Two rule changes I'd like to see

[Michael]

I think everyone fails to realize why they call the delay of game the way they do. It is to ensure that a play is not stopped unless the ball was not snapped. What is worse giving teams an extra second (keep in minds the refs will try to give the same extra second to both teams though each ref may be a little different) or blowing the whistle and than realizing opps they actually snapped that in time and replaying the down because of inadvertant whistle.


The way it is set up would still need to be the same with a buzzer on the ref because once they get buzzed they still want to ensure the ball was not snapped.

Which is why I said it should be like holding or a false start. They lose yardage on the next play. No need to stop the play.

 

[unoriginal]

Which is why I said it should be like holding or a false start. They lose yardage on the next play. No need to stop the play.

They can't do it like that. Delay of game is inherently a dead ball foul.

 

[Synovia]

In Super Bowl Xtra Lame the Steelers couldn't get the ball snapped in time and Ben signaled a time out about 2 full seconds after the clock went to 0.

I'm pretty sure you can give up a timeout to stop a delay of game call. I think theres a rule in there for it.



Put a big buzzer in the stadium. Have it go off when clock hits zero. If buzzer goes off before ball is snapped, DOG. Give the head ref a button that resets it.

 

[jmt57]

On Delay of Game: check the NFL rules for which official is responsible for the playclock, IMHO it's the Back Judge together with the Referee. The only thing they have to do is anticipate better on the playclock reaching zero seconds when they look at the snap. And a signal like a buzzer or otherwise, would have to be sent slightly in advance of the playclock reaching zero seconds, to take into account the delay from the moment the clock hits zero to the moment the zero is registered by the eyes of the officials. I don't think we should overload the officials with electronic devices, just because once in while the human mind decides to react slower than usual.

On Measurement: The Umpire is the official that takes care of the placement of the ball. The officials on the sidelines decide to which point the ball is advanced to, and the umpire puts it at that spot. The ball doesn't move an inch until the center lines up again. In case of a measurement, the officials crew moves all players out of the way, and the chains are brought in, with the wing official holding firm grip of the chain on the spot of the best fitting 5- or 10-yard line. The chain is placed alongside the ball, and the back stick is placed on the ground (guided by the official holding the chain), and finally the front stick is placed down to see where the ball is in relation to the front stick. All this is standard officials work, I don't see where you get your assumption that they are just guessing, or do it "from memory"? One thing to remember: all the lines (yellow, blue, red, whatever) drawn on the screen are unofficial. The position of the ball is determined by how far the ball has advanced in the runner/receiver's hands, and a first down is determined by the relative place to the chain. And to get a first down, only the tiniest amount of the tip of the ball has to get past the front stick of the chain.

Let me clarify. On the play clock, an electronic device (e.g., buzzer) would allow that back judge to focus solely on the ball, rather than looking for the play clock and then back to the ball. It wouldn't be all that different from what the NBA uses with lighting on the backboard, or the horn for the shot clock to help the ref determine if a shot got off in time.

Regarding measurement, "from memory" was a poor choice of words on my part; sorry that you felt compelled to teach me what happens on a measurement as if I've never seen a game. However, I find it funny that everything up to the measurement for first down is done by sight - from 60 to 100 feet away. A team gets a first down and the chains and down marker are placed on the sidelines by sight; an incomplete pass and the ball is re-placed by sight, etc.; yet when it comes to the measurement for first down, the chains are brought out with the idea the ball, or chains, couldn't have possibly been off by an inch on the previous plays.

Maybe the NFL keeps doing it this way for the tradition, and perhaps the networks like it for the drama. I just thought it may be quicker and more accurate for the NFL to update the "bringing out the chains" to determine first downs. Speed up the game creates a better flow of the game for players and fans. For networks, there would be less games that run over their allotted time, which can cause headaches. And if the games end a couple minutes earlier, the networks can run more ads after the game - which means less of a need for TV timeouts during the game.

 

[spacecrime]

On Measurement: The Umpire is the official that takes care of the placement of the ball. The officials on the sidelines decide to which point the ball is advanced to, and the umpire puts it at that spot. The ball doesn't move an inch until the center lines up again. In case of a measurement, the officials crew moves all players out of the way, and the chains are brought in, with the wing official holding firm grip of the chain on the spot of the best fitting 5- or 10-yard line. The chain is placed alongside the ball, and the back stick is placed on the ground (guided by the official holding the chain), and finally the front stick is placed down to see where the ball is in relation to the front stick. All this is standard officials work, I don't see where you get your assumption that they are just guessing, or do it "from memory"? One thing to remember: all the lines (yellow, blue, red, whatever) drawn on the screen are unofficial. The position of the ball is determined by how far the ball has advanced in the runner/receiver's hands, and a first down is determined by the relative place to the chain. And to get a first down, only the tiniest amount of the tip of the ball has to get past the front stick of the chain.

Gee, thanks, none of us knew any of this, especially the part about refs not using the yellow first down lines the networks superimpose on television screens.

 

[Michael]

They can't do it like that. Delay of game is inherently a dead ball foul.

We're talking about changing the rules are we not?

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

1 - Delay of game could be easily enforced using technology. I guess the question is whether or not it is worth it. I don't see why it wouldn't be worth it to take whatever small step would be required to do so.

I personally don't care if a team snaps the ball a second or two late and gets away with it. Nothing is really lost by it, and it isn't like the defense did anything to deserve it. I reserve my outrage for bogus PI calls (and blatant non-calls), which can alter a game dramatically.

2 - People always tell me it is heresy but I watch games on a dvr delay (an hour and a half delay gets the job done) whenever possible. There are just so many commercials in an NFL game that it actively hinders my enjoyment of the game. When I watch a game live and sit through the "touchdown - commercials - kickoff - commercials" routine it drive me crazy.

 

[bresna]

The illegal touching rule is concerned with players who get out of bounds, then return inside the field of play and then still are the first to touch the ball or the returner.

Yeah, that's true. But why should a player be penalized for that? I've seen calls when the gunner's outside edge of his foot caught the sideline and he was able to corral the ball on the 2 yard line, only to have that flag fly and find out his great play would result in good field position for the other team because he did something "wrong". It penalizes a player for playing through a block. It's just not right.

Penalize a player for going out of bounds and not trying to get back in, but don't penalize a player for playing through a block.

 

[Michael]

2 - People always tell me it is heresy but I watch games on a dvr delay (an hour and a half delay gets the job done) whenever possible. There are just so many commercials in an NFL game that it actively hinders my enjoyment of the game. When I watch a game live and sit through the "touchdown - commercials - kickoff - commercials" routine it drive me crazy.

I enjoy watching them live (even though there is still some delay). I just watch with my laptop in my lap. But, if I pause the game for a while to do something it is nice to come back and just watch the action until I catch up. I have a button programmed to skip 30 seconds. At the the end of the play I hit the 30 second button and they are usually just lining up for the next play. I can watch a whole quarter in about 5 minutes.

 

[SeymourTrophies]

I agree with both, but it's optimistic for us to hope they would get rid of the T.V. timeout right before each possession. Money talks. The delay of game thing is easily avoided.

What I'm not sure about is why they got rid of the force out rule. It was a good rule among many dumb ones, and they rubbished it. Why?

 

[aluminum seats]

I like it where it is. I think the rhythm of the game is disturbed less at change of possessions and around kicks and the 2 minute warning. What disturbs the flow of the game is anything in the middle of a series, including timeouts, some penalties, and challenges.

But there is no rhythm to disrupt around a kick.

Well, I wouldn't want to make the current set-up worse--they wouldn't add tv timeouts to the middle of drives. It's the td, commercial, kick, commercial routine that's a killer. After a score, and a commercial, and the kick, you want the game to start again. I'd rather pad the remaining breaks and get rid of that.

Again, I know this probably won't happen.

 

[aluminum seats]

I think everyone fails to realize why they call the delay of game the way they do. It is to ensure that a play is not stopped unless the ball was not snapped. What is worse giving teams an extra second (keep in minds the refs will try to give the same extra second to both teams though each ref may be a little different) or blowing the whistle and than realizing opps they actually snapped that in time and replaying the down because of inadvertant whistle.


The way it is set up would still need to be the same with a buzzer on the ref because once they get buzzed they still want to ensure the ball was not snapped.

Fair enough, I guess, but two ways around it. Someone in the booth who would press a button to alter the play clock (switch to a flashing D, at which point the play would be blown dead) or make it challengeable, as others have said.

 

[luisrha]

So this is what happens when our Pats don't play in January... :disagreement:

One more reason to feel bad for not qualifying to playoffs... I bet nobody here would care about the DOG rule (or any topic discussed in the last four pages) if we still were alive this season...

 

[bakes781]

I have a rule change idea that would benefit defenses a little, but would seem only fair IMO.

Currently when the offense gets called for pass interference they just replay the down. Well IMO that's not good enough. The offense should be penalized a down IMO. Doesn't that seem to make sense considering how greatly defensive pass interference penalizes the other side?

 

[Synovia]

I have a rule change idea that would benefit defenses a little, but would seem only fair IMO.

Currently when the offense gets called for pass interference they just replay the down. Well IMO that's not good enough. The offense should be penalized a down IMO. Doesn't that seem to make sense considering how greatly defensive pass interference penalizes the other side?

I do agree with that. Its ridiculous that for one side, its a spot foul, usually 30+ yards. For the other side, its a 5 yard penalty without loss of down.

 

[unoriginal]

We're talking about changing the rules are we not?

Changing the basic principles the refs rely on to solve penalty application isn't warranted by this minor issue.

 

[ScottieC]

Polian will argue again that Tom Brady has to play with one hand tied behind his back. He will probably get a little more attention this year now that the Heart beat of his team is gone - One and Dungy.

 

[neuronet]

2 - People always tell me it is heresy but I watch games on a dvr delay (an hour and a half delay gets the job done) whenever possible. There are just so many commercials in an NFL game that it actively hinders my enjoyment of the game. When I watch a game live and sit through the "touchdown - commercials - kickoff - commercials" routine it drive me crazy.

It makes a huge difference. I do this for all but the playoff games, where I just wait an hour. If I don't care about the commentary, I can watch a full game in under an hour. The 'jump forward' button on my DVR is 30 seconds while time between plays is usually about 35 seconds. I can jump from the end of a play to the beginning of the next play. It is awesome especially when the Pats aren't playing.

Super Bowl of course I watch live because the commercials are usually pretty funny.

 

[Leave No Doubt]

It is painful when attending a game in person to watch both teams standing in the huddle for minutes on end waiting for the commercials to end.

Truth. I wish they'd do away with commercials except for TO's and regular game breaks like quarters and the half. This would never happen of course,and when you watch on TV it isn't as big of a deal, but in person it's another story. I think there're too many commercials anyway no matter where you're watching, but I wish the networks would just allow the game to be played. I'd sacrifice some of the halftime commentary for more commercials rather than watching the guys pick their noses etc while they wait for the 27th Bud Light commercial to be over