Pass interference and possibly some other severe penalties need to be reviewable.

[Ellard80]

Yes, I know they did it for one year - but it was a farce, they didn't actually take it seriously.

I feel like the NFL is falling behind in innovation when it comes to officiating. They were the pioneers of replay and getting calls corrected, and now they are losing ground.

In the NBA they challenge foul calls, pretty much the same degree of judgement that is involved as PI.

It's completely doable.

Something needs to change because the current trends are making the NFL look like shit.

 

[Flatlyner]

In this day and age, this can be reviewed in under 30 seconds and the right call can be made. There is ZERO reason this isn't instituted for last 2 mins of every game unless there is some nefarious things going on. Who wouldn't want a FAIR game called at the key moments of the game?

Baseball has done it right. Surely the NFL can follow suit.

#GODODGERS

 

[RamBall]

This would be great if the officials cared about integrity. The problem they had when it was introduced as a test, was that the refs didnt want to overturn the call because it would make the official that made the bad call look bad.

 

[Karate61]

This would be great if the officials cared about integrity. The problem they had when it was introduced as a test, was that the refs didnt want to overturn the call because it would make the official that made the bad call look bad.

Conversely, the refs are all hunky dory when they call out the player's jersey number so everyone round the world know's who f'd up. But, they are to fragile for being called out themselves? Joke.

 

[Twopointtry]

Don't forget that in the Bengals and Rams SB, late in the game there was a controversial PI call that went in the favor of the Rams, helping to set up the winning TD. If we asked them, I bet Bengals fans would say the game was stolen from them. If I had been the ref, I wouldn't have thrown a flag on that play.

 

[LARAMSinFeb.]

Don't forget that in the Bengals and Rams SB, late in the game there was a controversial PI call that went in the favor of the Rams, helping to set up the winning TD. If we asked them, I bet Bengals fans would say the game was stolen from them. If I had been the ref, I wouldn't have thrown a flag on that play.

Was it worse than the uncalled facemask on their td after the half?

 

[So Ram]

Was it worse than the uncalled facemask on their td after the half?

I’d say a PI needs to be REVIEWED,or CHANGE the RULE!!

For the very obvious reason!!!!

Can anyone figure that ONE out ?
It’s SUPER SIMPLE !! As easy as balls & strikes.Better yet EASIER than a catch NO catch ??

Just said last night in a college game just to make The ANSWER easier. The REFS still get REPLAYS Wrong Already !!

Well check for responses to see how easy of answer & solution this is . Keep IT at that.Hard for me to not go on a RANT,but these is to easy to do in the NFL.The price & TIME is quick & not as game changing.

 

[Ellard80]

Don't forget that in the Bengals and Rams SB, late in the game there was a controversial PI call that went in the favor of the Rams, helping to set up the winning TD. If we asked them, I bet Bengals fans would say the game was stolen from them. If I had been the ref, I wouldn't have thrown a flag on that play.

yeah that supports my premise for sure.

 

[PARAM]

I hate when they say, 'that's not reviewable". EVERYTHING should be reviewable!!!! As it stands now, teams get 2 challenges. They should get 2 additional "penalty challenges" that work the same way. Get it right, receive a third.

Is MLB suffering because of the ABS challenge system? No. Do the umps look bad? No. In fact, I'd say they look BETTER. Are we going to diss an umpire because the ball was 0.1" outside? Fuck no!

 

[den-the-coach]

This is very simple, coaches get two challenges, you should be able to challenge any penalty. Has to be a penalty, not a non call, like a face mask. However, the coaches would keep their challenges for major calls and pass interference which is major, they can challenge.

if they lose the challenge, just follow regular protocol, but I want a challenge system like college, where we get to hear and see the decision. So to sum this up, the Rams could of challenged the PI call in Denver because it was a penalty. Keep everything else the same, but if there was even an offside call that was wrong and it created a first down, you can challenge that too.

 

[Tano]

I hate when they say, 'that's not reviewable". EVERYTHING should be reviewable!!!! As it stands now, teams get 2 challenges. They should get 2 additional "penalty challenges" that work the same way. Get it right, receive a third.

Is MLB suffering because of the ABS challenge system? No. Do the umps look bad? No. In fact, I'd say they look BETTER. Are we going to diss an umpire because the ball was 0.1" outside? Fuck no!

Only the really bad umpires look bad.

The ones that have 8 challenges against them in a game suck.

The ones that have only 1 or two overturned challenges in a game are fine by me.

Everyone makes a mistake or two.

 

[Jacobarch]

They should just keep it simple and reverse bad calls via new york. It doesnt have to be complicated

 

[majrleaged]

Don't forget that in the Bengals and Rams SB, late in the game there was a controversial PI call that went in the favor of the Rams, helping to set up the winning TD. If we asked them, I bet Bengals fans would say the game was stolen from them. If I had been the ref, I wouldn't have thrown a flag on that play.

We deserved it. It was a make up call. It led to TD so it truly made up for it. Unlike most of them.

 

[Karate61]

This is very simple, coaches get two challenges, you should be able to challenge any penalty. Has to be a penalty, not a non call, like a face mask. However, the coaches would keep their challenges for major calls and pass interference which is major, they can challenge.

if they lose the challenge, just follow regular protocol, but I want a challenge system like college, where we get to hear and see the decision. So to sum this up, the Rams could of challenged the PI call in Denver because it was a penalty. Keep everything else the same, but if there was even an offside call that was wrong and it created a first down, you can challenge that too.

Curious as to why you wouldn't want the ability to challenge a non call? Stupid one off the top of my head was the last Super Bowl when Ramsey had the blatant face mask, that wasn't called, and gave the Bengals a long TD score. Wouldn't you want to be able to challenge a non call like that?

 

[kmramsfan]

Don't forget that in the Bengals and Rams SB, late in the game there was a controversial PI call that went in the favor of the Rams, helping to set up the winning TD. If we asked them, I bet Bengals fans would say the game was stolen from them. If I had been the ref, I wouldn't have thrown a flag on that play.

It did seem ticky tack, especially after basically just letting them play for most of the game.
Same crew who somehow missed the Jalen Ramsey takedown by Tee Higgins, which became a TD play.

 

[Ram65]

This is very simple, coaches get two challenges, you should be able to challenge any penalty. Has to be a penalty, not a non call, like a face mask. However, the coaches would keep their challenges for major calls and pass interference which is major, they can challenge.

Are they only allowed to challenge PI against the defense that was called? What about offensive pass interference that wasn't called. That happens a lot.

Curious as to why you wouldn't want the ability to challenge a non call? Stupid one off the top of my head was the last Super Bowl when Ramsey had the blatant face mask, that wasn't called, and gave the Bengals a long TD score. Wouldn't you want to be able to challenge a non call like that?

I think it affects the play; they should be able to challenge no calls on things like face mask. That happens so fast it gets missed and can have an effect on a play. What about the head-mugging on the Eagles WR when McDuffy was later called for a PI? If you're limiting the number of challenges then it shouldn't matter if you add more than the defensive PI review.

 

[majrleaged]

It did seem ticky tack, especially after basically just letting them play for most of the game.
Same crew who somehow missed the Jalen Ramsey takedown by Tee Higgins, which became a TD play.

Keep in mind the only way Cindy had a chance was to let them get away with PIs and holding. Then the refs realize they have maybe given the game away and they call what is a PI, just not what they have been calling.

 

[Alaskan Ram]

This is very simple, coaches get two challenges, you should be able to challenge any penalty. Has to be a penalty, not a non call, like a face mask. However, the coaches would keep their challenges for major calls and pass interference which is major, they can challenge.

if they lose the challenge, just follow regular protocol, but I want a challenge system like college, where we get to hear and see the decision. So to sum this up, the Rams could of challenged the PI call in Denver because it was a penalty. Keep everything else the same, but if there was even an offside call that was wrong and it created a first down, you can challenge that too.

Absolutely love the transparency in college football review process. Letting fans behind the curtain as they re-examine the footage is a great way to delete any perceived bias and prejudice. Its fast. It humanizes the refs. The goal is to get it right. If 15 cameras saw something the ref didn't then fix it and move on.

 

[Ellard80]

alabama vs georgia yet another example... if you saw that.

 

[den-the-coach]

Curious as to why you wouldn't want the ability to challenge a non call? Stupid one off the top of my head was the last Super Bowl when Ramsey had the blatant face mask, that wasn't called, and gave the Bengals a long TD score. Wouldn't you want to be able to challenge a non call like that?

I just think you have to limit some things, agreed, sometimes the non calls are obvious, but then you get to the point you are reviewing everything.