My God. For those who missed it, there were six-SIX-straight plays in the Dallas NYJ game where the flags came out. The officiating in this league continues to be an absolute joke. And why even have that PI challenge call? It's never overturned. Come on NFL. Get your F'ing act together.
#rantover
Take a side and let me know. Happy to discuss further...
An onerous rule book. Too much subjectivity. Inconsistent application of the rules from crew to crew.
And that also includes certain players getting calls other players don't. We don't know if that is bias or incompetence - likely a combination of both. But when a player draws 6 PF calls without any of them being egregious it will always strike up debate.
But if you say it shouldn't be debated, I guess we should all just stop.
The arbiter of behavior has spoken....
Like with most things, it's both. The call on the Jets player defending Witten on that last drive was hilariously bad.
An onerous rule book. Too much subjectivity. Inconsistent application of the rules from crew to crew.
And that also includes certain players getting calls other players don't. We don't know if that is bias or incompetence - likely a combination of both. But when a player draws 6 PF calls without any of them being egregious it will always strike up debate.
But if you say it shouldn't be debated, I guess we should all just stop.
The arbiter of behavior has spoken....
The worst is the that Dallas didn't even bother challenging the ridiculous opi that took a td off the board.
An onerous rule book. Too much subjectivity. Inconsistent application of the rules from crew to crew.
And that also includes certain players getting calls other players don't. We don't know if that is bias or incompetence - likely a combination of both. But when a player draws 6 PF calls without any of them being egregious it will always strike up debate.
But if you say it shouldn't be debated, I guess we should all just stop.
The arbiter of behavior has spoken....
Unfortunately you don't have wit to be funny.
Nevertheless, debate the bad officiating all you want. My point is very simple that your debate goes too far when you state that officiating is trying to favor certain teams/players purposefully.
And that is what posts above are saying, even if you didn't really mean it...
Quote:
The point is that officiating is bad. For a number of reasons.
An onerous rule book. Too much subjectivity. Inconsistent application of the rules from crew to crew.
And that also includes certain players getting calls other players don't. We don't know if that is bias or incompetence - likely a combination of both. But when a player draws 6 PF calls without any of them being egregious it will always strike up debate.
But if you say it shouldn't be debated, I guess we should all just stop.
The arbiter of behavior has spoken....
The worst is the that Dallas didn't even bother challenging the ridiculous opi that took a td off the board.
Garrett may only be an average coach, but he is smart and can read the writing on the wall - PIs will not be overturned. Figured it would not be reversed and did not want to burn a TO.
Garrett may only be an average coach, but he is smart and can read the writing on the wall - PIs will not be overturned. Figured it would not be reversed and did not want to burn a TO.
Bingo. Add in further that the play they sent in was instructed to do something similiar (interfere but w/o getting caught), Garret passed on the challenge...
But I guess since Dallas gets all the calls anyway he should have expected some love with a challenge? No wait...Dak isn't getting roughing the passer calls in his favor since Cam Newton is out. Wait again, there were 6 calls on their final touchdown drive. Whoops, 2 of them were against the Jets.
This is all so confusing...are the crews trying to help or hurt the Cowboys win?
they need to start playing on grassy knolls instead of grass...
Simplify the rulebook, hold the officials more accountable and start using the real-time tools available in 2019.
It's like they've decided that unless it's a repeat of the Saints' situation, don't even bother.
I'm guessing they may do away with the PI challenge in the offseason.
Just one of many little reasons why I hate him.
Add the ridiculous call against Matthews in the Rams game and a terrible call on the Steelers and the Seahawks could easily have lost those games.
The officiating isn't just terrible, it is having a tangible impact on the season.
The crazy thing is if Seattle ever lucked out with home field advantage whether for the division or the conference, it's a huge deal, unlike say Kansas City which despite their comparable SPL levels ain't the same type of HFA.
Records count, especially for certain teams. Minnesota is another tough place to play.
- The Calvin Johnson play
- The pass interference that was flagged and then picked up against the Cowboys that forced a punt instead of a first down in FG range in the playoff game
- The Golden Tate non-TD review where a 10 second runoff ended the game
- Last night's debacle where the ref got not one, but two calls wrong, directly allowing the Packers to win
I'll just remind the board since you'll hear many say the opposite - the refs do impact games and sometimes directly affect the outcome.
But I guess since Dallas gets all the calls anyway he should have expected some love with a challenge? No wait...Dak isn't getting roughing the passer calls in his favor since Cam Newton is out. Wait again, there were 6 calls on their final touchdown drive. Whoops, 2 of them were against the Jets.
The Dallas calls gave them 1st downs vs the Jets calls that merely backed the Cowboys up, until, yep holding/contact 1st down....It was bad officiating but very suspect that every time the Jets made a play, oops penalty to negate the play.
Now, I think all of these examples were catches in the eyes of common sense, but by the letter of the ridiculous rules that year, those were very likely not catches.
The Giants mostly stink and maybe that's an excuse but it's hard to stay invested. Last night was a joke. Has to be.
Quote:
But I guess since Dallas gets all the calls anyway he should have expected some love with a challenge? No wait...Dak isn't getting roughing the passer calls in his favor since Cam Newton is out. Wait again, there were 6 calls on their final touchdown drive. Whoops, 2 of them were against the Jets.
The Dallas calls gave them 1st downs vs the Jets calls that merely backed the Cowboys up, until, yep holding/contact 1st down....It was bad officiating but very suspect that every time the Jets made a play, oops penalty to negate the play.
Merely backed them up? What exactly did you want the refs to enforce...kill their first born child?
Again, if you think the refs purposely favored the Cowboys someway I don't know how you compute that they flagged them 9 times versus the Jets 8, and took away a touchdown scored by Witten.
Will let others speak for themselves but this is pretty much indisputable. Different though from outcries that the refs impact games with a predetermined cause to purposely and consistently favor a certain team/player.
Quote:
In comment 14628099 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
But I guess since Dallas gets all the calls anyway he should have expected some love with a challenge? No wait...Dak isn't getting roughing the passer calls in his favor since Cam Newton is out. Wait again, there were 6 calls on their final touchdown drive. Whoops, 2 of them were against the Jets.
The Dallas calls gave them 1st downs vs the Jets calls that merely backed the Cowboys up, until, yep holding/contact 1st down....It was bad officiating but very suspect that every time the Jets made a play, oops penalty to negate the play.
Merely backed them up? What exactly did you want the refs to enforce...kill their first born child?
Again, if you think the refs purposely favored the Cowboys someway I don't know how you compute that they flagged them 9 times versus the Jets 8, and took away a touchdown scored by Witten.
I'm really not arguing preferential treatment exclusively but more bad officiating with a jaundiced eye.
What part of a 10 yard penalty vs giving a 1st down don't you get? The Cowboys kept getting 1st downs on questionable holding/illegal contact or very questionable PIs.
And again, it is not how many penalties, it is when they were called. Yeah the Jets got 8, but 4 on the last drive. The Cowboys got 2 on the last drive, almost immediately followed by a call that gave them a 1st down.
The biggest factor, to me, is that the rules used to be simpler and easier to apply. They keep monkeying with the rules and making them more complex, and that's the driving factor behind a lot of terrible calls and delays.
Lack of consistency is one of the biggest gripes of the current officiating. So is it your view that consistency should be sacrificed based on more important timing within the game?
IMO, the league has responded to public outcry by counseling the refs on what to call and when. This is what causes trouble, and is the reason I left the NBA as a fan years ago. League stopped calling the double-dribble on what was once called "palming" because it was so common and an integral part of certain superstars' games. Next thing you know, they aren't calling charging as often. Next thing you know, they aren't calling traveling, giving some superstars but only in some situations the opportunity to take 1-2 extra steps making contact before dunking because the fans like it. Meanwhile, they still occasionally call charging or traveling, mostly on bench players or early in games. Could end up being the reason why I end up leaving the NFL if this trend continues.
The rules are the rules. The league should allow the refs to call rules as they are written. If they don't like the outcomes, rewrite the rules. The instructions given to ignore certain violations leads to calling the rules situationally.
Think about just on the defensive side of the ball where you can get called for hands to the face, illegal contact, defensive holding or PI on passing plays and when they are making some of the call based on minimal or no contact - it's easy to see why there is a rise.
Bad calls have always existed, but as players get stronger and faster, refs get older and slower, and we have high-def to show us all of the inaccuracies, the NFL should be using technology when possible - by adopting the NCAA system. They should also pare back the rule book too.
Lack of consistency is one of the biggest gripes of the current officiating. So is it your view that consistency should be sacrificed based on more important timing within the game?
You think it is difficult to make a questionable call go the way you want? There is holding on every play, why isn't called every play? There is PI or illegal contact every play, why isn't it called every play? An unscrupulous official or officials could easily dictate the calls whenever he needed to. I don't think they do this consciously at all. This is hypothetical because I do not think they make calls to help one time vs another.
However, and I have brought this up before, Bill Parcells called out the league after the Giants OT Doug Van Horn(IIRC) kept getting holding calls game after game. Van Horn had a rep for holding earlier in his career and seemed to get called on plays that impacted drives an inordinate number of times. He was not doing anything different than any other player - just singled out for an earlier rep. Parcells was fined, but amazingly enough the calls against VanHorn dropped. It was pretty stark.
How many games have you seen that clutching a grabbing is let go until the end of the game?
I have no idea what your 2nd paragraph is saying, nor do I care.
My point (that you didn't care to follow) is you seem to suggest that the flags came out in unusual timing in the Jets - Cowboys game. Suggesting that the refs were absolutely inconsistent based on the flurry of activity at the end, and it somehow hurt the Jets more. Are you sure the Jets didn't get away with a whole lot earlier and it helped them, so now the refs were trying to "even things out"?
Referees.. - ( New Window )
My point (that you didn't care to follow) is you seem to suggest that the flags came out in unusual timing in the Jets - Cowboys game. Suggesting that the refs were absolutely inconsistent based on the flurry of activity at the end, and it somehow hurt the Jets more. Are you sure the Jets didn't get away with a whole lot earlier and it helped them, so now the refs were trying to "even things out"?
You are arguing to argue. It comes down to that officials are inconsistent. It is not a lazy argument that there is a penalty on every play. There are. But why choose to call it after a big play...etc. Why start calling what you haven't called all game on the last drive of the game? Not so hard to understand.
If you didn't think it was unusual that the Cowboys kept getting their drive extended on what were questionable calls, then there is no point in continuing and I won't after this. Did the refs do it on purpose, IDK. Did the Jets get away with it earlier and not called, IDK. I doubt both. But if they did not call a penalty earlier in the game, then they cannot start calling it at the end.
If you didn't think it was unusual that the Cowboys kept getting their drive extended on what were questionable calls, then there is no point in continuing and I won't after this. Did the refs do it on purpose, IDK.
this is all that was needed...
If you didn't think it was unusual that the Cowboys kept getting their drive extended on what were questionable calls, then there is no point in continuing and I won't after this. Did the refs do it on purpose, IDK. Did the Jets get away with it earlier and not called, IDK. I doubt both. But if they did not call a penalty earlier in the game, then they cannot start calling it at the end.
I'm not sure the penalties "extended" that drive. And here's what I mean by that.
If the calls came on third or forth down than I would agree the drives got extended. Those are the more crucial downs, right?
But I believe - and keep my honest - that nearly every flag on that hideous last drive was on first down, or maybe one on second.
So Dallas would have had 2 or 3 more cracks to get another first down/chance to score. And there was considerable time left on the clock.
Does that make sense?
Quote:
If you didn't think it was unusual that the Cowboys kept getting their drive extended on what were questionable calls, then there is no point in continuing and I won't after this. Did the refs do it on purpose, IDK. Did the Jets get away with it earlier and not called, IDK. I doubt both. But if they did not call a penalty earlier in the game, then they cannot start calling it at the end.
I'm not sure the penalties "extended" that drive. And here's what I mean by that.
If the calls came on third or forth down than I would agree the drives got extended. Those are the more crucial downs, right?
But I believe - and keep my honest - that nearly every flag on that hideous last drive was on first down, or maybe one on second.
So Dallas would have had 2 or 3 more cracks to get another first down/chance to score. And there was considerable time left on the clock.
Does that make sense?
Of course it does and I don't know what down they were called. So on that aspect you might be correct. But it does not matter though, it still gave them at least one extra down and instead of a 1st and 20(iirc on a couple of penalties), now it is a 1st and 10, 5 yards closer. So it did extend the drive or at least got them closer to where they were before the call. And wasn't one of the Jets penalties on a 4th down that was not converted?? I'm just guessing on that one, 3rd or 4th down.
Walker and Allison were simultaneously diving to make a play on the ball and just by the nature of the moment, Walker's helmet hit Allison's. And Allison took a severe head shot.
The call has been criticized, and I believe rightfully so, because it was really incidental contact. In fact, challenge anyone to say Walker looked to be intentionally trying to hit Allison.
But here is what I found interesting. After the game, referee Clete Blackman was asked about the play and said this:
Blakeman said even if Walker had intercepted the pass, he still would have been flagged.
Basically a defensive player is presumed guilty on ANY helmet contact where the offensive player takes the hit. Does anyone else find that preposterous???
Walker and Allison were simultaneously diving to make a play on the ball and just by the nature of the moment, Walker's helmet hit Allison's. And Allison took a severe head shot.
The call has been criticized, and I believe rightfully so, because it was really incidental contact. In fact, challenge anyone to say Walker looked to be intentionally trying to hit Allison.
But here is what I found interesting. After the game, referee Clete Blackman was asked about the play and said this:
Quote:
"That's a good question, but the reality is, it is strict liability for a defensive player," Blakeman said. "In this case, he may be going for the ball and not intending to hit the helmet, but when there's helmet contact, it is a foul in that situation."
Blakeman said even if Walker had intercepted the pass, he still would have been flagged.
Basically a defensive player is presumed guilty on ANY helmet contact where the offensive player takes the hit. Does anyone else find that preposterous???
As someone posted in another thread, wasn't Landon Collins flagged for something similar last year?
And while I agree it sounds ridiculous at face value, do you really want officials trying to judge "intent"?
Walker and Allison were simultaneously diving to make a play on the ball and just by the nature of the moment, Walker's helmet hit Allison's. And Allison took a severe head shot.
The call has been criticized, and I believe rightfully so, because it was really incidental contact. In fact, challenge anyone to say Walker looked to be intentionally trying to hit Allison.
But here is what I found interesting. After the game, referee Clete Blackman was asked about the play and said this:
Quote:
"That's a good question, but the reality is, it is strict liability for a defensive player," Blakeman said. "In this case, he may be going for the ball and not intending to hit the helmet, but when there's helmet contact, it is a foul in that situation."
Blakeman said even if Walker had intercepted the pass, he still would have been flagged.
Basically a defensive player is presumed guilty on ANY helmet contact where the offensive player takes the hit. Does anyone else find that preposterous???
Like I said, they did it to Collins (IIRC) two years ago. But again it goes back to another thing I said - once the ball is in the air, both offense and defense have equal right to it - that is the rule. For a referee to say that the safety did not have a right to the ball is completely false and he should be called on the carpet. The safety had as much right to dive at that ball as did the WR.
You wonder why there is a problem with officiating - here is a perfect example.
As someone posted in another thread, wasn't Landon Collins flagged for something similar last year?
And while I agree it sounds ridiculous at face value, do you really want officials trying to judge "intent"?
Yes, I do. Because there are times when it's easy to make the call. And last night was a perfect example. Walker clearly has his arms and hands in a position to make a catch. He can't be trying to catch a ball and make an intentional helmet to helmet hit at the same time. So a quick review of that play by any rationally thinking human being would result in changing the call.
They called a hit on a defenseless receiver while all he was doing was diving to make a play.
Absolute bullshit.
Refereeing football looks like a really, really hard job. It's only made more difficult when refs have replay looking over their shoulder. I think a big part of the problem is that fans and media overreact to missed calls, which then results in rules changes and tweaks to how the game is officiated.
We all need to accept that the refs aren't going to get it right all of the time; that's the first step in giving them more leeway to interpret a play in real time AND allow them the power to do their jobs better.
The other alternative, in my view, is to go to a fully automated system with no human officials actually on the field making calls. Is the technology there yet?
Link - ( New Window )
It's been evident for 15 years.
Wouldn't mind if the Conspiracy Theorists on this thread gave me their views on which teams (or players) will undoubtedly get favoritism from the refs on Sunday.
I will check in from time to time today for that foresight...