Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner
 

Archived Thread

How Can Replay Work Effectively??

FatMan in Charlotte : 1/9/2018 8:40 am
We've now crossed the threshold where the average game has over 10 minutes of replay review time used.

We've seen plays impact games that aren't reviewable and plays that have a minimal impact take several minutes to review. What do you guys think are some suggestions to improve replay?

After watching the Titans game and then the Bama game last night, I'd make everything able to be reviewable including penalties. If you can miss a fumble because of a botched rule interpretation or miss an obvious facemask in the open field - those plays have an immediate and tangible impact on the outcome of a game. Much more than reviewing if there was a micro-bobble as someone is attempting to "survive the ground".

But it is a fine-line on what to recommend. I'd stick with the call on the field except to review obvious misses or impactful plays, but that is subjective. Calling a 50 yard PI where there's minimal contact has a much larger impact than a 5-yard pass where the receiver might be touching a blade of grass on the sideline, and we need a high def look and 17 angles to tell for sure (or never know for sure but have the ref make the call on his own).

I'd also recommend that all plays are reviewed remotely anytime during the game and remove the challenges from the coaches control.

Jeff Triplette's crew mis-spotted a ball by 3 yards this weekend and a challenge had to be used to reverse the incompetence. Why?? And frankly, that missed call which would've forced a punt is much more impactful than taking 7 minutes to confirm a catch that looks to everyone to be a catch.

Basically, if it isn't apparent within the first or a quick second look of a play if the call was wrong - the call on the field stands. Simplify the process. Don't stop the game for minutes at a time for inconsequential plays (and as a sidebar - simplify the damn rules to reduce interpretation)

You'd still have controversy because not all calls would be perfect, but it would be a heck of a lot less disruptful to the flow and rhythm of the game.

Thoughts?
Review time should be limited to 30 seconds  
Greg from LI : 1/9/2018 8:46 am : link
Replay should be for correcting easy, obvious mistakes. If they can't tell what happened after a quick viewing, then it shouldn't be overturned.
Do what NCAA does  
Chris684 : 1/9/2018 8:50 am : link
When there's a close play the ref stops the game for what always seems to me like a fair amount of time and much less than NFL.
I think replay is ruining the game  
I Love Clams Casino : 1/9/2018 8:53 am : link
when do we get down to the molecular level of what possession is? When the Jets played the Pats,

I believe the right call was made on the Sefarian-Jenkins non-TD. Having said that, I also think it should have been ruled a TD. Also, same team against the Giants the year before. Why wasn't Odell's catch a TD? What has replay done to enhance either one of those plays?.....nothing, it just chews up a lot of time, and always seems to favor the Patriots
Its tough to turn back on technology  
ron mexico : 1/9/2018 8:59 am : link
But howabout tbe review has to the done with real speed footage. No slo mo
We absolutely need replay...  
EricJ : 1/9/2018 9:10 am : link
the problem is that the rules have taken us down into these rabbit holes. Rules layered on top of rules which create confusion. In many instances the replays are the result of some of these ridiculous rules.

The whole thing needs to be simplified. Some examples to included but not limited to the following..
1. The "football move" nonsense needs to go away
2. The going to the ground and then maintaining possession even though the receiver already got two feet down needs to go away. IMO, you catch the ball, you got two feet down.. it is a catch. If you lose the ball after that then it is a fumble... simple.
3. QB intentional grounding in the pocket, out of the pocket. It should all be the same.

just get rid of it. I know that won't happen. But we still talk aboout  
Victor in CT : 1/9/2018 9:14 am : link
games with questionable or unresolvable calls. The Immaculate Reception, The Hail Mary.

Also, SIMPLFY THE DAMN RULE BOOK! It's worse than the tax code, typified by the "catch" rule "surviving the ground" bullshit.
First thing they need to do is stop automatic replays on every TO/TD  
Eric on Li : 1/9/2018 9:14 am : link
go back to giving coaches 2 challenges, and a bonus if they are right. Also go back to the 90 second time limit. That way they can correct the egregious mistakes and not slow down the entire game the way it is now with 3-4 challenges per quarter.

Also, they need to change the catch rules and just let the officials use their best judgment. 2 feet, control of the ball, football move. Yes that is somewhat ambiguous and may lead to more fumbles on bang-bang plays, but I believe that is worth eliminating these maddening plays where players catch the football, possess it clearly, and then have to continue "the process" or else it's not a catch.
RE: Its tough to turn back on technology  
BlueHurricane : 1/9/2018 9:16 am : link
In comment 13779730 ron mexico said:
Quote:
But howabout tbe review has to the done with real speed footage. No slo mo


This is a thought I have had several times. Looking for the slightest movemant of the ball or one blade of green grass between a foot and the sideline has ruined the game for me. Itís ludacris to expect the correct call from a human in real time and then challenge that call looking at blown up footage in HD and slow mo. Run it in real time. If you conclude you canít see a blatant error you go with the call.
RE: Do what NCAA does  
BigBlueDownTheShore : 1/9/2018 9:19 am : link
In comment 13779712 Chris684 said:
Quote:
When there's a close play the ref stops the game for what always seems to me like a fair amount of time and much less than NFL.


This, I don't have any problem with NCAA's version of replay, but the NFL's is brutal.
It's like with golf on TV  
Rocky369 : 1/9/2018 9:20 am : link
go back to no replay and use real time to make the call. But the next day it will get nit picked over and over again and result in the refs are out to get my team. It's not a football thing, but a state of technology in general. If "Bummer" is acceptable, then so be it.
Replay is needed...  
STLGiant : 1/9/2018 9:24 am : link
Nobody even Ed "Popeye Arms" Hochuli isn't infallible. All penalties should be subject to review. Love the idea of Intentional Grounding irrespective of where the QB is or isn't in the pocket, would like to see the Inadvertent Whistle go away, as well as when a RB is plowed from the side or behind by his own teammates to get a 1st down or TD. Nobody from the same team should be assisting the runner.

Face-guarding PI needs to be called, maybe as a 5-yeard penalty and a 1st down like illegal contact within 5-yards or LOS. The "pick-play" should also be called. Just as you can't do a moving screen in basketball, nor should you be able to do a moving screen in football.

With today's technology, a decision should be able to be reached within 2 minutes.

Also, I'd like to see a better use of targeting penalties. If a offensive ball-carrier ducks his head into what normally would be a legal tackle into the chest, the defensive player should not be ejected or fined.
EricJ  
PaulBlakeTSU : 1/9/2018 9:27 am : link
if that were the rule, it would lead to atrocious consequences. There would be fumbles all over the middle of the field on routine incomplete passes.



By your rule, this would be considered a catch at this very instant. If the ball popped out at any point immediately after this snapshot (whether from hitting his knees on ground, or from his elbows hitting the ground, or from landing on the ball), then by your logic it would be a fumble.

Or look at this:


The ball is secure in his hands. His second foot is going to hit the ground right before the rest of his body hits the ground. By your defintion, it would be a catch at that instant. So if the ball pops out when his body/hands hit the ground, it would be a fumble. That can't be.


Now imagine a defensive player trying to make a stop and does the same thing as the receiver int he picture. Dives for an interception has it in his hands in midair, and then a knee hits, and as he smacks the ground, the ball pops out.

By your definition, it's an interception, fumble, and a live ball and so if the offensive team recovers it, they now get a first down.

This would also put defenders in a terrible dilemma. If a WR dives after the ball, the defensive player now has to decide, "should I hit him or not?" If he falls to the ground and a single knee touches and then the ball pops out as he hits the ground, it's a fumble and the defensive player can recover it. But if the defensive player touches him at all as he falls to the ground (which a defender SHOULD do to break up the pass make a tackle), and the ball pops out, it's now a completion, dead ball because of a ground-caused fumble.

Also, now anytime a defensive player dives to try and make an interception, if the ball pops out a split second after his knee hits because he lands on the ball or just hits the gorund hard, an offensive player can just pick it up and run into the end zone?


This would also put defenders in a terrible dilemma. If a WR dives after the ball, the defensive player now has to decide, "should I hit him or not?" If he falls to the ground and a single knee touches and then the ball pops out as he hits the ground, it's a fumble and the defensive player can recover it. But if the defensive player touches him at all as he falls to the ground (which a defender SHOULD do to break up the pass make a tackle), and the ball pops out, it's now a completion, dead ball because of a ground-caused fumble.
Reviewing penalties will be a disaster  
UConn4523 : 1/9/2018 9:28 am : link
IMO.
not sure how  
PaulBlakeTSU : 1/9/2018 9:30 am : link
that paragraph got copied twice
I thought about this..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 1/9/2018 9:32 am : link
during the playoff games:

Quote:
as well as when a RB is plowed from the side or behind by his own teammates to get a 1st down or TD. Nobody from the same team should be assisting the runner


I think it was Jacksonville or Atlanta who did this and the announcer was gushing over the OL plowing the RB into the end zone.

All I could think to say is "That's illegal! where's the flag?" Right in the open field a runner was literally picked up and pushed into the end zone by his lineman.
Hire 3 more officials for each game  
RomanWH : 1/9/2018 9:32 am : link
Have them strictly in the booth watching the game live with instant access to multiple feeds and the ability to rewind and playback in slo-mo. No more going back to New York nonsense. Keep them at whatever stadium they are playing at.

As soon as whatever play happens on the field that may be questionable, they instantly play it back and issue a ruling. Majority rules and they signal that down to the head official on the field to announce the call. I mean if we all at home can look at the same replay and instantly make the call, they should be able to at the stadium.

No more taking the time to announce that you're gonna review something. Walking to the sideline where some intern holds up a screen. No more back and forth between the head official and the replay booth. Play happens. A call review occurs and is relayed immediately.
RE: Reviewing penalties will be a disaster  
Victor in CT : 1/9/2018 9:45 am : link
In comment 13779778 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
IMO.


agreed
I like the idea of being able to review penalties  
Matt M. : 1/9/2018 9:57 am : link
But, I have no idea how that would work. Could you challenge for a flag when none was thrown? Or, would only called penalties be reviewable?

I think some rules need to be simplified. I would start with the catch rule, but specifically in the end zone. Two feet down with control of the ball over the plane ends the play as a TD. Period. Nothing after that matters because the player crossed the plane in control of the ball.
I know reviewing penalties..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 1/9/2018 10:03 am : link
is difficult, but missing an obvious facemask or calling DPI when there isn't any contact or incidental contact can have as big of an impact on the game than any other play.

But the flipside is that doing this adds complexity.

Basically, I want a system that rights obvious wrongs and doesn't spend a shitload of time on looking at things that need slo-mo pixelated evidence to overturn.
I was in favor of the league office being involved  
Section331 : 1/9/2018 10:18 am : link
in the review process, but I think it's been a disaster. Return full authority to the officials on the field, but shut off the screen after 60 seconds. If they don't see enough to change the call, the call on the field stands.
You can push a running back  
xwreckingxcrewx : 1/9/2018 10:19 am : link
but you cannot pull him. In the Atlanta game, Mack bearhugged the RB but pushed/carried him into the endzone, which would be legal.
as soon as you introduce replay....  
BillKo : 1/9/2018 10:22 am : link
...you immediately are dissecting plays down to the smallest frame.

And while you think that might make things easier, it becomes equally as hard because one person can see one thing, another something else. It's STILL interpretation. And with interpretation comes controversy and debate.

I've got no problem with replay other than the fact I think a team shouldn't be "penalized" needing to use the system. If a team has numerous bad calls against them, why should they be limited to 2 or 3 replays?

The other issue is officials who aren't doing their job. When Triplett made up the "forward progress" BS on that fumble, the NFL should be allowed to call down and overrule him on such. Although that might open up another can of worms, with a higher authority over the refs running/watching the game.

Fans know who the poor refs are. It should be a privilege and earned right to ref NFL games...not a right. Guys like Triplett should be relieved of their duties..........
RE: Reviewing penalties will be a disaster  
BillKo : 1/9/2018 10:24 am : link
In comment 13779778 UConn4523 said:
Quote:
IMO.


Def agree...again, down to frames with interpretation.
RE: We absolutely need replay...  
BillKo : 1/9/2018 10:28 am : link
In comment 13779744 EricJ said:
Quote:
the problem is that the rules have taken us down into these rabbit holes. Rules layered on top of rules which create confusion. In many instances the replays are the result of some of these ridiculous rules.

The whole thing needs to be simplified. Some examples to included but not limited to the following..
1. The "football move" nonsense needs to go away
2. The going to the ground and then maintaining possession even though the receiver already got two feet down needs to go away. IMO, you catch the ball, you got two feet down.. it is a catch. If you lose the ball after that then it is a fumble... simple.
3. QB intentional grounding in the pocket, out of the pocket. It should all be the same.


Completely agree with Paul on this one...you can not eliminate those elements, otherwise the game would completely changed.

You can't aid..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 1/9/2018 10:35 am : link
a runner in any manner.

From the NFL rulebook:

Quote:
It is illegal for an offensive player to aid a runner in advancing the ball forward. An offensive player may block for the runner, but may not push them forward. No offensive player may lift a runner to his feet or pull him in any direction at any time, nor push or throw his body against a teammate to aid him in an attempt to obstruct an opponent or to recover a loose ball If an offensive player is deemed to have helped a runner advance the ball, a 10-yard penalty will be assessed.


This covers both pushing or pulling, as well as throwing their body against them
RE: I was in favor of the league office being involved  
Matt M. : 1/9/2018 10:45 am : link
In comment 13779879 Section331 said:
Quote:
in the review process, but I think it's been a disaster. Return full authority to the officials on the field, but shut off the screen after 60 seconds. If they don't see enough to change the call, the call on the field stands.
The problem I have with this is the officials on the field are reluctant to overturn calls made by their crew.
RE: as soon as you introduce replay....  
Matt M. : 1/9/2018 10:47 am : link
In comment 13779885 BillKo said:
Quote:
...you immediately are dissecting plays down to the smallest frame.

And while you think that might make things easier, it becomes equally as hard because one person can see one thing, another something else. It's STILL interpretation. And with interpretation comes controversy and debate.

I've got no problem with replay other than the fact I think a team shouldn't be "penalized" needing to use the system. If a team has numerous bad calls against them, why should they be limited to 2 or 3 replays?

The other issue is officials who aren't doing their job. When Triplett made up the "forward progress" BS on that fumble, the NFL should be allowed to call down and overrule him on such. Although that might open up another can of worms, with a higher authority over the refs running/watching the game.

Fans know who the poor refs are. It should be a privilege and earned right to ref NFL games...not a right. Guys like Triplett should be relieved of their duties..........
Wasn't it announced Triplett will be retiring?
Triplette is....  
FatMan in Charlotte : 1/9/2018 10:52 am : link
retiring, but look at his stellar last game:

- Called a sack that jarred the football loose not a fumble because the QB's forward progress had been stopped. On a play where the QB was hit and fumbled immediately. Making it about forward progress, means that replay cannot occur and the Chiefs didn't get the ball at the 50 yard line

- Mis-marked a ball 3 yards short of the first because confusion over a flag that had been thrown. A challenge had to be used to correct this blatant error

- Ruled forward progress had been stopped on a TD conversion attempt on a fumble that KC returned for what would have been a game-winning 2-point defensive conversion

Yes, he's retiring, but think about the state of the league when that clown gets a playoff game to influence.
RE: Triplette is....  
Matt M. : 1/9/2018 10:55 am : link
In comment 13779945 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
retiring, but look at his stellar last game:

- Called a sack that jarred the football loose not a fumble because the QB's forward progress had been stopped. On a play where the QB was hit and fumbled immediately. Making it about forward progress, means that replay cannot occur and the Chiefs didn't get the ball at the 50 yard line

- Mis-marked a ball 3 yards short of the first because confusion over a flag that had been thrown. A challenge had to be used to correct this blatant error

- Ruled forward progress had been stopped on a TD conversion attempt on a fumble that KC returned for what would have been a game-winning 2-point defensive conversion

Yes, he's retiring, but think about the state of the league when that clown gets a playoff game to influence.
I was just pointing out he won't need to be removed, as he is leaving on his own. It is a disgrace how bad his crew was this weekend and how bad they are regularly. How did they score a playoff assignment?
RE: Review time should be limited to 30 seconds  
TyreeHelmet : 1/9/2018 11:08 am : link
In comment 13779707 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
Replay should be for correcting easy, obvious mistakes. If they can't tell what happened after a quick viewing, then it shouldn't be overturned.



I think this is a great idea. The over analyzing of it has really hurt the flow of the game and how the viewer consumes it.
RE: RE: Review time should be limited to 30 seconds  
Victor in CT : 1/9/2018 11:16 am : link
In comment 13779970 TyreeHelmet said:
Quote:
In comment 13779707 Greg from LI said:


Quote:


Replay should be for correcting easy, obvious mistakes. If they can't tell what happened after a quick viewing, then it shouldn't be overturned.




I think this is a great idea. The over analyzing of it has really hurt the flow of the game and how the viewer consumes it.


me too. replay was never meant to be spent looking for daylight between the bal and a blade of grass
Enforce the inconclusive evidence standard  
jeff57 : 1/9/2018 11:20 am : link
And put a time limit on the review. If they can't make a determination within two minutes, it's inconclusive.
RE: Do what NCAA does  
yatqb : 1/9/2018 12:01 pm : link
In comment 13779712 Chris684 said:
Quote:
When there's a close play the ref stops the game for what always seems to me like a fair amount of time and much less than NFL.


+1. College does a much better job of this. It's a quick look and back to the action. And, like FMiC says, if it's not immediately definitive, just let it stand.
How about doing what rugby and cricket do?  
bigbluescot : 1/9/2018 1:46 pm : link
and have the process and thought behind it audible. In rugby the Television Match Official and the Ref audibly talk through the play while watching it on the screen at the stadium.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGtpvF9eTv0

In cricket there's a dedicated 3rd umpire who independently but transparently works through a process which is visible and audible to the crowd and to the folks watching back home.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSBzsiAIoAM

In the end up you might not agree with the decisions but you can listen to the logic and see the determinations they make which takes an awful lot of the ambiguity out of it. Both Cricket and Rugby work on a similar level of evidence to the NFL (i.e the onfield decision needs to be overturned by compelling evidence) but at least you can see them work through the process and aren't relying on the tv commentators who often don't have a particularly great grasp of the rules.
the automatic replays need to stop  
Dankbeerman : 1/9/2018 2:57 pm : link
The refs on the feild seem to call it where they know it gets reviewd to cover their ass. They lean on the booth and avoid making the call basically.

But then the guys in the booth pull the we arent sure so the uphold the call which may have been made out of conveinence
Totally agree w/your comments FMiC  
STLGiant : 1/9/2018 4:14 pm : link
problem is, the refs didn't call it..

Replay was to make teams accountable for breaking the rules, or reversing an otherwise incorrect application of the rule during real-time.

Something's amiss...that's for sure. I cannot see how with today's technology we can't figure the outcome in 2 minutes.
RE: Triplette is....  
bw in dc : 1/9/2018 4:47 pm : link
In comment 13779945 FatMan in Charlotte said:
Quote:
retiring, but look at his stellar last game:

- Called a sack that jarred the football loose not a fumble because the QB's forward progress had been stopped. On a play where the QB was hit and fumbled immediately. Making it about forward progress, means that replay cannot occur and the Chiefs didn't get the ball at the 50 yard line

- Mis-marked a ball 3 yards short of the first because confusion over a flag that had been thrown. A challenge had to be used to correct this blatant error

- Ruled forward progress had been stopped on a TD conversion attempt on a fumble that KC returned for what would have been a game-winning 2-point defensive conversion

Yes, he's retiring, but think about the state of the league when that clown gets a playoff game to influence.


Was it a scheduled retirement? Because his performance was sooooo bad that he should have been fired. That forward progress deal on Mariota was preposterous...
Apparently..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 1/9/2018 4:52 pm : link
he told his crew at the end of the regular season he was retiring, but then again, nothing was reported until after that catastrophe of a game.
Back to the Corner