I don't completely agree, but I will say, I don't think the refs are out to get any one team. I just don't think they're particularly good at their jobs. :shrug:
NFL Refs
- Thread starter Big/Sky/Fly
- Start date
Share this page
I don't completely agree, but I will say, I don't think the refs are out to get any one team. I just don't think they're particularly good at their jobs. :shrug:
Number Cruncher
Time to go.... NOW
I don't envy the refs, not one little bit.
I think they do their best under extremely difficult circumstances.
1. The rulebook is flawed. Some many illogical things. If you are going to write a rule, have some logic behind it. If Calvin Johnson fumbles the ball through the back of the endzone, it's Seattle ball, unless of course, a Seahawk helps it on its way. Then it's Detroit ball. So many things like this.
2. The size and speed of the athletes. Having a ref embedded with the linebackers, about 7 yards off the line of scrimmage is the best place to view they line play he is responsible for. Heck, they move him back there in the last minutes of each half. But too many teams use them in the "pick" play that and the ref had no chance to get out of the way you almost have to move them to a less advantageous position.
3. Subtle influences. I do not think that the refs themselves are corrupt, but I am GODDAMN POSITIVE that the league is corrupt. I don't know that can even be argued. Consider that the refs have direct line responsibility to the league in terms of performance evaluation and being selected for marquee games and I don't see how corruption above can be kept totally out of their way of thinking, especially when making quick, heat of the battle decisions. It is human nature to want positive feedback from people formally charged with evaluating your performance. And now the corrupt league wants a more direct link to the refs during games. Yeah, this will end well.
A great example is the Pass Interference penalty on Gronk in Denver. Do I think the ref who called it was corrupt? No. Do I think corruption was involved? Absolutely YES. And now Blandino (famous for his involvement coming off the Dallas Party Bus) is going to be more in the ears during games. Do you think Blandino, in his role as an NFL official would want Roger GoodHELLs approval when it comes time for his performance evaluation?
I think corruption flows downhill in organizations. The fish rots from the head. Having the Gingerbread man corrupt begins to poison the well and I do think it flows down as far as the refs in their on the field decision-making, but in a subtle, more difficult to prove fashion.
I think they do their best under extremely difficult circumstances.
1. The rulebook is flawed. Some many illogical things. If you are going to write a rule, have some logic behind it. If Calvin Johnson fumbles the ball through the back of the endzone, it's Seattle ball, unless of course, a Seahawk helps it on its way. Then it's Detroit ball. So many things like this.
2. The size and speed of the athletes. Having a ref embedded with the linebackers, about 7 yards off the line of scrimmage is the best place to view they line play he is responsible for. Heck, they move him back there in the last minutes of each half. But too many teams use them in the "pick" play that and the ref had no chance to get out of the way you almost have to move them to a less advantageous position.
3. Subtle influences. I do not think that the refs themselves are corrupt, but I am GODDAMN POSITIVE that the league is corrupt. I don't know that can even be argued. Consider that the refs have direct line responsibility to the league in terms of performance evaluation and being selected for marquee games and I don't see how corruption above can be kept totally out of their way of thinking, especially when making quick, heat of the battle decisions. It is human nature to want positive feedback from people formally charged with evaluating your performance. And now the corrupt league wants a more direct link to the refs during games. Yeah, this will end well.
A great example is the Pass Interference penalty on Gronk in Denver. Do I think the ref who called it was corrupt? No. Do I think corruption was involved? Absolutely YES. And now Blandino (famous for his involvement coming off the Dallas Party Bus) is going to be more in the ears during games. Do you think Blandino, in his role as an NFL official would want Roger GoodHELLs approval when it comes time for his performance evaluation?
I think corruption flows downhill in organizations. The fish rots from the head. Having the Gingerbread man corrupt begins to poison the well and I do think it flows down as far as the refs in their on the field decision-making, but in a subtle, more difficult to prove fashion.
Nah.
The field judge threw that flag from 20+ yards away. No way he actually saw what we all saw. From his vantage point, it looked like a push-off. I initially thought it was a push-off myself, and I had a better look at the play.
This is what I mean. I don't think that ref is out to get the Patriots, or is under any pressure from the one entity they hate the most - I just think he's bad at his job, and should have kept his flag in his pocket, because he didn't have a good view of the play, certainly not good enough to throw the flag there. Same sort of thing with the Chung "hold".
Number Cruncher
Time to go.... NOW
That's why I think it is subtle
I don't think the NFL could, in a subtle manner, influence the refs to do anything other than tell the league to go **** themselves.
AkPatsFan
Well-known member
I think the refs do the best that they can but clearly, they are not very good at their jobs. So many blown and missed calls, something needs to be done and I think hiring permanent refs is a good start.
Younger refs too. I'm tired of seeing fat 70 year olds trying to run around and call a game.
Too me the refs are ok, not great, but I don't think they were ever great. They're human. I also feel that they should stop with the emphasis crap either it's already a penalty and should be just as important as other penalties or they need to clarify the all the rules.
~Dee~
~Dee~
That penalty on cam Chancellor today was not a penalty on him and should have been called on the tight end. If that was Gronk it would have been called on him instantly.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2005
- Messages
- 41,435
- Reaction score
- 13,233
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 76
OP
OP
Big/Sky/Fly
370hssv vw6!s tu36v
Or sooner.
Cheers, BostonTim
Yes...thought crime type BS.
AkPatsFan
Well-known member
Make up call for one they missed earlier on a missed hold on a pass that Thomas was able to knock out of the receivers hands. Otherwise that could have been a TD.
HomelessJoe
Unknown User
Here's another:
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2-L9ExI_76E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I'm still amazed that the Refs aren't full time... given the size (in monetary) terms of the NFL. Professional officials are needed in professional sport, that's the long and short of it in the modern world. Every other sport has had the same issue where the standard of officiating has been poor/inconsistent and the majority have moved the make them full time.
As for corrupt, who knows, I think the rule book needs reviewing because the refs either don't understand it or the "judgement" call guidelines are too vague. I mean does anyone on here know what a catch is anymore?
As for corrupt, who knows, I think the rule book needs reviewing because the refs either don't understand it or the "judgement" call guidelines are too vague. I mean does anyone on here know what a catch is anymore?
subroc
Interested Observer
I do. I believe this is the most overplayed controversy, by the media, ever. It is silly in the extreme. The rule is clear. 2 steps and a football move makes you a runner. Going to the ground the catch must be complete through the process of going to the ground. Because the media likes this issue, even catches that are explainable by the rule and the outcome is clear, NFL Network brings in Blandino for an explanation
Part of it is some just refuse to accept the explanation.
I think that stupid Nationwide commercial with Aaron Rodgers giving the official a hard time about his mic being on is spot on and depicts the intelligence of these men.
OP
OP
Big/Sky/Fly
370hssv vw6!s tu36v
Or that State Farm commercial with Peyton singing some meaningless dumbfvck jingle...
Giant Octopodes
Well-known member
I like to think I have a pretty good handle on it, and I still get it wrong sometimes, as do their rule "experts". The issue is the fact that the rules suddenly change after "2 steps and a football move", with the "football move" part leading to wild debate about which set of rules they're currently under. IMHO it should be set instead to where control of the ball and 2 feet (or equivalent) in bounds makes it a catch, and you're treated as a runner thereafter from a rules interaction standpoint. Eliminate the "going to ground" and "football move" parts entirely. That makes it so you have more spectacular catches that count, more TDs in particular, and also more fumbles. In short, a more interesting game all around.
FWIW, from the NFL 2015 Rule Book, here is Rule 8 - Section 1 - Article 3
RULE 8 FORWARD PASS, BACKWARD PASS, FUMBLE
SECTION 1 FORWARD PASS
ARTICLE 3. COMPLETED OR INTERCEPTED PASS. A player who makes a catch may advance the ball. A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, until he has clearly become a runner (see 3-2-7 Item 2).
Note: If a player has control of the ball, a slight movement of the ball will not be considered a loss of possession. He must lose control of the ball in order to rule that there has been a loss of possession.
If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any part of his body to the ground, it is not a catch.
Item 1. Player Going to the Ground. A player is considered to be going to the ground if he does not remain upright long enough to demonstrate that he is clearly a runner. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
Item 2. Sideline Catches. If a player goes to the ground out-of-bounds (with or without contact by an opponent) in the process of making a catch at the sideline, he must maintain complete and continuous control of the ball until after his initial contact with the ground, or the pass is incomplete.
Item 3. End Zone Catches. The requirements for a catch in the end zone are the same as the requirements for a catch in the field of play.
Note: In the field of play, if a catch of a forward pass has been completed, after which contact by a defender causes the ball to become loose before the runner is down by contact, it is a fumble, and the ball remains alive. In the end zone, the same action is a touchdown, since the receiver completed the catch beyond the goal line prior to the loss of possession, and the ball is dead when the catch is completed.
Item 4. Ball Touches Ground. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control of it, it is a catch, provided that the player continues to maintain control.
Item 5. Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become
eligible to catch the loose ball.
Item 6. Carried Out of Bounds. If a player, who is in possession of the ball, is held up and carried out of bounds by an opponent before both feet or any part of his body other than his hands touches the ground inbounds, it is a completed or intercepted pass.
______________________
As the Article above, 8-1-3, refers to 3-2-7 Item 2, I though I would include that item as well.
RULE 3 DEFINITIONS
SECTION 2 THE BALL AND POSSESSION OF THE BALL
ARTICLE 7. PLAYER POSSESSION.
Item 2. Possession of Loose Ball. To gain possession of a loose ball that has been caught, intercepted, or recovered, a player must have complete control of the ball and have both feet or any other part of his body, other than his hands, completely on the ground inbounds, and then maintain control of the ball until he has clearly become a runner. A player becomes a runner when he is capable of avoiding or warding off impending contact of an opponent. If the player loses the ball while simultaneously touching both feet or any other part of his body to the ground, there is no possession. This rule applies in the field of play and in the end zone.
MontanaBrady
Active member
Unbelievable. How much you want to bet this will be the beginning and end of it. And if there is a fine, or punishment, it wont be anything big.