Reiss on the McCourty personal foul

[sieglo]

Please, list some reasons?

For one thing, it gives the team that controls the Jumbotron a rather large advantage.

 

[SuperPatsFan]

1) It immediately gives the home team an unfair advantage as its their stadium, and they can control the replays
2) There are certain calls which - by the rule book - are not reviewable. This rule would be broken - as it was last nite.
3) It slows down the game, and changes the tempo of the game for the players.
4) The refs aren't in control of what they see on the jumbotron, ie, which angles are shown in review on the jumbotron, which can lead to a bad call.
5) The game should not be ref'd in slow motion.
6) Watching a replay with the crowd reacting inherently leads to a bias. Again, for the home team.

Exactly what advantages are there? It would be an absolutely nightmare if this became common practice.

Therefore, having a good jumbotron operator would be part of having home field advantage.

 

[Synovia]

I'm sorry, this just isn't correct. They cannot use information gleaned from looking at the Jumbotron or any other replay device unless someone throws a red flag or its inside of two minutes. This isn't in any way controversial. It goes without saying.

No, it does not. At no point in the rulebook does it say they can't look at the jumbotron.

 

[patsox23]

Wasn't there something about a FG try that they glanced at the Jumbotron about and that was a massive controversy because it's not allowed???

 

[Synovia]

I'm sorry, this just isn't correct. They cannot use information gleaned from looking at the Jumbotron or any other replay device unless someone throws a red flag or its inside of two minutes. This isn't in any way controversial. It goes without saying.

Please post a quote from the NFL rules digest if you're going to make this claim.

 

[patsox23]

No, it does not. At no point in the rulebook does it say they can't look at the jumbotron.

It also doesn't say that people can't perform surgery at the 35-yard line.

 

[Synovia]

It also doesn't say that people can't perform surgery at the 35-yard line.

I've never seen a penalty called for that.

 

[DaBruinz]

Again, a REVIEW is a VERY SPECIFIC THING IN THE RULE BOOK. A Review did not happen on that play. A referees conference did.

AGAIN, THIS WAS NOT A REVIEW.

This is the problem you are having. It was clear to just about everyone watching the game in person and on TV that the conference was regarding whether or not the pass was incomplete. It was only during Hochuli's announcement that the one official tossed his flag AFTER watching the replay on the Jumbotron.

Also, the rules are very specific that there are only specific instances where you can use a replay to call a penalty. And that is when the replay is part of a Challenge. And even then, there are only specific penalties that can be called (too many men).

 

[tobias funke]

Apparently, PFT agrees that this is against the rules:

If that’s what Hochuli did, he committed a blatant violation of the rules regarding the use of replay, even if the ultimate decision to penalize McCourty was the right decision. The decision should have been made based on the live action, not based on replay review.

I believe I've heard either the commissioner or Mike Pereira confirm in the past that the officials are absolutely not allowed to use the replay board to influence their calls.

edit: Yep, it was from the Cleveland/Baltimore game with the FG at the end that was first called no-good, then reversed. Pereira had to come up with an explanation alternative to 'they used the replay board' because it would have made the officials look very bad.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Wasn't there something about a FG try that they glanced at the Jumbotron about and that was a massive controversy because it's not allowed???

the "Phil Dawson Rule"

HowStuffWorks "Reviewable Plays in the NFL"

>>>>>>During the final seconds of a Browns-Ravens game in November 2007, Cleveland kicker Phil Dawson booted a 51-yard field goal. The ball hit an upright, ricocheted off the goal-post gooseneck and sailed back toward the field. The officials first ruled the kick no good, but the replay clearly showed the ball had gone through the goal. At the time, field goals were not reviewable, but the referee reversed the call anyway (he claimed the replay wasn't a factor).<<<<<<<

 

[fgssand]

They must lighten up on inadvertent helmet to helmet hits of receivers....otherwise, mark my words - what is going to happen is a receiver will decide to take one for the team.

Let's say game is on the line 4th and 15 and he gets 14 yards - he lowers his helmet as soon as he sees where the defender is going to hit him and boom - contact and a flag.

Or even more likely and is what is happening now - if the defender lowers himself to hit receiver at waist, but receiver suddenly goes down - how is the defender supposed to pull up at last nano second, while in flight at point of contact??

They MUST change the rule to allow for judgement of intent - even if it does mean using a replay.

 

[Synovia]

This is the problem you are having. It was clear to just about everyone watching the game in person and on TV that the conference was regarding whether or not the pass was incomplete. It was only during Hochuli's announcement that the one official tossed his flag AFTER watching the replay on the Jumbotron.

Also, the rules are very specific that there are only specific instances where you can use a replay to call a penalty. And that is when the replay is part of a Challenge. And even then, there are only specific penalties that can be called (too many men).

Again, all of this (in the rulebook) specifically refers to the REPLAY HOOD. They did not use the replay hood.

There is absolutely nothing in the rulebook that refers to the jumbotron/scoreboard, or replays outside the hood.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

I've never seen a penalty called for that.

No but I've seen some receivers have their heads removed ( non-surgically) going across the middle on badly thrown balls.
If a play is NOT reviewable, then any form of instant replay (monitor or Jumbotron) shouldn't be allowed and the refs, it seems should not be allowed to use it to make a decision, especially no judgment calls in real time.

 

[Synovia]

Apparently, PFT agrees that this is against the rules:



I believe I've heard either the commissioner or Mike Pereira confirm in the past that the officials are absolutely not allowed to use the replay board to influence their calls.

Again, post Pereira's quote. "I believe I've heard" isn't useful in the least. Neither is Florio.

 

[Yehoodi]

No, they did not. A review is a very specific thing. They didn't do a review.

if they looked at the replay on the jumbotron to make the call then they reviewed the play, what part of the word review do you not understand???

When the refs got under the hood they look at video footage to review a play, they use video footage to determine if their live decision was correct or not and whether to change it on or not, there are only a limited selected amount of plays that can be looked at again using video footage, a penalty is not on the list . . .


bottom line the refs can not use video footage (regardless of the location) to change or to help make a call if it not one of the few enurated plays, what part of this concept do you not understand??

 

[upstater1]

They must lighten up on inadvertent helmet to helmet hits of receivers....otherwise, mark my words - what is going to happen is a receiver will decide to take one for the team.

Let's say game is on the line 4th and 15 and he gets 14 yards - he lowers his helmet as soon as he sees where the defender is going to hit him and boom - contact and a flag.

Or even more likely and is what is happening now - if the defender lowers himself to hit receiver at waist, but receiver suddenly goes down - how is the defender supposed to pull up at last nano second, while in flight at point of contact??

They MUST change the rule to allow for judgement of intent - even if it does mean using a replay.

I saw some ballcarriers leading with the helmet last night.

How does one tackle a guy that's only two feet off the ground?

Or how about tackling Kuhn as he launches himself in the air?

Can you launch yourself to tackle him or is the rule that anyone who jumps in the air is off limits?

 

[Hoodie]

I appreciate the League's attempts to reduce serious injury and head injuries in the game but the standards for officiating are becoming too exacting for a game that happens so fast. So now all you have to do is roll around on the ground and hold your helmet and the refs will say it was an illegal hit.

And McCourty was penalized because the Commidiot was there.

 

[Yehoodi]

Again, all of this (in the rulebook) specifically refers to the REPLAY HOOD. They did not use the replay hood.

There is absolutely nothing in the rulebook that refers to the jumbotron/scoreboard, or replays outside the hood.

simple question Synovia.

In your opinion what do the following words in the NFL lexicon mean "Reviewable" and "non-reviewable"

you know my definition of those two NFL words, what is your definition of those two NFL words??

 

[Synovia]

if they looked at the replay on the jumbotron to make the call then they reviewed the play, what part of the word review do you not understand???

When the refs got under the hood they look at video footage to review a play, they use video footage to determine if their live decision was correct or not and whether to change it on or not, there are only a limited selected amount of plays that can be looked at again using video footage, a penalty is not on the list . . .


bottom line the refs can not use video footage (regardless of the location) to change or to help make a call if it not one of the few enurated plays, what part of this concept do you not understand??

Again, in the context of the NFL rulebook, the word REVIEW has a very specific meaning. The fact that you say they "reviewed" the play doesn't mean there was a "REVIEW".

 

[upstater1]

simple question Synovia.

In your opinion what do the following words in the NFL lexicon mean "Reviewable" and "non-reviewable"

you know my definition of those two NFL words, what is your definition of those two NFL words??

And of course Synovia should really consider not only what these terms mean but what do these terms mean to Goodell, Fisher and Polian?