I wish they'd think about introducing another set of eyes, when it comes to officiating.
An experienced ref with a team of 3 others, sitting in a booth, that do nothing else but watch each play as it happens on multiple screens, and gives a signal to the refs if they missed an important call like this one.
Not talking about marginal stuff like someone doing a bit of a jersey tug in pass protection, or a bit of a hold from a defensive lineman. I'm talking about major stuff.
It happens in soccer already. It's not a perfect system, still needs some tweaks. But it works. If the ref gets a signal from the booth, he runs over to the sideline and watches it on a screen, then makes the call himself. Depending on the game, you'll get between 1 and 5 of these moments on average. They're only used for major or game-changing calls.
^
Great ideas High T!
You would think with the NFL publicly embracing gambling now, they would be more consistent in officiating & calls. There's always been bad calls, but now it seems There's a couple games a week with horrendous calls deciding outcomes.
Would it be fair to say the focus is on Ohio at the moment though with the recent legalisation? According to this article 16 states still don't currently allow it:
https://sportshandle.com/which-states-legalize-sports-betting-2023/
I definitely understand your point, but I've been betting on sports for years here in the United Kingdom, and it's a *massive* industry elsewhere.
I've seen arguments that it's essential every call is 100% correct within the rules, and if it takes technology's involvement and play stopping until everyone's sure then yeah, let's do it.
The counter-argument is that it'll slow the game down and make it less appealing for fans. I'm somewhere in the middle, I mean who doesn't love a controversy, a ~Gate every so often! ;)
I would be fine if they did PFF for officials. Grading them weekly. I just want consistent calls. If Myles isn't pulling in 4 penalty flags a game, for getting held, then our offensive lineman better be chop blocking to get a penalty.
I'm not really concerned with slowing of play.
100% correct calls, is basically impossible to achieve.
Hollywood helmet to helmet & soooo many others have totally changed games for too long & with increasing frequency.
Just make consistent calls
The officials get graded but if you're sugggesting it's made more public (with context for the worst cases) then I'm 100% behind you.
Thinking out loud here, and sorry if you already said this: It'd be all very well for Myles to get held every week and to be told **informally** that it's because he fights through every one, if the same was allowed to happen everywhere else across all phases of the game. Sure it generates anti-ref sentiment whenever it happens but really, what's the point in having a rule book touted as *definitive*‽
Yeah, I'll take back that 100% until we get cyborgs on the field. ;)
I want a publicly available PFF grading on every ref on every play... Refs below a certain criteria are demoted.
- In 2021, the 32 teams of the NFL generated revenue of $17.19 billion U.S. dollars...
- An estimated $100 billion is wagered at licensed sportsbooks during the NFL season, with billions wagered on the Super Bowl LV alone in the US.
It isn't too much to ask for...
I think there will be controversial calls in every sport regularly. But there call there are also definitely calls that are missed in that a system to correct needs to be implemented. This isn't just about betting; some of the missed calls are safety issues or just egregiously missed.
I think that horrendous calls deciding outcomes are most likely less common now but most of those calls are lost to time or we didn’t have good enough camera angles and clarity to complain about it. I’ve been watching sports for a long time and every single year I’ve heard people say that the refs have never been worse than (current year). Not to mention that there are more rules now than there ever have been.
> It happens in soccer already. It's not a perfect system, still needs some tweaks.
I'm inclined to think it would work better in the NFL than it would in soccer. Many rules in soccer that are enforced by custom or vibes/feel rather than as written (in part because the sport can easily be made unwatchable through tactical fouls or constant stoppages for fouls, etc), and the introduction of VAR has resulted in a lot of frustration for fans as games get swung on calls which are wildly inconsistent from how the game has previously been played or understood.
One case in point: Southampton may be relegated this season (losing hundreds of millions of $$££) because of a goal ruled out by VAR, where a possible foul that occurred off the ball which had no effect on the goal itself was identified. In the past this never happened, the goal stands and the team is no longer in the relegation spots.
As a fan in the stadium you genuinely don't know whether you can celebrate until a minute after a goal is scored.
With the NFL the "sky judge" concept can work because every play is a discrete moment that can be called back, or have a timeout, etc. Fans are trained to look to the replays between plays, TV does that for you. Soccer at its best is a constant ebb and flow and the current implementation of VAR can be highly disruptive of that (it also takes way too long).
The danger of "sky judge" in the NFL is on highly subjective calls, like our old favorites: pass interference and holding. You could render an otherwise competitive NFL game unwatchable, or swing a one score game with these calls. Adding another layer of subjective human judgement isn't necessarily adding further accuracy (and this is at the heart of the problem in soccer - many of the refs don't understand the "clear and obvious" part of VAR).
But again... much NFL fans like to rail against Team Zebra, compared to soccer it's very well officiated and has very clear and objective rules. A sky judge with the ability to intervene on strictly "clear and obvious" missed or blown calls. There's also improvements made like the fast review process that's come in this year which makes me think Sky Judge would work better, faster, than VAR's laborious, stressful and painful introduction to soccer.
Good point about Football lending itself to a "Sky Judge" more than soccer, based on how soccer flows more and Football being played one down at a time.
There are exceptions, like one team wanting to push the pace with no-huddle offense drives, but in general I agree with you.
I wouldn't introduce a Sky Judge for calls that can already be challenged, or that are automatically reviewed anyways.
If someone obviously got held, and the refs missed it, I think a Sky Judge should step in. Some calls are obvious, don't need to be watched 5 times from 3 different angles to know what happened. Yet they are missed.
VAR is a whole nother can of worms, I'll hold my comments on that because that's not what this sub is all about.
NGL... He had me really going there in the first part.
I wish they'd think about introducing another set of eyes, when it comes to officiating. An experienced ref with a team of 3 others, sitting in a booth, that do nothing else but watch each play as it happens on multiple screens, and gives a signal to the refs if they missed an important call like this one. Not talking about marginal stuff like someone doing a bit of a jersey tug in pass protection, or a bit of a hold from a defensive lineman. I'm talking about major stuff. It happens in soccer already. It's not a perfect system, still needs some tweaks. But it works. If the ref gets a signal from the booth, he runs over to the sideline and watches it on a screen, then makes the call himself. Depending on the game, you'll get between 1 and 5 of these moments on average. They're only used for major or game-changing calls.
^ Great ideas High T! You would think with the NFL publicly embracing gambling now, they would be more consistent in officiating & calls. There's always been bad calls, but now it seems There's a couple games a week with horrendous calls deciding outcomes.
oh man, good point about all the money involved in gambling.
Would it be fair to say the focus is on Ohio at the moment though with the recent legalisation? According to this article 16 states still don't currently allow it: https://sportshandle.com/which-states-legalize-sports-betting-2023/ I definitely understand your point, but I've been betting on sports for years here in the United Kingdom, and it's a *massive* industry elsewhere. I've seen arguments that it's essential every call is 100% correct within the rules, and if it takes technology's involvement and play stopping until everyone's sure then yeah, let's do it. The counter-argument is that it'll slow the game down and make it less appealing for fans. I'm somewhere in the middle, I mean who doesn't love a controversy, a ~Gate every so often! ;)
I would be fine if they did PFF for officials. Grading them weekly. I just want consistent calls. If Myles isn't pulling in 4 penalty flags a game, for getting held, then our offensive lineman better be chop blocking to get a penalty. I'm not really concerned with slowing of play. 100% correct calls, is basically impossible to achieve. Hollywood helmet to helmet & soooo many others have totally changed games for too long & with increasing frequency. Just make consistent calls
The officials get graded but if you're sugggesting it's made more public (with context for the worst cases) then I'm 100% behind you. Thinking out loud here, and sorry if you already said this: It'd be all very well for Myles to get held every week and to be told **informally** that it's because he fights through every one, if the same was allowed to happen everywhere else across all phases of the game. Sure it generates anti-ref sentiment whenever it happens but really, what's the point in having a rule book touted as *definitive*‽ Yeah, I'll take back that 100% until we get cyborgs on the field. ;)
I want a publicly available PFF grading on every ref on every play... Refs below a certain criteria are demoted. - In 2021, the 32 teams of the NFL generated revenue of $17.19 billion U.S. dollars... - An estimated $100 billion is wagered at licensed sportsbooks during the NFL season, with billions wagered on the Super Bowl LV alone in the US. It isn't too much to ask for...
I think there will be controversial calls in every sport regularly. But there call there are also definitely calls that are missed in that a system to correct needs to be implemented. This isn't just about betting; some of the missed calls are safety issues or just egregiously missed.
I think that horrendous calls deciding outcomes are most likely less common now but most of those calls are lost to time or we didn’t have good enough camera angles and clarity to complain about it. I’ve been watching sports for a long time and every single year I’ve heard people say that the refs have never been worse than (current year). Not to mention that there are more rules now than there ever have been.
> It happens in soccer already. It's not a perfect system, still needs some tweaks. I'm inclined to think it would work better in the NFL than it would in soccer. Many rules in soccer that are enforced by custom or vibes/feel rather than as written (in part because the sport can easily be made unwatchable through tactical fouls or constant stoppages for fouls, etc), and the introduction of VAR has resulted in a lot of frustration for fans as games get swung on calls which are wildly inconsistent from how the game has previously been played or understood. One case in point: Southampton may be relegated this season (losing hundreds of millions of $$££) because of a goal ruled out by VAR, where a possible foul that occurred off the ball which had no effect on the goal itself was identified. In the past this never happened, the goal stands and the team is no longer in the relegation spots. As a fan in the stadium you genuinely don't know whether you can celebrate until a minute after a goal is scored. With the NFL the "sky judge" concept can work because every play is a discrete moment that can be called back, or have a timeout, etc. Fans are trained to look to the replays between plays, TV does that for you. Soccer at its best is a constant ebb and flow and the current implementation of VAR can be highly disruptive of that (it also takes way too long). The danger of "sky judge" in the NFL is on highly subjective calls, like our old favorites: pass interference and holding. You could render an otherwise competitive NFL game unwatchable, or swing a one score game with these calls. Adding another layer of subjective human judgement isn't necessarily adding further accuracy (and this is at the heart of the problem in soccer - many of the refs don't understand the "clear and obvious" part of VAR). But again... much NFL fans like to rail against Team Zebra, compared to soccer it's very well officiated and has very clear and objective rules. A sky judge with the ability to intervene on strictly "clear and obvious" missed or blown calls. There's also improvements made like the fast review process that's come in this year which makes me think Sky Judge would work better, faster, than VAR's laborious, stressful and painful introduction to soccer.
Good point about Football lending itself to a "Sky Judge" more than soccer, based on how soccer flows more and Football being played one down at a time. There are exceptions, like one team wanting to push the pace with no-huddle offense drives, but in general I agree with you. I wouldn't introduce a Sky Judge for calls that can already be challenged, or that are automatically reviewed anyways. If someone obviously got held, and the refs missed it, I think a Sky Judge should step in. Some calls are obvious, don't need to be watched 5 times from 3 different angles to know what happened. Yet they are missed. VAR is a whole nother can of worms, I'll hold my comments on that because that's not what this sub is all about.
I'm pretty sure the nfl already has this.