Watch this. Not just about this game, but all NFL games at risk.

[Mackeyser]

I have heard this mentioned before. If true, what is the purpose, other than spotting the ball?

Amazon already uses them as part of how they use Next Gen Stats… the NFL could be so modern, but they’d have to cede control to the fates and that seems like it will only happen after a lot of dragging kicking and screaming

 

[Loyal]

The refs right now are so bad I almost want the replacement refs back .... almost

"I'm ready dor the next players strike" ~ Shane Falco

 

[XXXIVwin]

this is why everything needs to be reviewed upstairs - no more challenge flags.

College basically does this as ive said in the other thread.

Interesting. Yeah, I basically watch only Rams games. I watch college games (or other NFL games) only every once in a while. So admittedly I don't have a lot of context for this stuff.

But if the college game has a more common sense approach that works, of course I'd be all for it. "Review it if it's close, otherwise leave it alone" sounds damn good in theory. The devil is in the details of course.

 

[RamFan503]

I'm in the minority on this, but...

I am constantly amazed at how players get better and better, and therefore how insanely and ridiculously close many of the calls need to be.

Take Puka Nacua's sideline catch, for example. I mean, what human on earth could have possibly seen that call ACCURATELY in REAL TIME without the aid of slo-mo AND close-up replay? Puka's right toe was BARELY inbounds by the tiniest hair just a SPLIT-SECOND before the rest of his foot rolled out of bounds. Cripes, his shoelaces were almost out while his toe was in!

My point being... I think many fans have lost perspective on how INSANELY CLOSE so many calls have become.

When I go to a game, from far away, it's easy ti lose perspective on how FAST these guys are. I move closer, and then I see, "wow, they're elite athletes". On the field itself, the speed of play must seem BLAZING fast to us mere mortals.

Refs have to make split-second decisions on split-second plays with super-elite players with the tiniest of margins. And then we sit in our recliners and watch the super-slo-mo replays on our big screens and say "it was obvious."

IMO, referees haven't gotten worse over the years. It's that the pace of the game has led to constant razor-thin calls, and technology exposes the mistakes.

I agree to a point and don't disagree really at all. The thing I would add is that as the game has gotten faster, the "rules committee" has made the refs jobs tougher by instituting a bunch of rules that tend to be decisions or even subjective, rather than clear rule violations.

I realize many rules are going to be decision based to some extent. But having rules with grey areas don't help anyone. Not the refs, not the teams, and certainly not the fans.

 

[RAMSinLA]

The bad officiating is a turn off but so is the lack of depth on the teams. One or two guys get hurt and the team is out of contention. Season over. That's what has me turning away lately.

 

[XXXIVwin]

the "rules committee" has made the refs jobs tougher by instituting a bunch of rules that tend to be decisions or even subjective, rather than clear rule violations.

Just curious, can you give an example of what you are referring to?

Yeah, football is an odd mix of "objective" and "subjective" rules.

The "catch" rule is IMO pretty darn close to objective nowadays. In my experience, I hardly ever see controversy regarding "complete vs incomplete" anymore.

But IMO holding and pass interference will always have grey areas of subjectivity.

 

[XXXIVwin]

Replay assist rule.

Expedited review.

Automatic review.

Coach's challenge.

Apparently these are 4 separate and distinct elements with their own specific rules and guidelines. Yeah, you'd sure as hell think that Pickett's failed 4th down play would somehow qualify for replay help... but no.

This article goes deeper into the weeds than you'd ever want to go:

Rules school: What replay assist can and can’t do

After a few controversial situations in the championship games, there are some misconceptions on the role of the replay official

www.footballzebras.com

 

[Selassie I]

View: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cyvoz-HuGI4/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

 

[Tano]

"I'm ready dor the next players strike" ~ Shane Falco

Never really watched that movie - had it on one day but didn't really pay attention

 

[dieterbrock]

Amazon already uses them as part of how they use Next Gen Stats… the NFL could be so modern, but they’d have to cede control to the fates and that seems like it will only happen after a lot of dragging kicking and screaming

Absolutely. Line of scrimmage would no longer exist to the camera eye, no charade of refs stretching a chain out to determine first down. Ball hits the 1st down point, alert goes off, Crew can then analyze (quickly) any other factors. Knee down, foot oob etc
Same with sidelines, track the ball, track the feet. when the foot triggers over oob, alert goes off. No looking for spacing etc.
Too many variables right now. Let technology make the definitive decision, and thats it.

 

[RamFan503]

HOWEVER... I gotta acknowledge that all rule changes can potentially create unintended consequences. For example, if ALL fourth down scrimmage plays (all of which of course *could* lead to change of possession) are automatically reviewed, could that lead to significant disruptions of play in the last minute of a close game? Suppose a team pretty clearly makes a fourth down conversion... would play need to be stopped for a review each and every time? (If it's only for "close" fourth down plays, how is "close" decided?) Would this play stoppage potentially give an advantage to whichever team wants to preserve the clock...?

I think it would be obvious and quick in most cases. In last year's playoffs, they showed they could do it with virtually no disruption to the game. And it wasn't restricted to just the end of the game or 4th downs. Close plays or ball locations were altered pretty immediately. It didn't take stopping action for most plays - only for those that were called wrong and that was pretty quick.

They showed they have the ability. Why not just use it every game?

But does the NFL recognize that ratings might actually go UP with all the attention and fan engagement from all the constant debating and controversies surrounding close calls? I don't know. Maybe they do.

Interesting thought.

Just curious, can you give an example of what you are referring to?

Some of the rules regarding what constitutes roughing the passer, how they call pass interference has changed, what constitutes a defenseless player, etc...

I'm not saying I disagree with all the changes, but when you watch a replay and can't really figure out what they were calling, then you hear someone like Blandino (I think that's his name) disagree with the interpretation of the rule as called or that the call was right at all, it gives pause.

Personally, I like having human refs but I think the booth is so quickly able to review calls in most cases, there's really no reason they can't do it on all close calls and questionable penalties. If the team is trying to hurry to the line after a close or questionable call, that really is about the only time you would need to blow the whistle.

I would still leave the coaches challenge in place and because that has consequences, it would and should be looked at with a more thorough eye.

 

[Tano]

I think it would be obvious and quick in most cases. In last year's playoffs, they showed they could do it with virtually no disruption to the game. And it wasn't restricted to just the end of the game or 4th downs. Close plays or ball locations were altered pretty immediately. It didn't take stopping action for most plays - only for those that were called wrong and that was pretty quick.

They showed they have the ability. Why not just use it every game?

Interesting thought.

Some of the rules regarding what constitutes roughing the passer, how they call pass interference has changed, what constitutes a defenseless player, etc...

I'm not saying I disagree with all the changes, but when you watch a replay and can't really figure out what they were calling, then you hear someone like Blandino (I think that's his name) disagree with the interpretation of the rule as called or that the call was right at all, it gives pause.

Personally, I like having human refs but I think the booth is so quickly able to review calls in most cases, there's really no reason they can't do it on all close calls and questionable penalties. If the team is trying to hurry to the line after a close or questionable call, that really is about the only time you would need to blow the whistle.

I would still leave the coaches challenge in place and because that has consequences, it would and should be looked at with a more thorough eye.

I completely agree with this assessment

 

[Loyal]

Never really watched that movie - had it on one day but didn't really pay attention

Keanu Reeves hater!

 

[Tano]

Keanu Reeves hater!

That was possibly one of his worst movies and that includes Dangerous Liaisons (that was such a stupid movie and his accent was terrible)

 

[Loyal]

That was possibly one of his worst movies and that includes Dangerous Liaisons (that was such a stupid movie and his accent was terrible)

NOW you hate Uma Thurman and John Malchovick!

 

[Tano]

NOW you hate Uma Thurman and John Malchovick!

heh