View Single Post
Old 09-30-2004, 06:17 PM   #20
memphisskin
Impact Rookie
 
memphisskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Age: 54
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunglehead
The coaches are only allowed two challenges, plus a third if their first two are successful. I can't possibly see how allowing more plays to be reviewable would slow the game down at all. We're not talking about increasing the actual number of challenges are we?

Plus, there ARE review officials upstairs all the time. They're the ones who step in after the two minute warning. I like that rule. If the guys upstairs were changing calls throughout the whole game, it definitely WOULD slow things down a lot. Plus, since they're the only ones allowed to call for a review in the last two minutes, it obviously stops either team from gaining 'extra' time-outs.

I don't see anything wrong with allowing the coaches to challenge any type of call by the refs; be it a penalty, down by contact, fumble, premature whistle, ball placement, or whatever. It would be stupid to ask for a review when no penalty was called, but if a player is called for pass interference and the replay clearly shows that the opposing player initiated the contact, it only seems fair that the call should not only be reviewable, but the proper penalty should be implemented in it's place.

It does seem petty to challenge a 'holding' call, and I don't think any coaches really would. But, if it comes at a key moment, where the game outcome is on the line, and the guys in the booth can see it was a bogus call, why not make it challengeable?

The coaches have precious few challenges, so they're not going to throw them away unnecessarily. Also, has anyone noticed that there are still a lot of coaches who throw out the red flag on unreviewable calls? This, in effect, still gives them a brief time-out, and they aren't charged for it. By making more plays reviewable, it would erase these 'free' clock-stoppers.

If you make more plays reviewable then why even have refs on the field? The reason some plays are reviewable and some aren't is because it's an imperfect game. The rules are subjective and open to interpretation, to review every potential game changing call means that you no longer need refs on the field to call the action. The refs have to make decisions and some of those decisions have to be binding, everything cannot be open for interpretation because if everything is then chaos results.

There are missed calls, its part of the game. It adds to the drama, but looking back on the game we still had a chance to win that game if we don't blow two timeouts early in the 2nd half. So the poor officiating, and it was definitely poor, didn't cost us the game. Poor clock management, wasted timeouts and dropped passes cost us the game. It's easy to use the officials as scapegoats, but it's part of the game and reviewing every play doesn't seem to make the game better to me.

I remember a playoff game between the 49ers and somebody. Jerry Rice caught a pass, was hit and fumbled but the refs blew the whistle and ruled him down by contact. Some things you just have to live with, blown calls being one of them.

The funny thing is if those two Pass Interference calls went in our favor instead of against us we'd never even be discussing expanding or changing replay.
memphisskin is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.17851 seconds with 10 queries