Refereeing in Playoff Games

[Pokerbrat2000]

The fact that we disagree about the Edelman call is why I believe the call was incorrect. The officials are not supposed to let replay change the call unless there can be no dispute about what the video evidence shows. I happen to think your are correct that he didn’t touch it... but I’m not sure. In that case, replay should not reverse the call. That is what i’m upset about. It seems that the officials were using a different standard of proof, and frankly it seems that officials do this all the time. Each one uses his own standard in every call .... replay or not.

I can't stand the Patriots, so I would have been fine had the call on the punt not been reversed. But honestly, I think it shows just how accurate replay can be. If you look at each piece of footage, which I assume they did back in N.Y., I think the reversal was 100% correct. It actually is a fun puzzle to watch as each piece of it plays out, it clears a body part from having touched the ball.

1. Fingertips? Nope, first shot shows the ball hits well before his fingertips
2. Hands/thumbs? Nope, second angle clearly shows the ball going over them.
3. Arm? Nope, third angle shows ball going over arm.
4. Ball itself, never seems to change in movement that a tip of it would cause.

Now if you just see one angle, it almost looks like the ball touched 2-3 body parts of Edelman. A classic play that proves how hard of a job a ref has with his one angle and split second view.

I realize you don't like it because it seems to buck the notion "cant reverse unless the evidence is clear". IMO, it was crystal clear.

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

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I probably should have driven this point harder.... but why did you need to watch it 25 times?

I only watched it 23 1/2 times, but I just wanted to be clear

Honestly, once they pieced the footage together, I agreed with the CBS Referee announcer, that it should be reversed.

 

[Mondio]

I would beg to differ, How often have we seen the need to see if a ball crossed the goal line, line to gain, a foot was out of bounds? In your opinion, I assume those things don't matter, since its an imperfect game that should tolerate imperfect calls by the referees.

To ignore that instant replay hasn't corrected a lot of mistakes, and say it shouldn't be used simply because you think it failed on a small percentage, to me isn't a reason not to have it, its a reason to keep trying to improve it.

Of course it’s corrected some, been ambiguous in others and in the opinion of many, has just been wrong in other situations game to game, week to week. I’m not sure it’s impact is all that positive.

Are they making it better? I think it’s as confusing as ever. And if you’re going to allow 2 challenges why not 4 or 10? Either the calls need to be right, or we need to live with error.

If you have 4 what about the big game when a 5th is obviously needed?

Every game, every week. Controversy. Doesn’t seem all that different than when they didn’t have replay. I think it’s usefulness is in its ability to keep people talking about football. I don’t think it makes for a better officiated game. And when they start taking officiating off the field and have more eyes in the sky type officiating, well, it will be a bad day for sports. At least for me.

 

[sschind]

I probably should have driven this point harder.... but why did you need to watch it 25 times?

I was actually waiting for you to bring that up I didn't say I needed to watch it 25 times I said I did. Those 25 times were from half a dozen angles including regular speed and slow motion. I did need to look at several angles because from some angles it looked like "maybe it did touch him right there" so I looked at other angles and determined "nope, it didn't" I never said it wasn't close I just said it was conclusive because from every angle that I saw I didn't see it touch him. And if I didn't see it touch him then it wasn't a muffed punt and if it wasn't a muffed punt I overturned the call (I in that last sentence meaning the ref as he presumably saw the same thing I did ... or didn't.)

Also, part of it was me WANTING to see that it touched him. I wanted it to be Chiefs ball when it happened and after it was overturned I wanted to convince myself the replay official screwed up so I could whine and cry like every other Patriot hater in the world and say they were handed the game by the refs and the NFL And finally, to be perfectly honest, it may have only been 22 or 23 times. I didn't actually keep count.

 

[Mondio]

And finally, to be perfectly honest, it may have only been 22 or 23 times. I didn't actually keep count.

What’s the matter? Did you Run out of fingers to count?

 

[sschind]

Of course it’s corrected some, been ambiguous in others and in the opinion of many, has just been wrong in other situations game to game, week to week. I’m not sure it’s impact is all that positive.

Are they making it better? I think it’s as confusing as ever. And if you’re going to allow 2 challenges why not 4 or 10? Either the calls need to be right, or we need to live with error.

If you have 4 what about the big game when a 5th is obviously needed?

Every game, every week. Controversy. Doesn’t seem all that different than when they didn’t have replay. I think it’s usefulness is in its ability to keep people talking about football. I don’t think it makes for a better officiated game. And when they start taking officiating off the field and have more eyes in the sky type officiating, well, it will be a bad day for sports. At least for me.

In all honesty I think much of this is due to fans being pissed a call went against their team. An identical call 3 weeks ago was a horrible call because it went against your team is suddenly the correct call this week because your team got the long end of the stick. This may be what you meant and what you said I just took it to mean that sometimes people thought the decision to overturn was wrong which may happen.

I agree with you on the if 2 then why not 4 or 10. If the goal is to get the call right every time then every play needs to be challengeable all the time. That's why my proposal would put severe penalties on challenges that are lost. 10 yard delay of game penalty and loss of down or 10 second runoff of the clock. Something serious enough to make the coaches think about wasting time by challenging every play.

A very wise and great man once said.

“Gentlemen, we will chase perfection, and we will chase it relentlessly, knowing all the while we can never attain it. But along the way, we shall catch excellence.”

There may be no perfect solution to replay rules but if they keep trying to perfect it it just may become a great tool.

 

[sschind]

What’s the matter? Did you Run out of fingers to count?

I was sitting at my computer naked and when I got to 21 and couldn't go any higher.



Good luck getting that image out of your head.