“Hochuli Rule” Approved

[PatsChamp88]

As expected, NFL owners have opted to tweak the replay rules to permit possession to be awarded to the defensive team if indisputable visual evidence shows that an incomplete pass actually was a fumble — and if indisputable visual evidence also shows that the defense recovered the fumble.

Per: PFT

What's your guys thoughts?

 

[Rob0729]

Although I like when they fix obvious flaws in the rules. I hate these reactionary rules based on isolated plays. I think they need to fix instant replay, but this fix in the rule might affect one or two replays a season if that. If the league are going to react to these individual plays, why not do a more extensive overhaul of the rules rather than fix a freak problem in the rule?

 

[jmt57]

Although Hochuli made an error, I believe in this case the 'cure is worse than the disease'. The proper fix to the problem, in my opinion, is to train the refs to let the play continue if there is any doubt in there minds. After the play is over they can concur and get another opinion, from another angle. Then, as a last resort, they can go to replay if they need to.

I have a major problem with any rule that bases an outcome of a play on what happens after the ref blows his whistle and signals the play dead. Players are taught from there very first Pop Warner practice to go hard till the play is whistled dead. Now you want possessions to be determined on what happens after the whistle blows? Uh-uh. Exactly when, then, is a player supposed to stop? This would tell the players 'keep going, it might be a live ball'. How would you determine what is a late hit?

Right or wrong, the whistle blows, players should stop and that's it - the play is dead. Anything that happens afterwards is irrelevant - even if the ball was loose.

 

[Pat the Pats Fan]

Although Hochuli made an error, I believe in this case the 'cure is worse than the disease'. The proper fix to the problem, in my opinion, is to train the refs to let the play continue if there is any doubt in there minds. After the play is over they can concur and get another opinion, from another angle. Then, as a last resort, they can go to replay if they need to.

I have a major problem with any rule that bases an outcome of a play on what happens after the ref blows his whistle and signals the play dead. Players are taught from there very first Pop Warner practice to go hard till the play is whistled dead. Now you want possessions to be determined on what happens after the whistle blows? Uh-uh. Exactly when, then, is a player supposed to stop? This would tell the players 'keep going, it might be a live ball'. How would you determine what is a late hit?

Right or wrong, the whistle blows, players should stop and that's it - the play is dead. Anything that happens afterwards is irrelevant - even if the ball was loose.

Good point. Wait til next year when a late hit after the whistle results in a penalty that costs a team a game, we'll have another refinement.....

 

[AFPatsFan12]

Although Hochuli made an error, I believe in this case the 'cure is worse than the disease'. The proper fix to the problem, in my opinion, is to train the refs to let the play continue if there is any doubt in there minds. After the play is over they can concur and get another opinion, from another angle. Then, as a last resort, they can go to replay if they need to.

I have a major problem with any rule that bases an outcome of a play on what happens after the ref blows his whistle and signals the play dead. Players are taught from there very first Pop Warner practice to go hard till the play is whistled dead. Now you want possessions to be determined on what happens after the whistle blows? Uh-uh. Exactly when, then, is a player supposed to stop? This would tell the players 'keep going, it might be a live ball'. How would you determine what is a late hit?

Right or wrong, the whistle blows, players should stop and that's it - the play is dead. Anything that happens afterwards is irrelevant - even if the ball was loose.

I do agree with this sentiment, although that line was already crossed when they made "down by contact" reviewable a couple of years ago, essentially encouraging players to play through the whistle if a ball came loose.

All of these, "well, the whistle blew, BUT...." scenarios are really primed to open a Pandora's Box and get someone seriously hurt after the whistle blows, which is somewhat ironic given all the new safety rules implemented this year...

 

[mcgraw_wv]

You wouldn't need this rule if Refs just didn't blow a play dead until there was an obvious end, ala tackle, out of bounds, TD, etc...

Then if there is a small issue in the play, the replay booth can catch it.

I think the Booth needs to be able to review questionable calls at will, for those type of plays, the second something looks funny, the booth, with no challenge from either player begins to review it, and quickly determines if the ref needs to look at it further...

 

[ScottieC]

Per: PFT

What's your guys thoughts?

They could just call it the "4 Million TV Viewers just saw that happen and there ain't no way you can call that a pass" rule - Too long?

Or perhaps The "Freakin' Common Sense Rule".

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

I have to disagree with the sentiment that refs should err on the side of letting the play continue if there is any doubt. I don't like refs making calls they don't believe in because they have replay backing them up. If the ref sees the play end he should blow his whistle, end of story. Sometimes he will be wrong, but I think that is better than him being tentative and passive.

Although I like when they fix obvious flaws in the rules. I hate these reactionary rules based on isolated plays. I think they need to fix instant replay, but this fix in the rule might affect one or two replays a season if that. If the league are going to react to these individual plays, why not do a more extensive overhaul of the rules rather than fix a freak problem in the rule?

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

[papa lazarou]

I thought this was going to be about the tightness of the officials' shirts - put those guns away Ed.

 

[Sicilian]

Good point. Wait til next year when a late hit after the whistle results in a penalty that costs a team a game, we'll have another refinement.....

Not only that, what happens if someone gets hurt scrambling for a loose ball in the off chance it's overturned into a fumble?

 

[jmt57]

The whistle is the universal signal that tells players to stop: the play is over. I just don't understand how you can whistle the play dead, and then decide the outcome of the play based on what happens after the whistle is blown - whether it be this rule or the 'down by contact' rule.

Regardless of whether or not the whistle should have been blown, you have to end the play at that point. Now you have a play determined with some players still going all out and others having already let up; that's just making a bad situation worse.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

I agree with those who have said a blown wistle should end the play in all cases, regardless of whether or not the ref screwed up.

Any replays that are currently in the rules that are allowed to overturn a blown whistle should be thrown out.

Violating the intent of the whistle to signal a dead ball is ultimately worse than a few plays a year where the refs mistakenly thinks the play should be blown dead when it shouldn't have been. (ie. the player's knee not really down, etc)

 

[TruthSeeker]

I've been looking forward to the day when fumble recoveries are not prohibited because of an incorrect whistle. I think that the number of plays during a typical game where there is a potential or actual fumble *and* the whistle has already blown will average less than one. Because it rarely happens and because it's important to get change of possessions right, I strongly support this and any other rules that allow fumbles to be recovered by the other team even if the whistle has blown.

 

[Rob0729]

The whistle is the universal signal that tells players to stop: the play is over. I just don't understand how you can whistle the play dead, and then decide the outcome of the play based on what happens after the whistle is blown - whether it be this rule or the 'down by contact' rule.

Regardless of whether or not the whistle should have been blown, you have to end the play at that point. Now you have a play determined with some players still going all out and others having already let up; that's just making a bad situation worse.

Actually, the rule was implemented last year that allowed players to play after the whistle if the ball appears to have fumbled. Belichick was vocal against the rule then. The only thing this rule did was to apply that rule to the situation that happened between Denver and San Deigo.