HawkShack.com

Didn't see it but on the radio our announcers were incredulous that no penalty flag was thrown when Russel was pulled down by the face mask for a loss in the fourth period. Apparently it was very obvious but missed/ignored by the refs.

I did see the play late in the fourth quarter where Clowney knocked the ever living stuffings out of Schwab on a very late hit and no flag was thrown.

How can the refs miss calls like this? The officiating continues to deteriorate. It is so hit and miss anymore and I personally find that very distracting.

Terribly officiated game.

I'll say it again, but IMO they can correct a lot of this by the replay center getting into the crew chief's ear and telling them to throw/pick up a flag. The face mask on Russell and no-call roughing penalty on Clowney were obvious.

How many holds/blocks in the back uncalled on Atlanta? looked like quite a few.

RiverDog wrote:I'll say it again, but IMO they can correct a lot of this by the replay center getting into the crew chief's ear and telling them to throw/pick up a flag. The face mask on Russell and no-call roughing penalty on Clowney were obvious.

Interesting thought. I think I could make an argument that they may be doing that already with flag pickups. I see many more flags being picked up the last couple years than I ever remember before.

So the question I would have is, did the ref un-see the reason he threw the flag in the first place?

That all said, I don't think they tell them to throw a flag which is the other part of your post. I just see it on the picking it up part.

idhawkman wrote:That all said, I don't think they tell them to throw a flag which is the other part of your post. I just see it on the picking it up part.

It's hard to say if the NY ever tells them to throw a flag or not, but there are situations, ie intentional grounding and illegal forward pass to name a couple, where they'll throw a flag after the play is blown dead and after having had a conference. But I do agree that the thought process for the refs is that if they have a doubt to throw the flag and pick it up later.

There's no reason why NY can't radio down to the crew chief and at least tell them to reconsider throwing a flag. The object is getting the play called right without having to endure a seemingly endless delay, such as was the case in World Series Game 6 Tuesday night.

My question for everyone is instant replay making the refs more lazy. Oh well if I blow a call, I have IR to back me up. I think the reffing over all is going down.

obiken wrote:My question for everyone is instant replay making the refs more lazy. Oh well if I blow a call, I have IR to back me up. I think the reffing over all is going down.

I don't think replay is the problem at all, I think it ridiculous, almost unenforceable rule changes that are the main culprit with officiating now.

obiken wrote:My question for everyone is instant replay making the refs more lazy. Oh well if I blow a call, I have IR to back me up. I think the reffing over all is going down.

c_hawkbob wrote:I don't think replay is the problem at all, I think it ridiculous, almost unenforceable rule changes that are the main culprit with officiating now.

I pretty much agree with Cbob. They've screwed around with the definition of a catch so many times that I honestly don't know what the current standard is. They've made one penalty, pass interference, reviewable while other equally impactful penalties are not. The roughing the passer rules are not always driven by long term player safety, ie head and neck injuries, but rather the ratings and revenue generated by their 'stars'. It's made some of those calls truly laughable. I wouldn't blame a player like Clay Mathews if they said screw it, took off their helmet, jersey, and shoulder pads, left them in the middle of the field, and walked away from the game and retired after being flagged for one of those ridiculous roughing the passer penalties.

These competition committees look at one specific instance, such as no call PI in the NFCCG or Megatron's no touchdown touchdown, and legislate for one specific instance without fully considering the negative consequences of their rule change.

I don't think that replay has made the refs lazy, but it obviously has changed the way they call a game. And as I've said before, I don't think they're utilizing replay correctly.

obiken wrote:My question for everyone is instant replay making the refs more lazy. Oh well if I blow a call, I have IR to back me up. I think the reffing over all is going down.

c_hawkbob wrote:I don't think replay is the problem at all, I think it ridiculous, almost unenforceable rule changes that are the main culprit with officiating now.

RiverDog wrote:I pretty much agree with Cbob. They've screwed around with the definition of a catch so many times that I honestly don't know what the current standard is. They've made one penalty, pass interference, reviewable while other equally impactful penalties are not. The roughing the passer rules are not always driven by long term player safety, ie head and neck injuries, but rather the ratings and revenue generated by their 'stars'. It's made some of those calls truly laughable. I wouldn't blame a player like Clay Mathews if they said screw it, took off their helmet, jersey, and shoulder pads, left them in the middle of the field, and walked away from the game and retired after being flagged for one of those ridiculous roughing the passer penalties.

These competition committees look at one specific instance, such as no call PI in the NFCCG or Megatron's no touchdown touchdown, and legislate for one specific instance without fully considering the negative consequences of their rule change.

I don't think that replay has made the refs lazy, but it obviously has changed the way they call a game. And as I've said before, I don't think they're utilizing replay correctly.

I think it all boils down to what I've highlighted in your post River. The unprotected player hits, the peel back blocks etc all go to the bottom line (REVENUE). Whether it is an immediate impact on the bottom line or a long term (concussion law suits, etc) it all comes back to how THEY make more money. I think they are ruining the game and it will be very hard for them to get the loyalty back when they take it too far.

The safety changes has to do more with mitigating future litigation. It's a smart business move as
well as removes some of the contention in future CBA negotiations. They have to look like they are
being proactive.

Regarding replay, Florio of PFT has a suggestion that I like and that is to add another member to the
crew, but one of them is in the replay booth at the game. He or she would be part of the discussions
on field and be able to buzz down to the field if an infraction was incorrectly called. They would have
the ability to rotate the ref in the booth from game to game if desired as well.

I think that would speed up decision making, and get a better result, too.
Unfortunately this is the NFL and as alluded to above, they couldn't define the basic idea of a catch
for years, so the obvious simple solutions probably won't be considered.

NorthHawk wrote:The safety changes has to do more with mitigating future litigation. It's a smart business move as
well as removes some of the contention in future CBA negotiations. They have to look like they are
being proactive.

Regarding replay, Florio of PFT has a suggestion that I like and that is to add another member to the
crew, but one of them is in the replay booth at the game. He or she would be part of the discussions
on field and be able to buzz down to the field if an infraction was incorrectly called. They would have
the ability to rotate the ref in the booth from game to game if desired as well.

I think that would speed up decision making, and get a better result, too.
Unfortunately this is the NFL and as alluded to above, they couldn't define the basic idea of a catch
for years, so the obvious simple solutions probably won't be considered.

I agree with that proposal. The main thing is getting a set of eyes on both the real time live action as well as the subsequent replay. Technology has progressed to the point that we here in our easy chairs can see some things in much better detail than the guys on the field. So long as they can make a decision in a reasonable amount of time so as not to interrupt the flow of the game, I'm for anything that would help the refs get the call right.

By the way, welcome back, my friend! Hope you enjoyed your vacation!