Ravens Propose Aggressive Replay Overhaul

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

The number and structure of challenges would remain the same: two for each coach, a third if the first two are right and automatic reviews on scores and turnovers. But philosophically, the Ravens are pushing the league to address a basic question: Why does it allow objectively inaccurate, and eminently correctable, calls to stand?

 

 

The practical impact would be even more apparent. If adopted as the Ravens suggested, replay would minimize instances where an obvious mistake can't be corrected because of what feels like an arbitrary exclusion. The goal, Harbaugh said, was simple: Make reviewable "anything that we felt clearly, black and white, can be looked at in review and you say, 'That is clearly [right or wrong].'"

 

 

The Ravens, of course, were burned last season when officials missed a false start by the Jacksonville Jaguars on a play that would have ended the game. Instead, the Jaguars had one more play to convert a game-winning field goal.

"It will allow us to get it right," Harbaugh said. "There were five games last year that were determined by non-reviewable calls. ... The fans don't understand that. They don't want to look at that all week, to see that their team, the official made a mistake that everyone can see, that the fans saw in real time, that the league says it's not reviewable, and we can't fix it."

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/204194/ravens-want-nfl-to-answer-why-not-fix-obvious-officiating-errors

 

What do you guys think? Is it time for the NFL to get with the times or should they stick to the current system?

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Whichever one lets the Jegs win games

[oochymp 2,393]

essentially the Ravens want to switch from a list of what's reviewable to a list of what's not reviewable, that still doesn't get to my biggest issue with reviews in the NFL (and, in fairness, most professional leagues) and that's the reliance on coaches challenges, they need to go to a replay official like college ball has because when you make reviews coaches challenges you're making coaches decide which calls are worth challenging, ie which ones are worth getting right, and it makes reviews a point of strategy rather than a matter of getting the call right, which is what any review policy should be focused on IMO

[Zack_of_Steel+ 3,014]

Step in the right direction, imo. I think penalties should definitely be reviewable.

[Thanatos 2,847]

I agree with them.

 

In addition, "call on the field" in certain situations, should be meaningless. If there is a massive scrum for the ball and you see that there is a better chance one team got it than the other, no matter what the call on the field is, it should have no impact if the guy didn't actually see what happened. All he is doing is guessing as well.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Anyone have objections to this slowing the game down at all or is that just an accepted sacrifice to get the call right at all costs?

[ATL_Predator+ 1,196]

Nah. We don't need this.

 

The game will never be perfect, and we have replays for important matters such as scoring plays, turnovers, etc.

 

If a game.. 'comes down' to a penalty or missed call..maybe you should be focusing on your team's play and ensure that such situations can't happen.

[Cherry 1,302]

Nah. We don't need this.

 

The game will never be perfect, and we have replays for important matters such as scoring plays, turnovers, etc.

 

If a game.. 'comes down' to a penalty or missed call..maybe you should be focusing on your team's play and ensure that such situations can't happen.

You're trolling right?

[BwareDWare94 723]

ATTENTION ALL TGP USERS, I PRESENT TO YOU: BWARE'S REVIEW REFORM PROPOSAL

 

1. Every aspect of the game is reviewable (including penalties).

 

2. All reviews are conducted by off site officials and decided in a much more quick manner, relayed to the white hat immediately, and the game resumes faster. (If the league wants longer games, simply make halftime longer).

 

3. Reviews are instigated by an off-field official reviewing plays immediately after they are finished. (Chip Kelly would hate this but fuck Chip Kelly).

 

4. Coaches are given the red flag for one reason and one reason only--to delay the game from resuming before it's deemed that something needs to be reviewed. They are given 2 flag tosses per game, with more tosses awarded if they continue to be correct. It's still a challenge system in a sense but it allows coaches to say "wait a minute, assholes, don't let them snap the ball!"

 

5. Scores and turnovers continue to be automatically reviewed.

 

6. All personal foul penalties are automatically reviewed. This would negate so many penalties on defensive linemen/OLBs/blitzing DBs.

 

 

 

In a nutshell, my review reform proposal would hopefully get rid of the differences from white hat to white hat. Reviews of plays have become somewhat akin to a baseball umpire's strike zone. It's different from guy to guy, and that is absolutely wrong. The outcome of a review shouldn't be different because Carl Cheffers is the official and not Ed Hochuli. If the league wants consistency, used the centralized review location to decide the outcomes of reviews for each game each Sunday.

 

But no, this idea just has too much common sense involved. It'd never happen.

 

I like the Ravens idea, but I don't expect anything to come of it.

Edited May 19, 2016 by BwareDWare94

[oochymp 2,393]

4. Coaches are given the red flag for one reason and one reason only--to delay the game from resuming before it's deemed that something needs to be reviewed. They are given 2 flag tosses per game, with more tosses awarded if they continue to be correct. It's still a challenge system in a sense but it allows coaches to say "wait a minute, assholes, don't let them snap the ball!"

am I reading this wrong or are you basically saying give teams two more timeouts per game?

[BwareDWare94 723]

am I reading this wrong or are you basically saying give teams two more timeouts per game?

 

This doesn't result in a time out. It's basically for when your team is on defense, so that the offense can't run a snap in 15 seconds because something on the previous play should be reviewed. Essentially, it makes sure that the officials hold the next snap until the last play is confirmed or goes to review. If the review official is watching the play immediately after it happens, he or she can figure out if something needs to be reviewed while the play clock is rolling. My idea simply allows the coach whose team is on defense to toss the flag to make sure the last play is confirmed before the offense snaps the ball. Like I said, only 3 tosses per game. Say it freezes the game and play clock for an additional 10-20 seconds. Not a big deal.

 

 

[oochymp 2,393]

so it'll give teams extra, but shorter, timeouts?

[BwareDWare94 723]

so it'll give teams extra, but shorter, timeouts?

Not if you say that the players have to stay on the field.

Edited May 19, 2016 by BwareDWare94

[oochymp 2,393]

I still think it could be used in much the same way as timeouts, slow down a fast paced offense, get your players a quick breather, give your defense a little more time to get set up, how many times do you think we'd see a coach throw the "slow down flag" out when the offense is trying to catch them with too many men on the field?

[BwareDWare94 723]

I still think it could be used in much the same way as timeouts, slow down a fast paced offense, get your players a quick breather, give your defense a little more time to get set up, how many times do you think we'd see a coach throw the "slow down flag" out when the offense is trying to catch them with too many men on the field?

Personal foul penalty at the White hat's discretion.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Easily fixed. Team can't throw the flag without a timeout. If they throw it and the play is not reviewed, charge them a timeout.

[oochymp 2,393]

But at that point all you're doing is adding a mechanism whereby the officials can initiate the replay on their own. While that'd certainly be a good addition, I would rather see the reviews taken completely out of the hands of coaches. It doesn't take long for a replay official to look at a play and decide it needs a second look, often they'd be able to tell watching it live, and if that's the only determination the extra official is making then there shouldn't be an issue. You can even do that off-site like BWare suggested and just have the replay official effectively call an officials timeout to have the crew in New York (or wherever you want to put them) take a minute or two to review it.

[BwareDWare94 723]

Also, and this is the main point of my centralized location idea. That crew should be able to review the play in a mere fraction of the time a white hat does. Like I said, if the NFL wants their three/three and a half hour games, anyway, just make halftime longer.