CelticPatriot
Third String But Playing on Special Teams
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2011
- Messages
- 768
- Reaction score
- 114
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Correct officiating always makes the game better, never worse. I don't understand what you are saying.
There are just too many rules in football though that are entirely subjective so that even replays will not be able to remove controversy.
I don’t think adding time to something that is already dragged out by commercials, halftime shows and players faking injuries is going to make anything better. I think the entire game should be handled like the last 2 minutes where the replay both handles everything and anything questionable is reviewed.
Also the coaches should have 3 challenges per half to use for things they feel the both should have buzzed.
I think they should be permitted more than 2 challenges per half but I think if they were allowed to challenge everything the games would be extended dramatically. Human error is also one of the components of pro sports that make the games interesting and entertaining, they could easily replace every home plate baseball umpire with a strike zone machine but that would pull from the human element.
I don’t think adding time to something that is already dragged out by commercials, halftime shows and players faking injuries is going to make anything better. I think the entire game should be handled like the last 2 minutes where the replay both handles everything and anything questionable is reviewed.
Also the coaches should have 3 challenges per half to use for things they feel the both should have buzzed.
patchick said:I wonder how specific the challenge would have to be? A wide-open challenge system could end up with a lot of gamesmanship.
Let's say that you're on defense, and in one slow-developing play the QB stays in the pocket for quite a while then throws a pass that turns into an 80-yard TD. Wouldn't you be tempted to challenge based on "offensive holding," even if you saw nothing, hoping and trusting that a careful review of every blocker would end up revealing at least a moment of holding?
You say that because the Panthers game is so fresh in everybody’s head but when the games start lasting from 1pm to 630pm with 50% of that time with a ref under the hood you’d have a different outlook. Human error is part of sports, you make everything challengeable and before long you’re playing a video game.
The Truth has no time limit.
A coach should be allowed to have as many challenges available to him as he has timeouts remaining, in both halves.
did you read the article? Coaches would still only have 2 (3 if the prior 2 are successful) challenges per game. they can't challenge every play, that would (indeed) be ridiculous.
His point was on the interference on Edelman's fair catch. Had it been recovered by Houston, he would have been able to challenge whether the Patriots recovered but NOT whether they ran into a returner who signaled for a fair catch. If the intent is to "get it right", BB is on the money....
Exactly.
As far as what should be challengeable? That's a tough one. IMHO any thrown flag should be challengeable, period. I'd argue PI, for example, is more often than not going to be decided more justly from video replay than in real time on the field. However, it gets dicey if you can challenge anything that didn't draw a flag. I'd bet if you scanned the field looking at every individual battle, you could find a penalty on just about every play (at least by the letter of the law). That in no way would be a good thing for the game.
This plan won't change the bad non penalty call situations but it would likely have a good effect on bad penalty call situations.