Officiating (Merged Threads)

**Raveninwoodlawn** · 09-16-2012, 08:59 PM

Why would you take a guy that did this in college...

Warning...may want to mute your speakers...

And have him play 10 yards off like he's Asante Samuel or something?

**HoustonRaven** · 09-16-2012, 08:59 PM

Originally Posted by Haloti92

I only concern myself with stuff that affects the outcome of the game. That it takes an extra 60 seconds for the refs to realize that they enforced an extra 5 yards or something is nothing but 60 seconds to me. The outcome of the game is the only thing that matters. And these administration aspects will sort themselves out as these crews call more than a handful of games.

The bottomline is, these refs are doing a fine job, and counting their "embarrassing" mistakes that do not really affect the outcome is not a real indictment of anything other than on-the-surface appearance, which to me is of little consequence

Well said

**LC_Ravens_87** · 09-16-2012, 09:06 PM

Originally Posted by Haloti92

I only concern myself with stuff that affects the outcome of the game. That it takes an extra 60 seconds for the refs to realize that they enforced an extra 5 yards or something is nothing but 60 seconds to me. The outcome of the game is the only thing that matters. And these administration aspects will sort themselves out as these crews call more than a handful of games.

The bottomline is, these refs are doing a fine job, and counting their "embarrassing" mistakes that do not really affect the outcome is not a real indictment of anything other than on-the-surface appearance, which to me is of little consequence.

Let me know when these refs call an imaginary foul as bad as the holding call on Torrey Smith that negated Rice's 70+ yard TD run on the first play from scrimmage vs the Steelers last year. I need a call that is as undeniably incorrect, that had as little effect on the outcome of the play itself, and that affected the score as much as that one. I am sure it will occur, but I have yet to see one.

fair enough...I guess people can disagree about whether they want the refs in a professional sports league to properly administer the game. Some would say that it might be an essential prerequisite to officiating, but I guess others would say that knowing the rules isn't that big a deal for being a pro referee.

**NCRAVEN** · 09-16-2012, 09:06 PM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

Why would you take a guy that did this in college...

Warning...may want to mute your speakers...

And have him play 10 yards off like he's Asante Samuel or something?

You stop it right now.

There is no logic allowed.

**Haloti92** · 09-16-2012, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by LC_Ravens_87

fair enough...I guess people can disagree about whether they want the refs in a professional sports league to properly administer the game. Some would say that it might be an essential prerequisite to officiating, but I guess others would say that knowing the rules isn't that big a deal for being a pro referee.

It obviously isn't an essential prerequisite to officiating because according to you they don't know the rules, and according to reality they have already officiated several games.

Nor does "knowing the rules," whatever you mean by that (I am reading it as: making less mistakes regarding irrelevant minutiae), prevent officials from making completely erroneous calls that have a massive effect on the outcome of the game, as evidenced by a large percentage of games called prior to this year.

**PerpetuallyBored74** · 09-16-2012, 09:18 PM

Watching the 49ers vs Lions game on Sunday Night Football and looking back on the Ravens game on MNF and it's become clear that the only games that can be counted on to be somewhat/primarily properly officiated will be the ones that are nationally televised since they will have the best hand-picked crews.

**dweezil22** · 09-16-2012, 09:20 PM

Originally Posted by Maverick Hiker

I think Vick was out of the pocket and towards the sideline and that's why that wasn't intentional grounding. QB's always thrown it away in that situation and the rule says no IG. I think the rule should be changed but it is what it is.

" If the player has left the tackle box, and throws the ball away, it must still reach the line of scrimmage. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_grounding

Apologies if this is repeating a previous answer, this thread has added 4 pages since I last checked...

**LC_Ravens_87** · 09-16-2012, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by Haloti92

It obviously isn't an essential prerequisite to officiating because according to you they don't know the rules, and according to reality they have already officiated several games.

Nor does "knowing the rules," whatever you mean by that (I am reading it as: making less mistakes regarding irrelevant minutiae), prevent officials from making completely erroneous calls that have a massive effect on the outcome of the game, as evidenced by a large percentage of games called prior to this year.

You are right on that front. The #1 prereq is for the Owners to squeeze every cent they can out of this game. If that means sacrificing the product for a couple weeks, obviously they are going to do it.

And I know we disagree, but in a game with rules, every rule matters. Otherwise, why would they have the rule? Why not just wing it?

**dweezil22** · 09-16-2012, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

What part of they cant review penalties in a review do you not understand.

The play was called a fumble.

Dude, you posted 3 times "Read the rule". Someone reads the rule, and you come back with "You can't review penalties", which has nothing to do with the rule you quoted? Are you just trying to upset people?

**dweezil22** · 09-16-2012, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

Pereria said that once a QB is in the process of being hit, there is no intentional grounding...probably because once a guy is hit he completely loses control of where the ball is going.

Pereria did say the O PI was bogus though as the defender was not looking for the ball.

Thank you, that makes sense. I can go to bed now...

**HoustonRaven** · 09-16-2012, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by dweezil22

Dude, you posted 3 times "Read the rule". Someone reads the rule, and you come back with "You can't review penalties", which has nothing to do with the rule you quoted? Are you just trying to upset people?

Read the entire thread. I think it's rather clear where I stand on the issue.

**Haloti92** · 09-16-2012, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by LC_Ravens_87

You are right on that front. The #1 prereq is for the Owners to squeeze every cent they can out of this game. If that means sacrificing the product for a couple weeks, obviously they are going to do it.

And I know we disagree, but in a game with rules, every rule matters. Otherwise, why would they have the rule? Why not just wing it?

Now you have circled back to the actual issue. And that is the extent to which the "product" has been "sacrificed." To me and many, you haven't even moved the needle towards proving there has been any sacrifice at all. This is especially true when you not only consider the minor effects of an increase of temporary errors that take a little extra time to sort out, but also consider the effects of having crews that do not go out of their way to (perhaps are afraid to) call any and all borderline, ticky-tack fouls regardless of their unbalancing effect on the outcome of the game.