Reviewing Of Scoring Plays

[Calhoun44]

Could someone enlighten me on this new rule? I was curious why the TD that wasn't by Gronk wasn't reviewed. I am guessing it only affects calls on the field that lead to scores, not close plays near the end zone. It really seems like refs should get in the habit of error-ing on calling it a TD since it will be reviewed anyway. That play was an obvious TD when they showed the replay and may not have changed the outcome, but it would have made the game a lot more interesting.

 

[Sciz]

You've got the right idea. It was not a scoring play, so it was not automatically reviewed. Had they called it a TD there, then it likely would have been reviewed.

 

[Deus Irae]

All the plays called touchdowns get reviewed. Plays that are not called touchdowns do not receive that same consideration. It's a flaw in the new rule, IMO.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

The rule needs to be changed such that all scoring plays are reviewed, and also the replay official can call for a review of any "goal line decision" as well.

 

[Patspsycho]

The rule needs to be changed such that all scoring plays are reviewed, and also the replay official can call for a review of any "goal line decision" as well.

That would lengthen the game to an unimaginable length.

It is incumbent upon BB and his staff upstairs to be on their toes all the time, so the onus is on them.

 

[strngplyr]

Because of the rule change refs should give the benefit of the doubt in these situations. Had that been called a touchdown, we kick it deep instead of a failed onside kick with a few extra minutes on the clock.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Since the game was in Pittsburgh the scoreboard operators did not replay it on the video screens there. If the roles had been reversed you can be sure that would not be the case. I suppose you can call that home field advantage, but that seems to be a slippery slope right there.

On the other hand I did read somewhere that the play was not replayed on television because the Pats saw the TD was not called, so they hurried to the line of scrimmage. CBS saw that and decided to stay with live action rather than showing the replay. Kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

This is one thing that I've never liked about replays, that sometimes coaches get to watch the replay and other times they don't before making the decision on whether or not to challenge. Similarly in one case the network may show a replay with a very good angle, and the next time show two or three replays with bad angles before finding a clear shot of what happened. Their broadcast shouldn't have an affect on a challenge, or the outcome of the game.

That whole concept just doesn't sit well with me, and never has. Unfortunately the only solution - don't show any replays in the stadium until after the time to challenge has passed - is simply not going to happen.

 

[Calhoun44]

Is there a person associated with each team that sits somewhere watching the game with a dvr and reviewing each close play? If not is it because it's illegal? I can watch a game at home and re-watch the same play over and over before the network shows a replay. Someone is doing this right? I know sometimes the angle is bad on the live shot, but sometimes it seems like it would help.

 

[NSPF]

I can't understand for the life of me why they don't give the benefit of the doubt to the touchdown in these situations! Worst case scenario, you add a couple of minutes to the game. In the current methodology, you unfairly cost a team over a minute at the end of a close ball game. Should be a pretty easy decision, but Mr. Roger Good("good" is a matter of opinion)ell doesn't seem to like making those.