ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
You are Tagliabu: How do you improve the officiating?
I don't know what can be done to improve officiating beyond the following:
* Establish new goal line/end zone and sideline camera angles specifically for use as needed for replay review.
* Require more of the officials re., preparation and schooling. If this means making them full-time employees of the league, so be it.
* Give the official in the press box a bigger role in overruling questionable calls that are not subject to coach's challenge, outside the final two minutes of each half (I know, this would open a huge can of worms).
* Don't laugh: Put some sort of microchip in the football that triggers a sensory field at the goal line when any part of the ball breaks the plane.
The main problem, as I see it, is that the game on the field has gotten so fast and the rules so complex that the officiating is more exposed than ever before. It's obvious that more must be done to prevent bad calls from unfairly deciding who wins and who loses. I think things have now gotten to the point where it's no longer a case of dismissing it as "things even out a the end."
FEATURED ADVERTISEMENT
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
One thing I would go is change PI to a 15 yard penalty except for maybe a flagrant version as the current spot foul. Given the percentage of downfield passes that are completed, a spot foul for a ticky tack PI is ridiculous.
[QUOTE=Tunescribe]I don't know what can be done to improve officiating beyond the following:
* Establish new goal line/end zone and sideline camera angles specifically for use as needed for replay review. BB has called for this. Wonder why the NFL ignores it?
* Require more of the officials re., preparation and schooling. If this means making them full-time employees of the league, so be it.
* Give the official in the press box a bigger role in overruling questionable calls that are not subject to coach's challenge, outside the final two minutes of each half (I know, this would open a huge can of worms).
* Don't laugh: Put some sort of microchip in the football that triggers a sensory field at the goal line when any part of the ball breaks the plane.
[\QUOTE]
* Make all PI calls reviewable by the booth. Too much yardage at stake to let these calls go unchallenged.
* Phantom and capricious offensive holding calls are a real problem. Don't know how to fix this.
You remove officiating over millimeters. That's one way.
Take the gray areas.
Roughing the passer is called if there is a doubt that it did or did not occur, throw the flag. This takes away the over-analysis of how close people were.
It is not perfect, but like the Tuck Rule, good or bad, it is something everyone can understand. Mike Perreria has said repeatedly on NFL Network, If the officials are not sure whether to throw a flag or not, their orders are to throw the flag.
This could work for goal lines and out of bounds. You could make the rule either way.
If there is any doubt that the ball crossed the plane, then rule it not a TD. The ball must clearly cross the plane. Any doubt and it is not a TD.
People could say, Yeah, look, the front millimeter of the ball touched the goal line. Tough. There was doubt so no TD. Only a D with no doukbt counts.
Ditto catching a pass in or out of bounds. Must clearly be out of bounds or it is a catch. If in doubt it is a catch. Or do it the reverse. It doesn't matter, as long as the gray area is assigned one way or the other.
If people understand that a ball must CLEARLY WITHOUT DOUBT cross the goal line, it will take some criticism away when the call is really, really close. Even people who think, for example, that Rothliesberger and Alstott crossed the goal line will admit it is a close call.
This works for the tuck. It also works for offensive pass interference. That is why Jackson was called for OPI, same as Troy Brown against the Panthers. Both receivers extended their arms.
Easy to officiate. Did the arm extend or not. You may not like the result sometimes, but the rule is clear. By the rule, it is repeatably shown that Brady did not tuck the ball away and jackson did extend his arm.
One thing I would go is change PI to a 15 yard penalty except for maybe a flagrant version as the current spot foul. Given the percentage of downfield passes that are completed, a spot foul for a ticky tack PI is ridiculous.
OK, so how would you rule on a 60-yard desperation bomb into the end zone on the last play of the game that went incomplete because of "minor" pass interference? Trying to draw the line between "minor" and "flagrant" PI would seem problematic to me.
* Don't laugh: Put some sort of microchip in the football that triggers a sensory field at the goal line when any part of the ball breaks the plane.
I was thinking the exact same thing. It could be done.
Technologically they could take it a step further too! Same chip or substance in or on the football could establish exactly where 10 yards is from the nose of the football by global positioning system satellites and place everything into a computerized field that would display automatically on the TV. Most channels do it anyway when they show a yellow line for the line of scrimage so make it the actual line electronically. Something like this could help eliminate time wasted on measurements.
Wouldn't really need a chip either, all you need is some detectable substance impregnated in the leather of the football.
__________________
We've had a bunch of practices. We're going out there everyday. They're tired. They're sore. There's a little bit of information overload, but it is pro football. Nobody ever said it was going to be easy."
You remove officiating over millimeters. That's one way.
Take the gray areas.
Roughing the passer is called if there is a doubt that it did or did not occur, throw the flag. This takes away the over-analysis of how close people were.
It is not perfect, but like the Tuck Rule, good or bad, it is something everyone can understand. Mike Perreria has said repeatedly on NFL Network, If the officials are not sure whether to throw a flag or not, their orders are to throw the flag.
This could work for goal lines and out of bounds. You could make the rule either way.
If there is any doubt that the ball crossed the plane, then rule it not a TD. The ball must clearly cross the plane. Any doubt and it is not a TD.
People could say, Yeah, look, the front millimeter of the ball touched the goal line. Tough. There was doubt so no TD. Only a D with no doukbt counts.
Ditto catching a pass in or out of bounds. Must clearly be out of bounds or it is a catch. If in doubt it is a catch. Or do it the reverse. It doesn't matter, as long as the gray area is assigned one way or the other.
If people understand that a ball must CLEARLY WITHOUT DOUBT cross the goal line, it will take some criticism away when the call is really, really close. Even people who think, for example, that Rothliesberger and Alstott crossed the goal line will admit it is a close call.
This works for the tuck. It also works for offensive pass interference. That is why Jackson was called for OPI, same as Troy Brown against the Panthers. Both receivers extended their arms.
Easy to officiate. Did the arm extend or not. You may not like the result sometimes, but the rule is clear. By the rule, it is repeatably shown that Brady did not tuck the ball away and jackson did extend his arm.
That's my theory.
TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU spacecrime!
If in doubt don't give or take anything away. Let the players play.
Obvious violations ... call it .... otherwise let it go!
This is opposite to what their orders are if what you said is true. Instead
the orders should be
" If an official is absolutely not sure whether to throw a flag or not, their
orders should be KEEP the flag in your pocket."
This you would think should be the orders. But .... if you want to go
conspiracy theory then throwing flags if in doubt allows a few bought off
refs to fix a game. When questioned he can claim he was in doubt.
Technologically they could take it a step further too! Same chip or substance in or on the football could establish exactly where 10 yards is from the nose of the football by global positioning system satellites and place everything into a computerized field that would display automatically on the TV. Most channels do it anyway when they show a yellow line for the line of scrimage so make it the actual line electronically. Something like this could help eliminate time wasted on measurements.
Wouldn't really need a chip either, all you need is some detectable substance impregnated in the leather of the football.
Technologically they could take it a step further too! Same chip or substance in or on the football could establish exactly where 10 yards is from the nose of the football by global positioning system satellites and place everything into a computerized field that would display automatically on the TV. Most channels do it anyway when they show a yellow line for the line of scrimage so make it the actual line electronically. Something like this could help eliminate time wasted on measurements.
Wouldn't really need a chip either, all you need is some detectable substance impregnated in the leather of the football.
You guys do not understand GPS technology and its accuracy.
However, an in stadium wireless positioning system (not cheap) could be established that would yield the required positional accuracy. Problem is that its not 'off the shelf' and would require a few million $ R&D. The NFL could afford it if they wanted it. Problem is...they don't even want the inexpensive goal line TV cameras Belichick advocates. Wonder why?
I think that goal line and sideline cameras are cheaper and solve the vast majority of the positioning problems.
You are Tagliabu: How do you improve the officiating?
Linear Mode
