Rams 30 vikings 20

[sschind]

Week 8 is off to a good start.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Good to see the Vikings get beat again. They got hosed at the end on the no face mask call and safety. Looks like they may have lost their starting LT too.

If the playoffs started today, 4 of the 7 NFC teams playing would be the entire NFC North. Tough division

 

[milani]

Week 8 is off to a good start.

Not if you are in the Weekly Prediction Contest.

 

[DoURant]

Good to see the Vikings get beat again. They got hosed at the end on the no face mask call and safety. Looks like they may have lost their starting LT too.

If the playoffs started today, 4 of the 7 NFC teams playing would be the entire NFC North. Tough division

My only thought on why or how the refs missed that face mask call was that they must have thought it was Aaron Jones who had the ball, not the QB

 

[Half Empty]

Before feeling too sorry for the Vikes on the facemask, remember the Packers' 2009 season playoff loss to the Cardinals.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Before feeling too sorry for the Vikes on the facemask, remember the Packers' 2009 season playoff loss to the Cardinals.

Was thinking the same. Or the facemask call on the Lions against the Packers, that kept the game going another play. That set up the Rogers to Rogers Hail Mary Miracle in Motown.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[weeds]

I'm thinking the Vikes got a couple of calls earlier ... no? ... oh, well, there's always next week.

 

[DoURant]

Good to see the Vikings get beat again. They got hosed at the end on the no face mask call and safety. Looks like they may have lost their starting LT too.

If the playoffs started today, 4 of the 7 NFC teams playing would be the entire NFC North. Tough division

LT Christian Darrisaw is going to need season ending knee surgery per Adam Schefter.

 

[Poppa San]

LT Christian Darrisaw is going to need season ending knee surgery per Adam Schefter.

and Dillard moves one spot closer to being traded.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

and Dillard moves one spot closer to being traded.

I would be shocked if the Packers traded Dillard to the Vikings or any top NFC team....unless they get WAY overpaid by one of the NFC North teams.

 

[weeds]

The reasons that I'm losing interest fast in the NFL and college football is the NFL is in bed with gambling and the NCAA is saddled with NIL.

Now, I recognize that Florio is what he is - and a known Vikings fan - but the clown makes something of a round-a-bout valid point here. The point that I see is a little different than Mikey's in that he's butt hurt that the Vikings lost a game they deserved to lose - however, now, more than ever is the crying that "the refs and the NFL" are bought out by gambling interests even in lost cause scenarios. This NFL/Gambling tie-in is just not viable. Whatever happened to PROTECTING THE SHIELD?

Non-call of face mask foul kept Sam Darnold from making his passing-yardage prop

At the most basic level, the failure of the officials to see what everyone else saw on the game-clinching safety in Vikings-Rams — a face mask foul that went uncalled — ending Minnesota's chance to erase an eight-point deficit and force overtime.

www.nbcsports.com

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There's a very easy fix to what happened in the Ram-Viking game and they are already using, just not for this play. The ref in the booth could have merely called down and said "ummm, guys, you missed a blatant face mask call."\

I'm confused by the NFL a lot. They say they want to do better at getting calls correct. Yet, they continue to operate under an old system of "trust the on field eyes and judgment of the refs on the field."

Personally, I don't think blown calls like that one are "evidence" of games being fixed and the NFL is in bed with Vegas. I think it's evidence of a league that continues to ignore what fans want and that is better officiating.

 

[sschind]

There's a very easy fix to what happened in the Ram-Viking game and they are already using, just not for this play. The ref in the booth could have merely called down and said "ummm, guys, you missed a blatant face mask call."\

I'm confused by the NFL a lot. They say they want to do better at getting calls correct. Yet, they continue to operate under an old system of "trust the on field eyes and judgment of the refs on the field."

Personally, I don't think blown calls like that one are "evidence" of games being fixed and the NFL is in bed with Vegas. I think it's evidence of a league that continues to ignore what fans want and that is better officiating.

I don't see why the ref in the booth can't review plays like this either. Review may not be the right word. I don't want them calling down and saying stop the play we want to take a closer look at this but if they see something as the play is happening or before the next play is run then they should be able to call down.

Like you said, most fans want to get the calls right. If another set of eyes has a different view then by all means use those eyes.

I'm not even sure I would call it better officiating. I mean yeah, that's the end result in more of the right calls being made but I don't necessarily fault the officials on the field. In this case in particular the ref behind the play couldn't see it (kinda looked from one angle I saw a that he may not even have been looking but that's a different story) He could have grabbed his shoulder and it would look the same. Lets change it up a bit and say he did grab his shoulder and the ref called a facemask and the vikings went on to win the game. Half the people would still be up in arms over a missed call. It would just be the other half and you'd still have people saying it was fixed.

 

[DoURant]

I like how College Football does it, plus they review for possible targeting. I would say booth review for any possible personal foul, which a face mask penalty is. The NFL needs to look more into that type of system for reviewing plays vs. challenge flags. Like you both said, the goal is to just get the call right.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm not even sure I would call it better officiating. I mean yeah, that's the end result in more of the right calls being made but I don't necessarily fault the officials on the field. In this case in particular the ref behind the play couldn't see it (kinda looked from one angle I saw a that he may not even have been looking but that's a different story)

That is the whole point of using an official in the box, with access to video monitors and different angles of view of a play. That person can "see" it all and pretty quickly. Thanks to technology, the process has been sped up quite a bit from when it first came in to use.

The world, including sports, has become focused on getting things right. Sometimes doing so creates just as much controversary as getting it wrong, but at the end of the day, a correct call is hard to argue with.

It used to be acceptable to rely on "human error" or bad judgement calls, but I think those days have passed us by and when technology is there to get calls correct, without completely grinding games to a halt, then do it.

People that say "the games will last too long if you are rechecking plays in the booth", have somewhat of a valid point. So how do you change that? TV Networks shuffle their commercials into those spots where some extra time is being spent, getting a key call correct. So instead of running commercials between possessions, they keep the game going. No 3-5 minutes of players standing around after a punt or kickoff, waiting for FOX to run all their ads. Remember, those guys were all just standing on the sidelines, so it isn't like the rest is doing them good.

Set up criteria as to what constitutes a "key call", that needs a good look. They already look at all scoring plays, turnovers and too close to call first downs. Add personal fouls, plays over 20 yards, completions at the sidelines. etc. Basically, key calls that could have a big impact on the game.

 

[sschind]

That is the whole point of using an official in the box, with access to video monitors and different angles of view of a play. That person can "see" it all and pretty quickly. Thanks to technology, the process has been sped up quite a bit from when it first came in to use.

The world, including sports, has become focused on getting things right. Sometimes doing so creates just as much controversary as getting it wrong, but at the end of the day, a correct call is hard to argue with.

It used to be acceptable to rely on "human error" or bad judgement calls, but I think those days have passed us by and when technology is there to get calls correct, without completely grinding games to a halt, then do it.

People that say "the games will last too long if you are rechecking plays in the booth", have somewhat of a valid point. So how do you change that? TV Networks shuffle their commercials into those spots where some extra time is being spent, getting a key call correct. So instead of running commercials between possessions, they keep the game going. No 3-5 minutes of players standing around after a punt or kickoff, waiting for FOX to run all their ads. Remember, those guys were all just standing on the sidelines, so it isn't like the rest is doing them good.

Set up criteria as to what constitutes a "key call", that needs a good look. They already look at all scoring plays, turnovers and too close to call first downs. Add personal fouls, plays over 20 yards, completions at the sidelines. etc. Basically, key calls that could have a big impact on the game.

Like I said, I'm in favor of using the ref in the sky to help get calls right but I am opposed to letting them stop play just to get a closer look. If they see something as it happens or on a replay while the teams are regrouping before the next snap then let them call down and stop the play but to say "I'm not sure that was the right call. Lets stop play so we can take a closer look" I'm not for that. They need to have had their look before they stop play and they need to make the call not tell the other refs to check it out to see what really happened. I don't like the idea of calling a penalty and then deciding if there really was one or if they should pick up the flag. Its one thing for a ref to make a call because he thinks he sees something but another ref over rules him but it totally different to throw a flag and then say did any of you see something different.

 

[AmishMafia]

How bout this. Get rid of flags. Give each ref a beeper and when there is a penalty multiple visual indicators engage. Nobody even needs to know which ref called the penalty in the booth, NY QC, or on the field.

 

[weeds]

Why even have refs on the field? Why not have 20-25 cameras at each game focused on a specific zone of the field of play. Review each and every player on each and every play ... imagine all of the commercial breaks we could have during game stoppages ... my gawd, I just wet myself knowing that NO penalties could possibly be missed ... and the human element of the game could be maintained.

Or... the NFL could stop taking gambling money and stop encouraging gambling on their games - by removing that element altogether. As the old saying goes ... "Hmmm... taste like dog sh*t. Good thing we not step in it".

 

[weeds]

My brother helped me with this so I can give proper attribution. It's not an old saying, its:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Magooch]

Personally, I don't think blown calls like that one are "evidence" of games being fixed and the NFL is in bed with Vegas. I think it's evidence of a league that continues to ignore what fans want and that is better officiating.

I agree with this. It reminds me of Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

In most instances it's not malicious actors or evidence of "the fix" being in or anything like that - it's just that people make dumb decisions (and often double-down on them). I have to think if the league or referees or whoever were seriously interested in fixing games they wouldn't leave it to such a pivotal (and arguably OBVIOUS) play at a crucial moment like that. Not that I have any evidence in the match-fixing world but I have to think that it's probably more effectively done "death by a thousand cuts" if you will - rather than blowing one or two big obvious calls it's a slight preference/prejudice in the little calls breaking for or against a given team over the course of a game, you know?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree with this. It reminds me of Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

In most instances it's not malicious actors or evidence of "the fix" being in or anything like that - it's just that people make dumb decisions (and often double-down on them). I have to think if the league or referees or whoever were seriously interested in fixing games they wouldn't leave it to such a pivotal (and arguably OBVIOUS) play at a crucial moment like that. Not that I have any evidence in the match-fixing world but I have to think that it's probably more effectively done "death by a thousand cuts" if you will - rather than blowing one or two big obvious calls it's a slight preference/prejudice in the little calls breaking for or against a given team over the course of a game, you know?

I agree, but would add this. Being a referee isn't an easy job. Despite what everyone thinks, as they watch it from home or in the stadium, the refs DON'T see everything or every angle individually or sometimes collectively. I guess now that I typed that, I would say its more like what we see when sitting in the stadium watching the game. We see one angle, once. I can't tell you how many games I have been to a game and said "Wait...WTF just happened, I didn't see THAT". Then when I sit down and watch the game on TV later, I see it. I see it from every angle, frame by frame by frame.

I doubt many fans want to see every play scrutinized frame by frame. But there blatantly obvious missed calls, ones that the current replay system, even if challenged by a coach, don't allow to be fixed, even though they easily could be. I think that is all fans, at least this one, wants.

Human error is fine, but stupidity isn't. I don't think any of the refs miss these calls intentionally, I think the NFL is just too stubborn to admit it matters. Hell, they might even like the controversary, it gets people talking about the NFL and watching those controversial plays over and over.

 

[milani]

I agree, but would add this. Being a referee isn't an easy job. Despite what everyone thinks, as they watch it from home or in the stadium, the refs DON'T see everything or every angle individually or sometimes collectively. I guess now that I typed that, I would say its more like what we see when sitting in the stadium watching the game. We see one angle, once. I can't tell you how many games I have been to a game and said "Wait...WTF just happened, I didn't see THAT". Then when I sit down and watch the game on TV later, I see it. I see it from every angle, frame by frame by frame.

I doubt many fans want to see every play scrutinized frame by frame. But there blatantly obvious missed calls, ones that the current replay system, even if challenged by a coach, don't allow to be fixed, even though they easily could be. I think that is all fans, at least this one, wants.

Human error is fine, but stupidity isn't. I don't think any of the refs miss these calls intentionally, I think the NFL is just too stubborn to admit it matters. Hell, they might even like the controversary, it gets people talking about the NFL and watching those controversial plays over and over.

I have always believed in refs helping other refs with calls. I know the pride thing enters into it. And that does not mean overrule. Think of the roughness call on Rodgers before the Detroit Hail Mary. ( Which was not reviewable. ) If they miss it we lose and our playoff position is in jeopardy. And then recall the Rodgers pass with 3 seconds left in Dallas. The first ref ruled incomplete but the second one said it was good. Now that one was reviewed and was upheld. And recall the Jerry Rice fumble in the 1998 playoff. The ref missed it and there was no replay.

 

[Magooch]

Yep, 100%. I think if the league was really that concerned about changing any of this...they already would have. No publicity, bad publicity, etc...

It really is kind of hilarious when you sit down and think about how they've parsed it out between "You can challenge that," or "You can't challenge that, but the booth can," or "We automatically review that," or "That one can't be challenged or reviewed" or "That's a scoring play and all scoring plays are automatically reviewed but you can't review a call that wasn't made so we can't change anything about it," and so on...

 

[Voyageur]

The problem with NFL rules is that they're written in a way that many of them are illogical. Let's talk about reviews. Any play that involves scoring, should be reviewed. I think that's what they mean?

So, that face mask, in the end zone, was not reviewable, because there was no score. Had he buckled and gone down for a safety, it would have been reviewed, and therefore it would have been a penalty, wiping out the safety, and sack, and giving them 15 yards and a first down.

Interesting. It had to be worse for your team to be great. Is that right? Sheeessssshhhhhhh!

I wonder how many bottles of tequila those guys writing the rules up had before even putting the first word on paper?

 

[sschind]

The problem with NFL rules is that they're written in a way that many of them are illogical. Let's talk about reviews. Any play that involves scoring, should be reviewed. I think that's what they mean?

So, that face mask, in the end zone, was not reviewable, because there was no score. Had he buckled and gone down for a safety, it would have been reviewed, and therefore it would have been a penalty, wiping out the safety, and sack, and giving them 15 yards and a first down.

Interesting. It had to be worse for your team to be great. Is that right? Sheeessssshhhhhhh!

I wonder how many bottles of tequila those guys writing the rules up had before even putting the first word on paper?

But he did go down for the safety or are you talking about a different play.

is it anything like time travel? Had he gone down for the safety it would have been a scoring play and reviewed and the facemask would have wiped out the scoring play meaning the play would not have been reviewed meaning it would have been a safety which means it would have been a scoring play and been reviewed...