|
Post by WarrenPeace on Mar 28, 2019 3:27:32 GMT
offensive and defensive Hail Marys should be fun. I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, I want penalty calls to be reviewed. Not every one but there have been too many that were bogus that went unchecked. On the other, 3 hrs is long enough for a game that has only about 20 min. of action. As long as they cut out commercials and keep it to 3hrs, I can be good with this.
|
|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Mar 28, 2019 3:29:26 GMT
Clubs voted to expand replay review to cover offensive and defensive pass interference. The change will be evaluated after one year. Reviews to be initiated by coaches’ challenge unless in the last 2 mins of the half or game (initiated in NY) All offensive and defensive pass interference calls, as well as non-calls, now be challenged, per league source. Whether the foul is called on the field or not, officials will be able to correct clear errors on impactful plays. This rule change also expands automatic replay reviews to include scoring plays and turnovers negated by a foul, and any Try attempt (extra point or two-point conversion). So when the refs throw a bogus flag for a phantom PI (like they often do against teams that are playing against the Pats), the coach can challenge it and get the flag taken back? You and I root for different teams but we are on the same team when it comes to the fucking Cheatriots and anything against those cheating fuckers.
|
|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Mar 28, 2019 3:34:28 GMT
I’m glad they did something, but I’m not sure it’s the right thing. I think ALL pass interference that are called on the field should be an automatic review, just like scoring plays are, If it’s obvious it’s a quick review and really doesn’t add much time to the game. I guess the non calls, this is the only way to handle it i also think this needs to be expanded to roughing the passer calls All that being said, I’m not worried about the length of a game, I’ve never turned off a game because it was taking to long. I’ve turned plenty off for being boring or lopsided though I agree to a certain extent. As long as this one doesn't take all day like the coaches challenge does. Coach throws flag. Cut to commercial. Show replay about 30 times from 100 different angles. Network brings in their expert ex referee to talk about it for us to know what to expect the call to end up being. Still reviewing. More replays. Another commercial. 10 days later we get the call. I thank the genius who came up with the DVR so I don't have to sit through all that bullshit and all those fucking ads.
|
|
|
Post by WarrenPeace on Mar 28, 2019 3:36:04 GMT
This is awful. What's next, reviewing holding calls? They just added 10 minutes to an already bloated broadcast of every game (giving us approximately 157 more Bud Light and Ford commercials per Sunday) which was surely the real impetus behind this. Get a DVR. Those things are a godsend! I fucking hate commercials with a passion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2019 3:40:17 GMT
I thought I read that roughing the passer was part of this too. Am I wrong? Also I don't see an issue with the length of games but I'm aware that not the rest of people feel the same. People live in different time zones and may not want games finishing past midnight on a Monday or Sunday night when they have to work in the morning. That is a good point. But that would not be the case for Sunday day games. Or the playoffs. The Saints/Rams "no call" happened in the post season. I'm just saying I think that is people's argument on not wanting games to be longer.
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Mar 28, 2019 7:13:48 GMT
There is no reason to grind the game to a halt for 3 minutes to look at a call. If you have to look at 3 minutes of replays it's pretty obvious to me that the call was not objectively bad. Patriots vs Chiefs might have been a really entertaining if they hadn't have repeatedly stopped the game for 3-5 minutes multiple times on 50/50 calls with inconclusive vision.
I was watching an AFL game last Friday where they stopped play for 2:48 and looked at 45 replays. Do you know what the arsehole video ref's decision was aftrr 168 seconds and 50 replays? Ref's call. You just wasted 3 fucking minutes and didn't even make your own call? Thsnks a lot dipshit.
Rant over.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Mar 28, 2019 7:18:41 GMT
There is no reason to grind the game to a halt for 3 minutes to look at a call. If you have to look at 3 minutes of replays it's pretty obvious to me that the call was not objectively bad. Patriots vs Chiefs might have been a really entertaining if they hadn't have repeatedly stopped the game for 3-5 minutes multiple times on 50/50 calls with inconclusive vision. I was watching an AFL game last Friday where they stopped play for 2:48 and looked at 45 replays. Do you know what the arsehole video ref's decision was aftrr 168 seconds and 50 replays? Ref's call. You just wasted 3 fucking minutes and didn't even make your own call? Thsnks a lot dipshit. Rant over. There is reason --- to get the call right.
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Mar 28, 2019 7:48:19 GMT
The idea of having a video replay is to overturn egregious errors, not waste 3+ minutes trying to get a definitive call on a 50/50. And yet in every sport in which video replay is used, there are still egregious errors made that aren't reversed and it's used almost exclusively on the 50/50s, which is a waste of time and not what it's there for.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Mar 28, 2019 7:53:52 GMT
The idea of having a video replay is to overturn egregious errors, not waste 3+ minutes trying to get a definitive call on a 50/50. And yet in every sport in which video replay is used, there are still egregious errors made that aren't reversed and it's used almost exclusively on the 50/50s, which is a waste of time and not what it's there for. The infamous "no call" in the NFC Championship game between the Saints and the Rams was an egregious error. The number of challenges a team coach has, has not been increased. So it will not result in games taking any longer. And it will be stupid for coaches to waste a limited number of challenges on a 50/50 judgement call. Unless the game --- and in the Saints' case --- a championship is on the line.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 28, 2019 11:56:19 GMT
This is awful. What's next, reviewing holding calls? They just added 10 minutes to an already bloated broadcast of every game (giving us approximately 157 more Bud Light and Ford commercials per Sunday) which was surely the real impetus behind this. What is with this crazy desire to speed up games? Nobody ever turned off a good game because it was taking too long. People are more concerned with fairness and the better team winning. Than cheating and having the worse team win, just so the game would be what --- 2 minutes shorter? New Orleans had a chance to win that game after the blown call, but they didn't. The better team won, bad call or not.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Mar 28, 2019 12:33:59 GMT
What is with this crazy desire to speed up games? Nobody ever turned off a good game because it was taking too long. People are more concerned with fairness and the better team winning. Than cheating and having the worse team win, just so the game would be what --- 2 minutes shorter? New Orleans had a chance to win that game after the blown call, but they didn't. The better team won, bad call or not. You are correct. The Saints were winning with a minute and a half left in regulation. And they got the ball first in overtime. But they would have won if the refs hadn't cheated. The two teams were that close in ability. But New Orleans would have won if the refs hadn't cheated. The Saints were just barely good enough to beat the Rams. But they weren't good enough to beat the Rams and cheating refs.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Mar 28, 2019 12:40:36 GMT
What is with this crazy desire to speed up games? Nobody ever turned off a good game because it was taking too long. People are more concerned with fairness and the better team winning. Than cheating and having the worse team win, just so the game would be what --- 2 minutes shorter? New Orleans had a chance to win that game after the blown call, but they didn't. The better team won, bad call or not. Had the right call been made would you say the worse team won?
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 28, 2019 13:07:58 GMT
New Orleans had a chance to win that game after the blown call, but they didn't. The better team won, bad call or not. Had the right call been made would you say the worse team won? I'd say the better team won either way. There's no guarantee the Saints score there whether the flag is thrown or not. As it stands, the Saints allowed the Rams to tie the game, the Saints got the ball first in OT and shit themselves, and the Saints lost. If the Saints regained their composure and closed that game out, they would've been the better team that day.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Mar 28, 2019 13:36:49 GMT
Had the right call been made would you say the worse team won? I'd say the better team won either way. There's no guarantee the Saints score there whether the flag is thrown or not. As it stands, the Saints allowed the Rams to tie the game, the Saints got the ball first in OT and shit themselves, and the Saints lost. If the Saints regained their composure and closed that game out, they would've been the better team that day. That's right. We will never know. Because the cheating referees distorted the outcome. Chances are, if the right call had been made, the Saints, at the very least, would have run the clock down to 3 seconds and kicked the winning field goal. But like I said, we will never know because the refs cheated.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 28, 2019 14:04:50 GMT
I'd say the better team won either way. There's no guarantee the Saints score there whether the flag is thrown or not. As it stands, the Saints allowed the Rams to tie the game, the Saints got the ball first in OT and shit themselves, and the Saints lost. If the Saints regained their composure and closed that game out, they would've been the better team that day. That's right. We will never know. Because the cheating referees distorted the outcome. Chances are, if the right call had been made, the Saints, at the very least, would have run the clock down to 3 seconds and kicked the winning field goal. But like I said, we will never know because the refs cheated. What we do know is they had a chance to win and they blew it. So now we have to suffer through a half hour of mindless reviews at the end of every game because the Saints couldn't stop the Rams offense and then panicked in OT. It was a terrible call, no argument here. But to introduce reviews of non-calls is bonkers. I wonder how you'll feel the first time the Saints lose a game in the final seconds when they call PI on your defense after a booth review? I remember a few years ago the Pats lost a game at Carolina when Gronk was clearly interfered with in the end zone as time expired. They even threw the flag, then picked it up when they realized it was a home game for the Panthers. The Patriots lost that game because of a horrible non-call (and not even a non-call, more like a reversal on the field because the refs just wanted to go home). That non-call literally decided the game. Still, I don't want reviews on non-calls because there are too many factors to consider when you start doing that. I'll take the bad call over ridiculous legislation of the game any day.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Mar 28, 2019 14:10:18 GMT
That's right. We will never know. Because the cheating referees distorted the outcome. Chances are, if the right call had been made, the Saints, at the very least, would have run the clock down to 3 seconds and kicked the winning field goal. But like I said, we will never know because the refs cheated. What we do know is they had a chance to win and they blew it. So now we have to suffer through a half hour of mindless reviews at the end of every game because the Saints couldn't stop the Rams offense and then panicked in OT. It was a terrible call, no argument here. But to introduce reviews of non-calls is bonkers. I wonder how you'll feel the first time the Saints lose a game in the final seconds when they call PI on your defense after a booth review? I remember a few years ago the Pats lost a game at Carolina when Gronk was clearly interfered with in the end zone as time expired. They even threw the flag, then picked it up when they realized it was a home game for the Panthers. The Patriots lost that game because of a horrible non-call (and not even a non-call, more like a reversal on the field because the refs just wanted to go home). That non-call literally decided the game. Still, I don't want reviews on non-calls because there are too many factors to consider when you start doing that. I'll take the bad call over ridiculous legislation of the game any day. A half hour !! I think you are exaggerating a little there, do you think ?? Most sports fans don't mind a good or great game going on longer. If it means getting a fair result. If a booth review takes 5 minutes max --- so what ?? Is your life so jam packed with important things to do, you cannot spend 5 more minutes watching a good football game ?? Don't be ridiculous. There is no point in playing any sport if the referees are going to cheat.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Mar 28, 2019 14:11:37 GMT
Had the right call been made would you say the worse team won? I'd say the better team won either way. There's no guarantee the Saints score there whether the flag is thrown or not. As it stands, the Saints allowed the Rams to tie the game, the Saints got the ball first in OT and shit themselves, and the Saints lost. If the Saints regained their composure and closed that game out, they would've been the better team that day. Yeah, they crumbled after the bad no call, but it's essentially a guarantee that they'd have won if the ref got the call right. With only one time out left the saints could have just taken a knew on their first three downs and kicked a closer than chip shot field goal to win with almost no time on the clock. Anything could have happened I suppose, but with a 1st down at that spot in that situation it would have been almost impossible for them to lose.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Mar 28, 2019 14:32:52 GMT
The Rams-Saints call is one of those that should be instantly called in from New York to stop the game. Why does it even need a challenge, it was a blatant non-call. Those should be automatically overturned. If the refs screwed up a field goal make, that's another type of automatic overrule.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 28, 2019 14:50:55 GMT
What we do know is they had a chance to win and they blew it. So now we have to suffer through a half hour of mindless reviews at the end of every game because the Saints couldn't stop the Rams offense and then panicked in OT. It was a terrible call, no argument here. But to introduce reviews of non-calls is bonkers. I wonder how you'll feel the first time the Saints lose a game in the final seconds when they call PI on your defense after a booth review? I remember a few years ago the Pats lost a game at Carolina when Gronk was clearly interfered with in the end zone as time expired. They even threw the flag, then picked it up when they realized it was a home game for the Panthers. The Patriots lost that game because of a horrible non-call (and not even a non-call, more like a reversal on the field because the refs just wanted to go home). That non-call literally decided the game. Still, I don't want reviews on non-calls because there are too many factors to consider when you start doing that. I'll take the bad call over ridiculous legislation of the game any day. A half hour !! I think you are exaggerating a little there, do you think ?? Most sports fans don't mind a good or great game going on longer. If it means getting a fair result. If a booth review takes 5 minutes max --- so what ?? Is your life so jam packed with important things to do, you cannot spend 5 more minutes watching a good football game ?? Don't be ridiculous. There is no point in playing any sport if the referees are going to cheat. Most fans want game action, not the Bud Knight or Denis Leary selling trucks for another 15 minutes as the broadcast comes back and we watch the refs watching the same replay we've already seen 150 times. If you think the refs cheated, what's going to stop the replay ref from cheating? I just think they f-cked up.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Mar 28, 2019 15:03:47 GMT
I'd say the better team won either way. There's no guarantee the Saints score there whether the flag is thrown or not. As it stands, the Saints allowed the Rams to tie the game, the Saints got the ball first in OT and shit themselves, and the Saints lost. If the Saints regained their composure and closed that game out, they would've been the better team that day. Yeah, they crumbled after the bad no call, but it's essentially a guarantee that they'd have won if the ref got the call right. With only one time out left the saints could have just taken a knew on their first three downs and kicked a closer than chip shot field goal to win with almost no time on the clock. Anything could have happened I suppose, but with a 1st down at that spot in that situation it would have been almost impossible for them to lose. I don't disagree, I just hate over-legislation of the game. This rule is too nebulous and is going to lead to more controversy than it seeks to avoid. Look at the 'definition of a catch' and how much of a debacle that was. Now the booth is going to automatically review pass plays in the final two minutes of the game? That won't lead to any conspiracy theories the first time it benefits the Patriots. There's no question the Saints probably win that game if the right call is made. But regardless they still had every opportunity to win and blew it. If they stop the Rams or score a TD in OT, we aren't having this conversation right now. Instead, the rest of the league is paying the price.
|
|