Officiating in the NFL

Lightning · Post by **Lightning** » Sun Nov 23, 2008 7:12 pm

Has anyone else noticed, or thought that, the officiating in the NFL has gotten beyond horrible. Its getting to the point where the refs are effecting the games outcomes and calling the most asinine calls. Earlier today, during the 'Skins/Seahawks game, The Seahawks should have been called for Pass interference, but weren't and in the Broncos/Raiders game one of the Raiders DB's grabbed the QB as if to sack him, then let go as soon as the he saw that the ball had gone past his head. The QB fell to the ground after being released, the DB's hands went up to show he wasn't pushing. The DB was called for roughing the passer. Total BS if you ask me.

What do you all think? Has the officiating in the NFL gone downhill?

SkinsChic · Post by **SkinsChic** » Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:41 pm

Yes...they stink!

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Nov 24, 2008 7:42 am

Dallas always gets a free ride from the refs. Yesterday's game was no different. And there were many blown calls in the Skins game, too. I don't know why players throw their arms up in the air after a play, though, they're just begging for a flag to be thrown.

Lightning · Post by **Lightning** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 9:32 am

Yeah and the problem is that they do get the flag. I remember a few weeks ago, i think it was the Giants, someone was pushed, lightly and played it up, falling over. It was very obvious that it was being played up yet he got the flag thrown for the guy that pushed him. It just shows that some players are going to take advantage of the horrible officiating.

langleyparkjoe · Post by **langleyparkjoe** » Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:23 pm

JSPB22 wrote:Dallas always gets a free ride from the refs. Yesterday's game was no different. And there were many blown calls in the Skins game, too. I don't know why players throw their arms up in the air after a play, though, they're just begging for a flag to be thrown.

Exactly!

MDSKINSFAN · Post by **MDSKINSFAN** » Wed Nov 26, 2008 5:03 pm

I agree. Its getting to the point where it is just annoying to see these stupid calls made. The NFL should make a rule where a player can't throw his hand up after the play, its either the ref saw it or didnt. I cant stand when there is no penalty but 2-3 seconds after the play is over the player puts his hand up or says something to the ref and out comes the late flag. They also dont call penaltys on superstars. I think it was T.O. last week, who pushed off obviously and it didnt get called but I've seen Thomas, because hes a rookie, get called for this and Moss although he is a star, hes not a cowboy. Ive noticed that players like Ray Lewis dont get called for horse collars, and he does it all the time.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Thu Nov 27, 2008 7:36 am

MDSKINSFAN wrote:I agree. Its getting to the point where it is just annoying to see these stupid calls made. The NFL should make a rule where a player can't throw his hand up after the play, its either the ref saw it or didnt. I cant stand when there is no penalty but 2-3 seconds after the play is over the player puts his hand up or says something to the ref and out comes the late flag. They also dont call penaltys on superstars. I think it was T.O. last week, who pushed off obviously and it didnt get called but I've seen Thomas, because hes a rookie, get called for this and Moss although he is a star, hes not a cowboy. Ive noticed that players like Ray Lewis dont get called for horse collars, and he does it all the time.

I wasn't talking about when a player is asking for a flag, I was speaking of when a player throws his arms up in an "I didn't do anything, I didn't even touch him" gesture. That will draw the flag every time.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:36 am

After watching the officials make a huge mistake at the end of the Steelers/Ravens game - it is going to be interesting to see who is still available to officiate in the playoffs - that crew certainly will not be a part of any playoff game. :lol:

We all saw more bad use of the replay system in a few games yesterday - the NFL should really take a closer look at this after this season - it is not working very well at all and the game deserves a better system.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:46 am

SkinsJock wrote:After watching the officials make a huge mistake at the end of the Steelers/Ravens game - it is going to be interesting to see who is still available to officiate in the playoffs - that crew certainly will not be a part of any playoff game.

We all saw more bad use of the replay system in a few games yesterday - the NFL should really take a closer look at this after this season - it is not working very well at all and the game deserves a better system.

I thought it was a TD but the call on the field was no TD and I saw no evidence to overturn it. That being said it's time to take avangtage of the technology and move the game forward. How is it thatthe college game seems to do more replys with a tird of the time wasted??

The NFL need to look at how they do it, a replay official should be in the booth to reveiw blown calls on the field.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:15 pm

The Ravens were cheated out of a win... Disgusting.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:23 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:The Ravens were cheated out of a win... Disgusting.

You can't say that Chris the Steelers would at the least had a 4th down and inches. Would they have going for it??
But they could have tied it with a FG.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:06 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:The Ravens were cheated out of a win... Disgusting.

Whether or not the ball crossed the plane is irrelevant. The player had two feet down in the endzone with possession of the ball = TD.
As for the Redskins game, In no replay could you ever see Sellers' knee touching the ground; his knees were always obscured by other players at the key moments. Yet that was the call that offered visual proof to overturn the call on the field.

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:10 pm

JSPB22 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:The Ravens were cheated out of a win... Disgusting.

Whether or not the ball crossed the plane is irrelevant. The player had two feet down in the endzone with possession of the ball = TD.

False. The ball MUST cross the plain.

If you want another flashback... look back to Jay Novacek's catch that he thought was a td in Super Bowl 30 against the Steelers. He tried to con the ref into giving him a td but only his feet were in the endzone, not the ball.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:21 pm

Jake wrote:
JSPB22 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:The Ravens were cheated out of a win... Disgusting.

Whether or not the ball crossed the plane is irrelevant. The player had two feet down in the endzone with possession of the ball = TD.

False. The ball MUST cross the plain.

If you want another flashback... look back to Jay Novacek's catch that he thought was a td in Super Bowl 30 against the Steelers. He tried to con the ref into giving him a td but only his feet were in the endzone, not the ball.

You're correct of course, I had forgotten about that play. But that was the call made by the officials. Personally, I thought the ball did break the plane.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:24 pm

JSPB22 wrote:You're correct of course, I had forgotten about that play. But that was the call made by the officials. Personally, I thought the ball did break the plane.

It's debatable that it crossed the plane...

What is not debatable is that there was not conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field. Maybe it crossed, maybe it didn't. I can see where it looked like the very tip crossed but again...it was NOT conclusive.

You'd all be irate if this were the Redskins... But then...we wouldn't be in this position anyway... :lol:

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:31 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:You'd all be irate if this were the Redskins... But then...we wouldn't be in this position anyway...

We were in the very same position yesterday. The call on the field was overturned with even less visual evidence than Pittsburgh had.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:45 pm

Maybe this is why we are having so many issues with the officials - they have different interpretation of both the rules and the requirements for changing a call. :lol:

JSPB22 wrote: Whether or not the ball crossed the plane is irrelevant. The player had two feet down in the endzone with possession of the ball = TD.

You obviously know the rules very well to be so sure and so emphatic. :roll:

Personally, I thought the ball had to cross the plane of the goal line. :lol:

The ruling on the field was the ball was just short of the goal - the review did convince the official that the player had 2 feet down (that is what he stated!) BUT the big thing to everyone (excluding you apparently) was that no replay showed the ball definetly did cross the line - to all these people including Madden there was no "irrefutable" evidence to overturn the original call - IF the call had been a TD there was no sure evidence to overturn that call either. :wink:

I have to say that I think you should check this ruling out - 2 feet down with possession is great but if the ball is not across that line it is not a TD :wink:

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 1:57 pm

I will again say that the replay system needs to be looked at - it is mean't to correct mistakes and if the evidence is not conclusive to everybody then do not change the call - that seems to be fairly simple.

In Rugby games - the official simply stops play and makes a box sign and an official in a replay booth (maybe more than 1) communicates what he sees, to the referee through an earpiece - this does not take near as much time to make a determination OR interrupt the flow of the game.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:00 pm

JSPB22 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:You'd all be irate if this were the Redskins... But then...we wouldn't be in this position anyway...

We were in the very same position yesterday. The call on the field was overturned with even less visual evidence than Pittsburgh had.

Not sure which one you are referring too..but Sellers didn't score on either and the replays showed it!!

Now the call in Baltimore was much closer IMO I agree with you that the ball crossed the line...but I agree with Chris I didn't see evidence to overturn it.

Bob 0119 · Post by **Bob 0119** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:08 pm

DEHog wrote:
JSPB22 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:You'd all be irate if this were the Redskins... But then...we wouldn't be in this position anyway...

We were in the very same position yesterday. The call on the field was overturned with even less visual evidence than Pittsburgh had.

Not sure which one you are referring too..but Sellers didn't score on either and the replays showed it!!

Now the call in Baltimore was much closer IMO I agree with you that the ball crossed the line...but I agree with Chris I didn't see evidence to overturn it.

I think what he was saying is that the ruling on the field was a touchdown, but after review it was called back.

In the replay, you couldn't see any part of Sellers, so therefor you couldn't have conclusive proof that he was down by contact.

By rule, the replay is only supposed to overturn the call on the field if there is conclusive proof, which you couldn't get by not seeing Sellers amidst the mass of humanity in the pile

Bob 0119 · Post by **Bob 0119** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:11 pm

You know what would help.

Having transmitters in the ball.

You know like the tags they use for security at department stores.

You could have the recievers buried under the goal-line and when the ball touches the plane, it would trigger a scoring light.

Someone posed that idea to me earlier, and the more I think about it, the more I wonder why it wouldn't work.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:12 pm

Bob 0119 wrote:
DEHog wrote:
JSPB22 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:You'd all be irate if this were the Redskins... But then...we wouldn't be in this position anyway...

We were in the very same position yesterday. The call on the field was overturned with even less visual evidence than Pittsburgh had.

Not sure which one you are referring too..but Sellers didn't score on either and the replays showed it!!

Now the call in Baltimore was much closer IMO I agree with you that the ball crossed the line...but I agree with Chris I didn't see evidence to overturn it.

I think what he was saying is that the ruling on the field was a touchdown, but after review it was called back.

In the replay, you couldn't see any part of Sellers, so therefor you couldn't have conclusive proof that he was down by contact.

By rule, the replay is only supposed to overturn the call on the field if there is conclusive proof, which you couldn't get by not seeing Sellers amidst the mass of humanity in the pile

The replay I saw showed Sellers on the ground well short of the goal line wasn't even close IMO

I'll add I hate when the refs don't make an intial call then come running in from the sidelines and see the ball in the end zone and go TD!!!
That's what happened on that play IMO

Bob 0119 · Post by **Bob 0119** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:15 pm

DEHog wrote:
Bob 0119 wrote:
DEHog wrote:
JSPB22 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:You'd all be irate if this were the Redskins... But then...we wouldn't be in this position anyway...

We were in the very same position yesterday. The call on the field was overturned with even less visual evidence than Pittsburgh had.

Not sure which one you are referring too..but Sellers didn't score on either and the replays showed it!!

Now the call in Baltimore was much closer IMO I agree with you that the ball crossed the line...but I agree with Chris I didn't see evidence to overturn it.

I think what he was saying is that the ruling on the field was a touchdown, but after review it was called back.

In the replay, you couldn't see any part of Sellers, so therefor you couldn't have conclusive proof that he was down by contact.

By rule, the replay is only supposed to overturn the call on the field if there is conclusive proof, which you couldn't get by not seeing Sellers amidst the mass of humanity in the pile

The replay I saw showed Sellers on the ground well short of the goal line wasn't even close IMO

I'll add I hate when the refs don't make an intial call then come running in from the sidelines and see the ball in the end zone and go TD!!!
That's what happened on that play IMO

Oh, I don't think he made it in either, but my point was about the ruling on the field.

I'll never forgive the refs for giving Mike Alstott that touchdown when only his helmet broke the plane. There ruling was that there wasn't enough "conclusive" evidence to show that he was down, and they couldn't see where the ball was on the replay.

Well, we could see where the ball wasn't, and it wasn't past his head.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:17 pm

AND all they need to do is say "we could not see any evidence to change the call" - that is the maddening thing - they often change a call when they could not really tell if it was the right or wrong call :shock:

I think we have all seen way too many bad decisions as a result of a system that was mean't to aid in getting a bad call changed.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:26 pm

Bob 0119 wrote:
DEHog wrote:
Bob 0119 wrote:
DEHog wrote:
JSPB22 wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:You'd all be irate if this were the Redskins... But then...we wouldn't be in this position anyway...

We were in the very same position yesterday. The call on the field was overturned with even less visual evidence than Pittsburgh had.

Not sure which one you are referring too..but Sellers didn't score on either and the replays showed it!!

Now the call in Baltimore was much closer IMO I agree with you that the ball crossed the line...but I agree with Chris I didn't see evidence to overturn it.

I think what he was saying is that the ruling on the field was a touchdown, but after review it was called back.

In the replay, you couldn't see any part of Sellers, so therefor you couldn't have conclusive proof that he was down by contact.

By rule, the replay is only supposed to overturn the call on the field if there is conclusive proof, which you couldn't get by not seeing Sellers amidst the mass of humanity in the pile

The replay I saw showed Sellers on the ground well short of the goal line wasn't even close IMO

I'll add I hate when the refs don't make an intial call then come running in from the sidelines and see the ball in the end zone and go TD!!!
That's what happened on that play IMO

Oh, I don't think he made it in either, but my point was about the ruling on the field.

I'll never forgive the refs for giving Mike Alstott that touchdown when only his helmet broke the plane. There ruling was that there wasn't enough "conclusive" evidence to show that he was down, and they couldn't see where the ball was on the replay.

Well, we could see where the ball wasn't, and it wasn't past his head.

You didn't think the replay clearly showed Sellers didn't get it??
I'm talking about the first one...
Here's a question on the second one when you challege do the refs look at everything...Zorn challage the fumble but he could have also chanllege that Seller scored??