They ought to be like the NHL and institute a penalty for "flopping". Call it an ALAP penalty....."acting like a pussy".
Now though, there is a NY office official, who has no problem changing the calls. Just admit that the Refs can't see them all and have a ref at all games buzz down when it is obvious if any flag is wrong. The non calls could be a problem though, seeing as there is a foul on every play.They tried that years ago for dpi and the refs reversed exactly zero flags. Didn't matter how obvious it was, they went with the on field call.
.
MLB has kept up with the times and available tech.The best thing that has happened in baseball this season is the batter being able to challenge the umpires calls on balls and strikes, it brings creditability to the game, something like this is needed in the NFL.
There was a couple of opinions on that in the media. The one that makes the most sense is they did confer but because it was in Denver, nothing was overturned. Had it been in L.A. it would have been. Which is weak and gutless. Typical NFL behavior.I just cant get over how the ref who had direct view of the play didnt confer with the back judge
We can agree to disagree. I don't think it was obvious. Certainly not from the ref's obstructed view from the rear. And thousands of people online are STILL defending the DPI call.
There was significant contact between the DB and the WR, and the DB had his hands on the WR's torso for a long time.
Cripes... Foolio and Simms are STILL claiming it's DPI. So yes, there are still "some" analysts that stubbornly believe that Wallace somehow pushed Bryant and/or impeded him.
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/DenverBroncos/comments/1wsiby2/mike_florio_and_chris_simms_agreed_with_the_late/
It was not DPI. But given how good Bryant was at selling it, I'm not surprised that people got fooled.
Bryant subtly grabbed the DB's shoulder pad and pulled it toward him. That's just a weird thing to do that is very rare. It doesn't make any sense from a competitive standpoint. It only makes sense if you are intentionally trying to draw a foul, which he was.
There has to be some way to prevent mistakes like that. Like I said before, if "replay assist" can reverse a catch without review, why can't they reverse a bogus penalty? That would be an even better, more important use of "replay assist". The true problem with officiating is bad officiating can change the outcome of a game and nobody should be okay with that. Not the teams, not the union and not the fucking league.I see this all the time on replays, where the receiver grabs the DB somewhere on his body and causes it to look like contact. Hell, it happened to Ramsey in the SB on his facemask. the ref next to the play is blocked out and no other ref will speak up. I think there is some sort of stripped line none of them want to cross. Same goes with the DB. It happened to Cooks in the 2nd Pats SB in the endzone. The DB held his arm down so he couldn't catch it. The Ref was behind the play so blocked out and no call. Other refs just let it go.
The fact Florio claims it was DPI means nothing. The guy is a fucking idiot. The NFL says it wasn't a penalty.Cripes... Foolio and Simms are STILL claiming it's DPI.
That game was a referee inquisition against the Rams. Seriously man I have never see such a one-sided game from a referee perspective. And sure I'm a homer fan and all that but damn that shit was one way.
I keep hearing it's because it's "subjective," which makes no sense to me. That just tells us that the replay would offer more clarity and increase the number of angles, slo-mos, eyes, and odds of getting it right. In short, it would help.There has to be some way to prevent mistakes like that. Like I said before, if "replay assist" can reverse a catch without review, why can't they reverse a bogus penalty? That would be an even better, more important use of "replay assist".
Officiating sports is all subjective. They interpret what they see.....a completed pass, a ball or strike.....and they make their call. They're human, I get that. I don't understand how they can allow challenges using replay; use replay to determine a CRUCIAL call; or use replay assist to "get it right" but they don't want anybody questioning their officials by challenging their interpretation of a penalty. Particularly on a crucial play. I call that arrogance. Conspiracy theorists would call that "the NFL's way of maintaining their ability to put their thumb on the scale". I believe somebody else suggested giving teams a penalty challenge in addition to their two challenges, that they can make on any penalty, at anytime, even under 2 minutes or in OT. I second that!!!I keep hearing it's because it's "subjective," which makes no sense to me. That just tells us that the replay would offer more clarity and increase the number of angles, slo-mos, eyes, and odds of getting it right. In short, it would help.
That was due to the burden of proof to overturn a penalty flag. The question for the reviewer wasn't "should PI have been called here?", but rather, "was there any basis for the Pi that was called?"They tried that years ago for dpi and the refs reversed exactly zero flags. Didn't matter how obvious it was, they went with the on field call.
.
OK OK, let's open this old wound and talk about this.They tried that years ago for dpi and the refs reversed exactly zero flags. Didn't matter how obvious it was, they went with the on field call.
.
Embarrassing for the NFL. They should be ashamed of themselves... think they are? HahahahahTerry MCaulay the NBCs rules analyst did come on and gave his take. Maybe you had an alternate stream?
He is the NBC equivalant to Mike Pereira and Dan Blandino on Fox.
His take was the WR Bryant grabbed wallace adnd pulled him in. He said he saw nothing from Wallace that significantly hindered Bryant.
He also said if Wallace's knee was down (which it was) then it should have been an interception.
Front Office Sports noted that rules analysts rarely disagree this plainly with a call.
It was a subdued moment on air due to the bad call and its impact.. bad moment for the NFL.
I re-watched it and didnt see any sort of a meeting of the minds about it. Could have happened, its not like the camera was on the whole time. I get it that from the back judge POV it looked like PI, but it had to be clear to the sideline guy that it wasnt. To me the sideline ref just didnt care enough that the correct call wasnt madeThere was a couple of opinions on that in the media. The one that makes the most sense is they did confer but because it was in Denver, nothing was overturned. Had it been in L.A. it would have been. Which is weak and gutless. Typical NFL behavior.
Yeah I’m not in favor of constant reviews of calls. There are too many interruptions to the flow of the game.The best thing that has happened in baseball this season is the batter being able to challenge the umpires calls on balls and strikes, it brings creditability to the game, something like this is needed in the NFL.
Correction, Florio and Simms are both fucking idiots, and have been for a long time.There has to be some way to prevent mistakes like that. Like I said before, if "replay assist" can reverse a catch without review, why can't they reverse a bogus penalty? That would be an even better, more important use of "replay assist". The true problem with officiating is bad officiating can change the outcome of a game and nobody should be okay with that. Not the teams, not the union and not the fucking league.
The fact Florio claims it was DPI means nothing. The guy is a fucking idiot. The NFL says it wasn't a penalty.
I will take this approach. It won't matter.....we probably won't even remember it.....when we are hoisting the Lombardi in February.
Neal and Bob.Correction, Florio and Simms are both fucking idiots, and have been for a long time.