on ground and at best GB had dual possession, so that should be a catch and then down by contact. I'm still shocked that they got both of those wrong.
