|
Post by wickhamissad on Sept 20, 2012 20:42:00 GMT
Not been here since way before Sheffield. It's nice to have a break and just be a fan of course.
Has anyone posted on here about the NFL Replacements?
We've all formed pretty much the same opinion and can view it with a more educated and critical eye than most. To me the biggest concern is the bench-mark being used of number of flags, but the length of the game has been noted after week 2.
I think we're geographically far enough removed to be able to criticise - though perhaps "comment" may be a more accurate term.
Also i couldn't help thinking that this is a really unique experience for the guys who've been thrown into this cauldron. It could be good if any of those are decent clinicians and get them over to our bash next year. Great learning environment.
|
|
|
Post by Ben G on Sept 21, 2012 8:27:28 GMT
I think the biggest issue is they are ALL new.
Normally when an Official steps up a level e.g. a new rookie official, first Bowl game, first EFAF game, first college game, first NFL game etc... most if not all the other officials on the crew will be experienced at that level.
So the officials don't have that veteran experience to lean on.
|
|
|
Post by teevee on Sept 21, 2012 8:53:22 GMT
If the NFL's own film analysis shows a week by week improvement, then things could either get interesting, ugly or both. But given the nature of labour relations in the States I'm not sure about the wisdom of asking a 'replacement' over until the dust has well and truly settled and everyone knows where they stand!
|
|
|
Post by New(ish) Ref on Sept 21, 2012 11:33:26 GMT
I agree with Tim. Inviting a "replacement" might be something which has a negative long-term impact on our relationships across the pond. Right now, we just don't know, so I'd be loathe to see us take the risk.
|
|
|
Post by Ed Herk on Sept 21, 2012 12:51:54 GMT
These guys are all Div 2 or Div 3 college refs, retired Div 1 guys or guys from other pro or semi-pro leagues from what I've heard and read. I'm not being funny but several of our more experienced members worked in the World League and have done World Cups, EFAF finals, IFAF finals. Some of us have also worked GB games against Div 3 college teams. I think that the NFL replacement guys could learn a thing or two from US! You watch Bill Le Monnier white hat the Ohio State game on Saturday and feel proud that he came to our Convention. Would you feel the same way about some of the guys that have been in charge of the first 2 weeks' worth of NFL games this season? The thing is - I cannot see the NFL giving ground on this unless they are lobbied by a majority of owners with complaints that the replacements are risking injuries to players and/or costing teams a win due to errors on calls. Unlike the player lockout last summer, most of the fans at home don't really care if its Tony Corrente white hatting a game, or John Doe, they're watching for the action, not the officiating. All of the regular guys have other jobs, so they are not out of work all together. Don't get me wrong, I am with our American brethren on this and hope that things work out in their favour, but I can't see it happening. Where are they going to go and ply their officiating trade while they're locked out? Perhaps they could replace the replacements in the leagues they normally work!! I would really prefer it if it was an established NFL crew coming over to do the Wembley game in October, but if its the replacements then I am sure that Davie, Lee, Andy, Phil, Amir, John, Dean and I can give them a few pointers!
|
|
|
Post by teevee on Sept 24, 2012 9:53:21 GMT
Having just looked at some of Mike Pereira'sstuff on Fox,, it really does seem as though the transition from NCAA rules to NFL rules is causing something of a problem. To be honest I'm not surprised. Reading Jerry Markbreit's autobiography and seeing the amount of intense rules study he put in when he went to the NFL, AND then having people around him who had years of experience, I just don't see how the replacements could ever get the job done without considerable difficulties.
|
|
|
Post by Osric Pureheart on Sept 24, 2012 13:30:09 GMT
I've read the NFL rulebook; it makes the NCAA rulebook look like Peter and Jane.
|
|
|
Post by Ed Herk on Sept 24, 2012 20:39:23 GMT
Yep, there are loads of weird rules in NFL.
|
|
|
Post by wickhamissad on Sept 24, 2012 22:02:25 GMT
So how did the NFL go about selecting these guys? Did they just grab a bunch, get them in an exam hall and see who scored the most?
The judgement calls are one thing, and the average fan can appreciate that. The overall continuity, managing the players and management of the entertainment product is something we all knew was going to suffer, and now the average armchair fan is starting to see this.
|
|
|
Post by bafra31 on Sept 25, 2012 12:24:53 GMT
The last play in the Seahawks / Packers game can be viewed at
1. What ruling would you make? 2. How confident would you be about your ruling in front of 68,000 fans?
|
|
|
Post by oglog1 on Sept 25, 2012 14:11:53 GMT
1. What ruling would you make? "Pass Interference; 81 Offense; Time expired on the play and the quarter is only extended for a defensive penalty, therefore the game is over" 2. How confident would you be about your ruling in front of 68,000 fans? Exactly as confident as if I'd made it in a muddy field in front of two men and a dog (looking forward to the University season already!) TBH my problem isn't so much the crappiness of the call; more the way in which B & F got together, discussed the call and then came to completely opposite conclusions leading to their contradictory signals. If they can't even get the process right then how can they expect the teams to have any confidence in the calls they make even when they are correct?
|
|
|
Post by jedsy123 on Sept 25, 2012 17:57:07 GMT
Given that "It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control", ball intercepted in the endzone. The blatant OPI should have rendered this moot though.
I don't really think that it makes any difference whether there's 1 or 68000 people watching, a kicked call is a kicked call.
It doesn't even seem that the B and F really talk about what's happened before F signals TD. I think B WANTS to talk about it as he gives a timeout signal instead of a touchback one but F just goes for it.
Anyway, the NFL had some ridiculous amount wiped off their stock price due to this incident so hopefully it's the impetus for them to hammer it out with the real refs and get the scabs out.
On the broader issue of what I think about the replacements, I thought we were *incoming cliche* one officiating family. If I were in their situation, I wouldn't feel morally right doing the games as I'm just allowing the NFL to ignore the "problem" of the real refs. If they said "no I'm not doing it", the league would be FORCED to make a deal with the real refs (I've heard that the maximum a new deal would cost the league is around the $3 million mark, pocket change for them really). Personally I think they are looking for some personal fame, to be able to say "I did an NFL game" rather than looking at it through a broader scope.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Sept 25, 2012 19:46:38 GMT
I think the bigger issue here, is that the play was reviewed for 10 minutes and then it was decided "the call on the field stands". I assume, not watching this live, that this is due to video evidence not being substantial enough to overturn the call on the field.
Now, as I currently understand it, the replay booths are being overseen by an NFL official to ensure the referees get the call on the field right. Kicked calls, I can tolerate. God knows, I've probably kicked a few in the 80-odd games I've done. But to have it reviewed, for 10 minutes, and to still come up with the wrong call? That really does lose a lot of face.
As for what would I call? Firstly, the OPI. I've seen people excuse it because it goes on all the time on jump balls. Just because it does doesn't mean you don't have to call it. So that renders anything, as oglog said, pointless. I think B43 comes down with it before A81 gets his hands properly on it, in which case possession is awarded to Team B, game over.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin S on Sept 25, 2012 20:11:55 GMT
The NFL have issued the following statement.
It reads, in its entirety:
In Monday's game between the Green Bay Packers and Seattle Seahawks, Seattle faced a 4th-and-10 from the Green Bay 24 with eight seconds remaining in the game.
Seattle quarterback Russell Wilson threw a pass into the end zone. Several players, including Seattle wide receiver Golden Tate and Green Bay safety M.D. Jennings, jumped into the air in an attempt to catch the ball.
While the ball is in the air, Tate can be seen shoving Green Bay cornerback Sam Shields to the ground. This should have been a penalty for offensive pass interference, which would have ended the game. It was not called and is not reviewable in instant replay.
When the players hit the ground in the end zone, the officials determined that both Tate and Jennings had possession of the ball. Under the rule for simultaneous catch, the ball belongs to Tate, the offensive player. The result of the play was a touchdown.
Replay Official Howard Slavin stopped the game for an instant replay review. The aspects of the play that were reviewable included if the ball hit the ground and who had possession of the ball. In the end zone, a ruling of a simultaneous catch is reviewable. That is not the case in the field of play, only in the end zone.
Referee Wayne Elliott determined that no indisputable visual evidence existed to overturn the call on the field, and as a result, the on-field ruling of touchdown stood. The NFL Officiating Department reviewed the video today and supports the decision not to overturn the on-field ruling following the instant replay review.
The result of the game is final.
Applicable rules to the play are as follows:
A player (or players) jumping in the air has not legally gained possession of the ball until he satisfies the elements of a catch listed here.
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3 of the NFL Rule Book defines a catch:
A forward pass is complete (by the offense) or intercepted (by the defense) if a player, who is inbounds:
(a) secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and
(b) touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and
(c) maintains control of the ball long enough, after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, to enable him to perform any act common to the game (i.e., maintaining control long enough to pitch it, pass it, advance with it, or avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.).
When a player (or players) is going to the ground in the attempt to catch a pass, Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 1 states:
Player Going to the Ground. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball throughout the process of contacting the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete.
Rule 8, Section 1, Article 3, Item 5 states:
Simultaneous Catch. If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.
|
|
|
Post by teevee on Sept 25, 2012 20:22:49 GMT
Actually, I don't think the replay time is the biggest issue. I do not understand how, if you are sticking with your keys and NOT watching the ball, you can (a) miss the OPI or (b) NOT call it. This is a call that had it been missed on a BAFANL game film posted on this site would have drawn adverse comment. To a point I understand Jim's point about 68,000 people ... significantly less can 'charge' the atmosphere, and that COULD have influenced the TD call, (sad though that may be) but to miss the blatant OPI is a different thing altogether. I wouldn't want someone, nor feel comfortable with someone who didn't call that at Lincoln Bombers. If indeed these guys are for the most part Div II/III NCAA officials then even that standard could be called into question by this.
|
|