No announcement yet.

Replay and other random thoughts

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Replay and other random thoughts

    I am convinced more than ever that replay is ruining football. It is absolutely torturous to watch what seems like every sideline catch and scoring play reviewed. It disrupts the flow of the game. It allows you to view a game, get excited over a score or a play, then rips the rug out from underneath you while making you wait for the outcome. It's no better in baseball. Though I understand it's not going away, I absolutely hate it.

    Tennis and basketball have it right. The calls are used very sparingly and result in an immediate decision. Little to no waiting. No viewing from 5 different angles. No indecision on something we can clearly see from our own living rooms.

    And don't tell me that "getting it right is the most important thing". Sometimes REPLAY doesn't even result in a right decision!! You mean to tell me Garcon's sideline catch (a call which was overturned and ruled a catch) was legit? His momentum was clearly taking him a foot out of bounds in the act of the catch. You can't convince me otherwise.The human element is a part of sports. Players make mistakes. Coaches make mistakes. Officials make mistakes. Live with it. Be more competent. Add an official if need be. You mean to tell me in all the games played in the years before replay that there were THAT MANY plays that weren't called correctly?? I don't buy it.

    Also stuck in my craw was the roughing the passer call vs. Aaron Donald. This is exhibit "A" of what's ruining the game. Guy hits the QB in the act of throwing, executes a perfect form tackle, doesn't lead with the head and still gets flagged 15 yards simply because Hoyer took a hard hit. Can't tell you how infuriated I was watching that. Concern for safety (hypocritical given the NFL's long time denial of concussion effects and allowing Thursday night football) has completely neutered good defensive play.

    It's getting tougher and tougher to enjoy sports. And replay shows that change isn't always for the better.

  • #2
    Disagree with you on the replay issue. Is the system perfect? No, but it does correct several errors. For example, though I hate to admit it the Garcon play WAS a catch. Both feet were in bounds when he secured the ball. As far as pulling the rug from underneath your excitement, what about the times when a player was incorrectly ruled short of the endzone and then the call was reversed? Or even when the ball is spotted incorrectly after a 3rd and short, and is reversed to keep a drive alive? Speaking for myself, in those moments it turns that moment of anger into a moment of elation! Shoot, I wish they could have reviewed the Donald play because that would have saved 15 yards and would have given them a chance to get the call right.
    Last edited by svh01; -09-22-2017, 05:46 AM.


    • #3
      I have to disagree with both. Donald picked his feet up and drove the QB into the ground. It was a close call, and it wasn't overtly obvious to be a pile driver, but it was technically a roughing the passer. Also, you had to look really close to see the slightest of debris, but both feet were down on that Garcon catch.

      What upsets me is that the officials didn't do the same degree of ticki-tackness to protect Goff. On the offside at about the two minute mark of the 3rd, a player goes after Goff's knees well after he got rid off the ball. Where the heck was roughing the passer there? That was more obvious than AD's body slam. The on-sides-kick was a delay of game and should have been called back. The PI that was called at half way through the third was pretty ticki-tack, yet there was no PI called when Woods was prevented from coming back to the ball a few minutes later.

      I think Replay is good and needs to stay. As far as everyone making mistakes, I don't think that is a good excuse. When the players get caught "making mistakes", there's a penalty for it to make things "even" in the game. When the refs make mistakes, there appears to be no penalty for it, except for the team that took it in the shorts from their "mistakes". I think a coach should be able to replay a refs decision if the decision has a major impact on the outcome of the game.



      • #4
        I'll agree replays can be frustrating and disruptive, but I remember so many huge plays in the 70's and 80's where there was no replay, and games were affected in a big way because of horrible, horrible calls. THAT was really frustrating. I'll gladly put up with the hassles of replay, in order to try and get it right.

        For the record, I thought the Garçon catch was legit, and the Donald hit was also legit, unless there is an NFL rule that doesn't allow defensive players to land on the player their tackling. I'll bet Donalds rep had something to do with being flagged.


        Related Topics


        • general counsel
          A refs version of what happened on the Ramsey play....
          by general counsel
          I have a friend who is a professional football referee. Most of his work is in a major college conference and he has done countless bowl games including national championships. I saw him a couple of nights ago and chatted with him about the game. Here is his very simple take on what happened on the non-call on the ramsey facemask.

          The refs who was responsible for the call was out of position and didnt see the facemask. No more complicated than that. My friend identified it immediately when he saw the play the first time and when he watched the replay, it was completely obvious to him what happened because he saw where the official was positioned (compared to where he was supposed to be positioned).

          I said to my friend that was what i assumed the ref would say, that he can't call what he didn't see but that during the post game, the explanation was not that he didnt see it, but rather that he saw it but didnt think the facemask impacted the play, which in my view was among the most idiotic things i have ever heard a ref say.

          What my friend explained to me was that it was the crew chief that did the talking in the post game and he was simply covering up for the guy who missed the call for a number of reasons. My friend was 100% clear with me that the explanation was literally impossible. You can not ignore a facemask especially when its an obvious grab of the facemask, regardless of whether the refs impact is that it didnt impact the play and regardless of whether its the super bowl. Among other things, its a player safety issue. Its no different than a player who leads with his head and makes helmet to helmet contact. Its a penalty 100% of the time that the refs see it. If they miss it they miss it, but its impossible not to call it if you see it. Thus, the only conclusion is that the ref didnt see ramsey get grabbed by the facemask and the ONLY way that could have happened per my friend is the ref being out of position because based on where the refs are trained to be positioned, its impossible for a properly positioned official to not see that kind of facemask on that spot on the field.

          Fortunately, we won the game. I dont like the crap ramsey is taking from people because i dont think its fair. He had a huge pass breakup at the goal line that held them to a field goal on the first drive. Another big third down pass breakup that got our defense off the field. Sure, he made a terrible play trying to jump the route at the end. He got beat by a quarter of a step by chase on the long pass in the first quarter, it was a sensational catch. Not Ramsey's best game, but hardly a "bad" game either as many are saying in the football world.

          Ramming speed to all

          general counsel
          -02-24-2022, 05:20 PM
        • RamWraith
          What about the Refs? -- Gap?
          by RamWraith
          Was it just me or did the Refs look like they were in preseason form Friday night? There was really marginal calls.

          --Holts catch
          --The QB hit by Lewis
          --A couple of phantom pass interferences that went against the Skins
          --Hands to the face
          -08-30-2004, 09:31 AM
        • jdpbmo
          reviewing calls from the booth
          by jdpbmo
          Okay, enough is enough. I can usually sit by and hold my piece, but I am so tired of this idiotic process the NFL uses to review calls. It isn't that I'm against the reviewing of questionable calls. I am 100 % for it. I want the call to be right. A noncall or wrong call shouldn't cost a team the game. It all came to a head in the Detroit/GB game when they didn't bother reviewing the touchdown late in the game. How crazy was that? If I was in charge of that part of the game, there would be some people looking for work tomorrow. My main problem with the process is that you are asking officials that make a call, or maybe don't make a call, to reverse their own decision. You are asking them to second-guess themselves or perhaps members of their crew. Now we can sit there and say "well, so what if they have to reverse a call to get it right". Hey, news flash, these officials have egos. They don't want to come out and say "sorry everyone, we just blew that last call". So they look at the replay to satisfy us, then come back and say "indisputable evidence to reverse the call on the field". That's a load of crap. There have been plenty of calls that they show that need to be reversed, but until you get a seperate crew of 2 or 3 people in the booth who do nothing but review a call when it's challenged, you will continue to see this craziness happen. Why wouldn't you have people not associated with the officiating crew reveiwing these calls? If you did, you would find a number of calls overturned when it's obvious they are wrong. You would find calls that are legitimate standing as good calls. People would be satisfied for the most part. Except for the Z E B R A S. They will find they are making a call or two incorrectly in important situations. But you know what else you are doing? You are taking some responsibility from them. What does everyone think? jd
          -11-25-2001, 07:37 PM
        • Barry Waller
          The Immaculate Reception and Bert Emmanuel Play Complaints Don't Hold Water
          by Barry Waller
          Watching this show about the most unbelievable play in NFL history, that started t alk of replay and changed the rule book. Of course every RAider and Raider fan is screaming bloody murder to t his day, about what they say are t hree no calls on that play.

          They claim the NFL wanted them to lose and they got cheated, but as I look at this play, after so many years, so many times, some t hings sem clear.

          1. The Steelers did nothing intentionally deceptive or illegal, on that 4th and 10 play, they just got very very lucky, as lucky as anyone ever, especially since Franco Haris HAD to score on that play or time runs out. Now the Raiders? They actually DID intentionally cheat to win a game, with the fumbleroosky play, They Changed the rule on that deal too so it CAN'T happen again, as they did the rule on a touched ball, so one like the Immaculate reception would ALWAYS be good.

          2. Conspriracy theory One, that Frenchy Fuqua touched the ball.
          Fact: The film is unclear who touche the ball, and the way it went backwards t hat far, shows that the impetus was caused by Jack Tatum trying to make a knockout hit, rather t han just stop the reception, or even just tackle Fuqua after t he catch.
          If he does that, game over time runs out.

          Fact, even if Fuqua and Tatum both touched the ball, under old rule, still good, play continues. If called good by Referee with instant replay, video is clearly incomclusive. AND now under new rule, doesn't matter who touched the ball.

          3. Villapiano wasn't clipped. The video does clearly show a hit from the side, at most a very borderline foul, one that would be roundly criticized if it were to decide a game. You must have a clear cut clip to make tht call.

          Also with the ball going every which way, the greatest officials in the world would have a hard time having just the right view of that block, especially the umpire, who would have been the guy making that call from the middle of the field.

          It was no more a clip that Az Hakim on the Ike Bruce TD play in the SB win.

          And also, there is no assurance that the 6-2 220lb Villipiano, no doubt exhausted, so much that a weak block knocked him sideways, would have tackled the 6-2 230lb Harris, no doubt a much fresher player at that point.

          It would have taken a Mike Jones effort.

          4. "Harris trapped the ball" Again a very tough call for officials on such a play, and no evidence exists that it was a trap, or at least t hat the tip of t he ball touched t he ground. Once again that rule has been changed, the Bert Emmanual rule they call it. If ruled a catch, still a catch with replay, unless todays replays would show at least one clearer view.

          Again, the refs have a split second to be looking in the right direction, and once the ball flies backwards, I doubt if anyone but Harris even sees it....
          -03-23-2013, 08:35 AM
        • RamDez
          Samson Ebukam
          by RamDez
          Throwing some love to this guy, superb game and doing what he should be doing by feeding off Donald and the rest of the D line.


          That INT was all on him, the way he not only blocked the pass attempt then had the quicks to snag and int the ball, then take off up the field and head for the end zone was sublime. Then to have the drive to not carry one but two players (Mahome being one of them) into the end zone from 10 yards out showed his athletic ability.

          I doff my cap to you, sir.
          -11-21-2018, 04:11 AM