Idle thoughts - the 'endgame' edition

[Ring 6]

Interesting idea.

One interesting but unworkable idea I read to speed up replay was to only allow the referee to look at the replay at half speed, no slower. The upside of that would be they wouldn't be spending minutes looking at each and every frame, and perhaps the calls would be closer to "50 guys in a bar" instead of the tedious mess we have now.

I’m not sure why we would want to get the call wrong so that 50 guys in a bar can get the call they mistakenly think us right.

The downside would be that the fans at home would still be seeing the network views that are made after a truck full of people look for the one frame that shows something significant, so it's unworkable.

Yes, I know the current system favors teams that coach to the rules like the Patriots do, and yes, we're getting better calls over time. However the cost of all this is a game that's just not very fun.

I don’t see how getting the call right takes the fun out of the game.

We see a bang-bang play, then everything stops while one guy holds up a computer and another guy sits there and watches what some corporate stooge in NYC chooses to show him for the next three minutes. Hopefully we can do something to get both fast and accurate calls.

Review has been in place for years and thoroughly considered an improvement to the game. Are you suggesting no review? Or are you suggesting just rush the process as a dog and pony show and who cares if it’s the right call?
By the way it’s not some corporate stooge making the call it’s al riveron a former field ref who was promoted to the position and given this responsibility so reviews in every game will be consistent. Personally I think this is the most effective season of getting reviews right there has ever been, but people are *****ing because even though they got it right it was close so now we should not look closely at the replay so close bad calls just stand. I don’t get it. The system is working better than ever.

Keep in mind that if you lower the standard
but blinders on etc MORE calls will end up wrong and there will be more legitimate complaints as opposed to now where people who’s team didn’t actually make the play complain because it was close so it should stand.

 

[Bill Lee]

So can we all agree that the point of replay is to get calls right?

The main goal is entertainment. That all stops when the ref stares at a screen for several minutes while we all wonder WTF he's going to come up with, IMHO. Even the NJFL admits that the pace of the game is a problem.

If it is unworkable, as you state, why waste time socializing it by including it in the discussion?

Because some times a bad idea triggers a thought that leads to a good idea.

Edison allegedly said, "I have not failed 1,000 times. I have successfully discovered 1,000 ways to NOT make a light bulb."

 

[Doctor DDS]

The Benjamin non-catch was certainly more questionable than the James non-catch as it required a determination as to when he gained control and then what his foot was doing. Still the right call though from what I saw. The James play was not controversial in the least for anyone that knows the rule. And the reason that rule is in place is that the prior "catch rule" resulted in non stop talk about what was a catch previously. The false narrative that if we just "use the eye test" that these controversies would go away is complete nonsense. If the networks and public are going to be outraged (like the tuck rule, ASJ fumble in Jets game) when a call is made exactly as it is written in the rule books then what can you do?

 

[Bill Lee]

Personally I think this is the most effective season of getting reviews right there has ever been, but people are *****ing because even though they got it right it was close so now we should not look closely at the replay so close bad calls just stand. I don’t get it. The system is working better than ever.

Keep in mind that if you lower the standard but blinders on etc MORE calls will end up wrong and there will be more legitimate complaints as opposed to now where people who’s team didn’t actually make the play complain because it was close so it should stand.

Your points are absolutely valid, but now that have improved, I don't see the problem with trying to improve some more. The pace of the game is a problem. Moving from the hood to the guy with a portable tablet is an improvement. And yes, I think centralized review is an improvement but in today's climate it does lead to various conspiracy theories. Perhaps some day they'll put a camera in the offices at Park Ave so we can see how that process works, instead of seeing what we see now, which isn't particularly compelling.

 

[Bill Lee]

If the networks and public are going to be outraged (like the tuck rule, ASJ fumble in Jets game) when a call is made exactly as it is written in the rule books then what can you do?

Maybe spend less money on Roger's salary, and come up with some really helpful aids to help fans and even announcers understand the rules better? On the earlier thread I posted a flowchart from Reddit that makes the process crystal clear. We need more things like that.

 

[Ring 6]

Your points are absolutely valid, but now that have improved, I don't see the problem with trying to improve some more. The pace of the game is a problem. Moving from the hood to the guy with a portable tablet is an improvement. And yes, I think centralized review is an improvement but in today's climate it does lead to various conspiracy theories. Perhaps some day they'll put a camera in the offices at Park Ave so we can see how that process works, instead of seeing what we see now, which isn't particularly compelling.

I could not care a stitch less about the conspiracy theories or whining by losers. It is totally meaningless to me.

I don’t think the review period is much longer with the centralized review, but the game is slower because of every TD and turnover being reviewed.
If they want to speed up the game remove commercials (you can extend halftime and between quarter breaks to make up the difference if they like) rather than changing the process that gets the right call made.

 

[DarrylS]

One of the things I had hoped for in this game was to get others involved in the passing game.. so it was nice to see Allen, Hollister, Britt, Gillislee and Dorsett get some touches.. one of the things I notice is that our decoys are just decoys and have not been that much of a threat, at least now future opponents will at least give them a glance.

 

[patfanken]

I’m not sure why we would want to get the call wrong so that 50 guys in a bar can get the call they mistakenly think us right.


I don’t see how getting the call right takes the fun out of the game.



Review has been in place for years and thoroughly considered an improvement to the game. Are you suggesting no review? Or are you suggesting just rush the process as a dog and pony show and who cares if it’s the right call?
By the way it’s not some corporate stooge making the call it’s al riveron a former field ref who was promoted to the position and given this responsibility so reviews in every game will be consistent. Personally I think this is the most effective season of getting reviews right there has ever been, but people are *****ing because even though they got it right it was close so now we should not look closely at the replay so close bad calls just stand. I don’t get it. The system is working better than ever.

Keep in mind that if you lower the standard
but blinders on etc MORE calls will end up wrong and there will be more legitimate complaints as opposed to now where people who’s team didn’t actually make the play complain because it was close so it should stand.

Here's the thing, Andy (at least from my perspective). From time immemorial football was played with coaches who made mistake, players who made mistakes, AND refs who made mistakes. They were ALL part of the game. The MISTAKES were all a part of the game.

The idea of replay was to reverse the really bad calls, not the ones you have go frame by frame and digitally match up hands and feet to determine that the ball appeared to be moving when his toe was on the white..

One of the negative aspects of replay has been that now both the players and fans demand that the game be called perfectly. Personally I'm sick and tired of seeing receivers and DB's complaining after EVERY freakin' call. To the point where when there IS a good reason to b!tch, it gets lost in the wash of the non-stop complaining every single play.

Officials making mistakes used to be just as an accepted part of the game for fans/coaches/ and players, just as coaching and player mistake were. Now our tolerance for mistakes by the refs has diminished to zero, and we all expect replay to fix it.

I think the announcers DEFINITELY need to understand the rules better. As someone said previously, the Jesse James catch was NOT controversial at all. That was proven witch the Clay drop in the EZ, Not a eye was batted when it was called incomplete not by the players or the coaches.. Because everyone now knows the rule , it was a non-issue,. It was just a matter of knowing what you are seeing.

Andy, I'm not asking that we let 50 drunk guys at a bar determine what's right and wrong. (btw- that is a STUPID example, which has been used far too often by professionals who should be smart enough not to use it.) But I am willing to go with the call on the field IF the the guy in charge can't see CONCLUSIVE evidence of a mistake, say, within 90 seconds.

AND if we find out later that after a long and microscopic revue that they got it wrong, I can live with it. Just like we have to live with phantom holding calls or obvious PI's that are let go. I may not like them, but I understand that they are all a part of the game played/coached, and reffed by flawed human beings. A game were there are multiple mistakes made on EVERY single play. Mistakes that are all part of the drama that makes the game great.

 

[luuked]

One of the negative aspects of replay has been that now both the players and fans demand that the game be called perfectly

I dont know about others but I certainly dont expect perfection but what I definitely want is consistency. And the catch rules are at least at a point where thanks to the review system more often than not we get that consistency in how calls are made.

 

[Doctor DDS]

I think a lot of the post replay controversies could be eliminated if the NFL would share the pictures of exactly what they saw/based decision on. If the photo of the ball clearly on the ground on the James catch was made available shortly after the game then much of the dialogue would have been muted. I assume a similar photo of the Benjamin catch exists somewhere showing his foot off the ground when he finally secures the catch. Having the ref who made the call go on the NFL network and break it down frame by frame would likely assuage most of the conspiracy theorists (not all of course) but maybe the NFL just prefers the non stop chatter the way it is.

 

[archstanton543]

I think a lot of the post replay controversies could be eliminated if the NFL would share the pictures of exactly what they saw/based decision on. If the photo of the ball clearly on the ground on the James catch was made available shortly after the game then much of the dialogue would have been muted. I assume a similar photo of the Benjamin catch exists somewhere showing his foot off the ground when he finally secures the catch. Having the ref who made the call go on the NFL network and break it down frame by frame would likely assuage most of the conspiracy theorists (not all of course) but maybe the NFL just prefers the non stop chatter the way it is.

There's a ref from the front office that has an official Twitter account that breaks down "controversial" calls of the games shortly after they've been played. He broke down the catch from the Bills/Pats game shortly after it was over. The refs also give a press conference after every game (they just don't televise it).

 

[PatsDeb]

For me the Bills lost the game when we went ahead by 7 (finally!), they reached 4th & 1 in FG range on their next possession and instead of going for it to keep up with us (which they had been doing nicely all game long), they went for the FG. Before they even kicked I turned to the guy next to me and said, "Game over. They just lost." Then they missed the field goal and it was really over. It felt like the Pats managed to psych out their opponent once again, without even doing anything.

 

[n6249c]

I think a lot of the post replay controversies could be eliminated if the NFL would share the pictures of exactly what they saw/based decision on. If the photo of the ball clearly on the ground on the James catch was made available shortly after the game then much of the dialogue would have been muted. I assume a similar photo of the Benjamin catch exists somewhere showing his foot off the ground when he finally secures the catch. Having the ref who made the call go on the NFL network and break it down frame by frame would likely assuage most of the conspiracy theorists (not all of course) but maybe the NFL just prefers the non stop chatter the way it is.

Heck, it was made available during the replay review! And during the discussion it was always stated that the call was correct. That hasn't mattered.

 

[njpatsfan]

If you read nothing else on this board, you would have the most succinct summary of what actually happened that mattered in this game.

 

[Ring 6]

Here's the thing, Andy (at least from my perspective). From time immemorial football was played with coaches who made mistake, players who made mistakes, AND refs who made mistakes. They were ALL part of the game. The MISTAKES were all a part of the game.

The idea of replay was to reverse the really bad calls, not the ones you have go frame by frame and digitally match up hands and feet to determine that the ball appeared to be moving when his toe was on the white..

One of the negative aspects of replay has been that now both the players and fans demand that the game be called perfectly. Personally I'm sick and tired of seeing receivers and DB's complaining after EVERY freakin' call. To the point where when there IS a good reason to b!tch, it gets lost in the wash of the non-stop complaining every single play.

Officials making mistakes used to be just as an accepted part of the game for fans/coaches/ and players, just as coaching and player mistake were. Now our tolerance for mistakes by the refs has diminished to zero, and we all expect replay to fix it.

I think the announcers DEFINITELY need to understand the rules better. As someone said previously, the Jesse James catch was NOT controversial at all. That was proven witch the Clay drop in the EZ, Not a eye was batted when it was called incomplete not by the players or the coaches.. Because everyone now knows the rule , it was a non-issue,. It was just a matter of knowing what you are seeing.

Andy, I'm not asking that we let 50 drunk guys at a bar determine what's right and wrong. (btw- that is a STUPID example, which has been used far too often by professionals who should be smart enough not to use it.) But I am willing to go with the call on the field IF the the guy in charge can't see CONCLUSIVE evidence of a mistake, say, within 90 seconds.

AND if we find out later that after a long and microscopic revue that they got it wrong, I can live with it. Just like we have to live with phantom holding calls or obvious PI's that are let go. I may not like them, but I understand that they are all a part of the game played/coached, and reffed by flawed human beings. A game were there are multiple mistakes made on EVERY single play. Mistakes that are all part of the drama that makes the game great.

I say if you are going to use replay you have to get it absolutely right every time.

If you don’t like that get rid of replay.

Using replay to over turn some calls but not others because they take longer names it worse. Benjamin was no less if an incomplete than James. I don’t think the wrong call should stand if it takes a little longer to see it all.

No replay and you accept mistakes.
When you insert replay to eliminate mistakes you have to keep the playing field even and eliminate them all.

 

[Bill Lee]

The idea of replay was to reverse the really bad calls, not the ones you have go frame by frame and digitally match up hands and feet to determine that the ball appeared to be moving when his toe was on the white..

One of the negative aspects of replay has been that now both the players and fans demand that the game be called perfectly. Personally I'm sick and tired of seeing receivers and DB's complaining after EVERY freakin' call. To the point where when there IS a good reason to b!tch, it gets lost in the wash of the non-stop complaining every single play.

Interestingly enough, similar to the argument made by a famous ex NFL coach:

“I would eliminate all of it,” Gruden said in an interview with Men's Fitness, via PFT. “Everything’s disputed now. Was he inbounds? Was it a turnover? It’s taken the juice out of the stadium. There are too many timeouts. Let the people on the field officiate and hold them accountable. Look, there’s going to be some bang-bang plays that have to be officiated. And who’s going to make the decision? The instant replay man in New York City?”

... Jon Gruden. Ref: Jon Gruden thinks the NFL should abolish instant replay

 

[BTTA]

More than you might think! That was the first game in NFL history with a final score of 44-33.

I was at first speechless about the odds of this. And then, I read this on SB Nation: After Sunday’s game, there are now 358 more scores that have yet to be accomplished in NFL history. We’ll be prepared for the next one that comes.

While there has never been a 4-4 game in NFL history, the odds are that one will happen in the next 1.7 billion years.

These unintuitive numerical facts help me hold onto hope that, with a minimum of 300 sextillion stars out there, plus the fact that all of this is just one of several dimensions, we aren't alone.

49ers' 44-33 win over the Jaguars was a first in NFL history

 

[patfanken]

I say if you are going to use replay you have to get it absolutely right every time.

If you don’t like that get rid of replay.

Using replay to over turn some calls but not others because they take longer names it worse. Benjamin was no less if an incomplete than James. I don’t think the wrong call should stand if it takes a little longer to see it all.

No replay and you accept mistakes.
When you insert replay to eliminate mistakes you have to keep the playing field even and eliminate them all.

Interesting. I heard BB on EEI on the way home today, and when they asked him about this, he was pretty adamant that Benjamin was out of bounds. He said that he didn't think he had EITHER foot in bounds when he finally got control of the ball. There was NO lack of conviction in his voice. He didn't think it was a catch either.

The thing that was insightful in this interview was the Pats thought process in this situation. Once they threw the challenge flag, the Pats were "on to the next play. It became irrelevant to them what the call would be. What WAS important was getting prepared for the next play. So while the Steelers had their fingers up their asses, the Pats where figuring out what defense they should be running if it was over turned, Or what KO and offensive strategy they should run if it was called a TD.

There is completely no room for any *****ing and moaning on what the refs actually end up calling. It is what it is, and its on to the next play. If they had called it a TD, he couldn't have given it another thought (until after the game).

The man is just so focused on what HE can be doing to get prepared for "the next play". And that mentality is generated and passed on to the entire organization, to the point you NEVER would have heard the kind of whining we heard not only from Bills players, but their owner as well.

 

[Uptown]

Advanced Stats Report: Patriots beat up Bills along the line of scrimmage in week 16 - Pats Pulpit

 

[Bill Lee]

Well, if nothing else, you guys did frame the argument extremely well.

The idea of replay was to reverse the really bad calls, not the ones you have go frame by frame and digitally match up hands and feet to determine that the ball appeared to be moving when his toe was on the white..

I say if you are going to use replay you have to get it absolutely right every time.

If you don’t like that get rid of replay.

Using replay to over turn some calls but not others because they take longer names it worse. Benjamin was no less if an incomplete than James. I don’t think the wrong call should stand if it takes a little longer to see it all.

No replay and you accept mistakes.
When you insert replay to eliminate mistakes you have to keep the playing field even and eliminate them all.

I just did re-watch the play on my computer frame by frame without audio and it does take digital alignment to figure it out. You need to use the camera from the field side to get a clear view of exactly when control is obtained, but in that shot you can't really see where the feet are well enough. Then you need to flip over to stands side to see exactly where the feet are (left foot in particular) at that point of time and beyond (but you don't get a good enough view of the hands to determine control). What I see is control happens late in the play (in my view a bit later than Romo suggests) and at that point of time the left toe is off the ground, and the left ankle is above the right heel (i.e. legs are crossed) so it's never going to touch, and in fact it doesn't.

Then I watched it again on my TV. Romo is pretty close to spot on. Nantz keeps bringing up the left foot dragging, but that happens before control is established, so he's just wrong. Romo is pointing out the real issue is the left foot's position once control is established. Romo says he would not reverse based on the evidence he sees, but I presume NY was able to do a more exact frame by frame replay and made it clear to the refs.

So, we did get the right call, yet one announcer incorrectly said it was wrong, and the other was on the right trail but in the end didn't have enough evidence to convince himself.

It makes me think we need to either (a) just get rid of replay and live with the calls made on the field or (b) get Al Riveron or his designee to present his evidence some time shortly after the call (next stoppage in play, or some artificial break between plays just like a TV timeout) so we all know why he made the call he made. The current method of a tweet from NFL OPs is not good enough, IMHO.

The main problem with (a) is that we're still going to be getting the network's frame by frame clip and often it will show the wrong call is made and most of one team's fans will be butthurt. That genie can't be put back into the bottle. One team is going to be told refs are human, unfortunately they made a mistake, so suck it up. That doesn't seem tenable.

The main problem with (b) is we go even deeper into the high tech eye in the sky approach, and the logistics get more complicated. Not only do calls have to be made quickly, the evidence used to make the call needs to be packaged and presented shortly thereafter.

IMHO this article:

Mike Pereira rips NFL for overturning Bills WR Kelvin Benjamin's TD catch​

and this (scroll down to BUF-NE part):

King: The Eagles look very beatable; Week 16 MMQB​

does a good job of showing the frustration being felt around the league about this issue.