NFL Will Consider Making Pass Interference Reviewable

Show All Comments

IBLEEDSCARLETANDGRAY's picture

Too little too late.

"You're the patron saint of the totally effed" - Hot Tub Time Machine

HS
MichiBuck12's picture

My thoughts exactly. Maybe just don't fuck up the most obvious pass interference of the season with a minute to go in the NFC championship game? Then we don't have to have this conversation.

HS
semperfibuck's picture

Roger Goodell a leader? Hardly. Reactionary is far more descriptive.

HS
BrutusB's picture

I think the no-call was horrendous, but this might be opening a can of worms.  What's to stop you from just running non stop Hail Marys at the end and throwing a challenge flag and making them look for PI? And why give PI special treatment and allow them to look for that - there's holding on basically every play, we're all cool with them not calling those?

HS
BillShermansGhost's picture

I think include this in the coaches challenge opportunity, that way they don't abuse the system, but only challenge game changing events; at the same time, the booth, should be able to correct all out whiffs, but not weigh in on every penalty.

HS
BrutusB's picture

Yea but that's my point - there's going to be a penalty of some form on basically every play.  Inside of 2 minutes you could have them buzzing down to call PI on some play (but not others).  You're opening the door (even more) to the game feeling rigged.

HS
OSU069's picture

I disagree if they only make PI reveiwable. In the NFL pass interference penalties are the only types that can literally make one team win or lose the game. If a 50 yard PI that sets the other team up at the 1 was a bad call, that should absolutely be reviewed and corrected. 

HS
ohst8buxCP's picture

The missed call was atrocious but this seems like a bad idea. Would lead to waaaaaaay too may reviews. ​Instead of arguing about what a catch is we'd be arguing about what a PI is. Real solution is pay the refs enough to make it a full time job so they get these calls right more often.

HS
ANOTHERMICHIGANLOSS's picture

If they make the change, it will only be reviewed as a challenge.  So you have each team getting 2 challenges, and then under 2:00 it will be reviewed automatically.  They need to make that more clear so people don't think the game will stop on every pass play.

HS
Canukbuck's picture

Not if you limit the number of coach's challenges to, say, one per half for PI ??  There should also be more consistency in calling penalties during the regular season and the post season - seems like there are two sets of rule books right now .....

HS
osu78's picture

It also would not have impacted the NO game since it was not called and thus not reviewable. They could have teh booth stop play for blatant blown calls but that'd probably cause more problems than it solves.

Strive at all times to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate.

HS
MiamiBuckeye's picture

Wait, is a $170,000 annual salary not enough to be considered a "full-time job?" 

Like, what lifestyle do these refs live that they can't get by on that kind of money? 

"porque las estirpes condenadas a cien años de soledad no tenían una segunda oportunidad sobre la tierra."

HS
LCT's picture

They should. Easy fix. Throw a flag, lose the appeal, lose a timeout.

Lifetime vs. UM: L 9-1, C 8-0, T 5-0
Ohio State University President Jim Tressel

HS
LCT's picture

Legit lol

Lifetime vs. UM: L 9-1, C 8-0, T 5-0
Ohio State University President Jim Tressel

HS
LCT's picture

Same as now I guess. What is it now?

Lifetime vs. UM: L 9-1, C 8-0, T 5-0
Ohio State University President Jim Tressel

HS
QuadCitiesBuckeye's picture

Same as now I guess. What is it now?

No timeouts = no challenges

Shandy is not beer

HS
LCT's picture

Yeah. That's fine with me. Just add PI to what's challenge-able.

Lifetime vs. UM: L 9-1, C 8-0, T 5-0
Ohio State University President Jim Tressel

HS
2morrow's picture

The way the pro game seems to be going, why have penalties and refs at all? It has become the NBA with pads. 

HS
Dstacify's picture

A lot of good it will do. Targeting is reviewable in CFB. That doesn't stop officials from getting the call wrong more than 50% of the time. It's almost like if it happens in an OSU game the criteria is "If the player flagged for targeting is wearing a Scarlet and Gray jersey automatically eject them."

11 Strong.

HS
You can't spell chump without UM's picture

The NFL also needs to make PI a 15 yard penalty rather than a spot foul. It's absurd that you can get a 50 yard penalty for touching a receiver downfield, but punching a player will only get you 15.

Tom Brady lost to John Cooper. Never forget.

HS
LCT's picture

Agreed here too. Plus less incentive to chuck & duck. Lotsa cheapery on those plays.

Lifetime vs. UM: L 9-1, C 8-0, T 5-0
Ohio State University President Jim Tressel

HS
BrutusB's picture

I've gone back and forth on this one.  While I agree with your example, it would also be crazy to reward a DB for tackling the WR basically anytime he got beat if it was 20+ yards down the field.  You would have no incentive NOT to commit PI if the penalty was only 15.

HS
You can't spell chump without UM's picture

It's already 15 yards in college, and most of the DBs I see don't interfere deliberately.

Tom Brady lost to John Cooper. Never forget.

HS
Wargor's picture

And the few times they do, we just go with, "Smart Penalty."  Soccer has smart penalties and so does basketball.

HS
southalabamabuckeye's picture

Will the NFL ever be proactive vs. reactive? Officials need to he held accountable. They aren't weathermen after all.

HS
osu992's picture

Would need a standard of evidence beyond "clear and convincing," like "blatant and obvious."

New Day for OSU. Same noon for TTUN.

HS
osu992's picture

Also, the ref could only watch the play in real-time.

New Day for OSU. Same noon for TTUN.

HS
NHBuckeye's picture

Might not be long before we see many more 4K cameras and the game itself being reffed by Watson.  

Fields of Dreams

 

HS
colo_buckeye's picture

Deshaun has connections that would help this task.

God > Family > Buckeyes football

HS
GVerrilli92's picture

Honestly, I'd be fine with it. At least the criteria for each call would be clearly defined and adhered to. I'm sure literally every Rams fan was screaming at the defender for committing such a dumb penalty - and were then subsequently shocked that it wasn't called.

A series of cameras linked to a computer would actually work to change the culture of the sport as well. The fan could NEVER be pissed that a call wasnt made if an objective computer software couldn't pull the trigger on a call. The sport would actually return it's focus to, you know, the players.

Kitties aren't supposed to smell like cigarettes, they're supposed to smell like kitties.

HS
osu78's picture

A series of cameras linked to a computer would actually work to change the culture of the sport as well. The fan could NEVER be pissed that a call wasnt made if an objective computer software couldn't pull the trigger on a call. The sport would actually return it's focus to, you know, the players.

I have several issues with the idea that technology will remove human decision errors and produce infallible results.  Computers are only as good as the algorithms it uses. Some things inherently involve judgement and can’t be reduced to a formula. Cameras are affected by camera angles, critical information missing because the view was obstructed, etc.  Look at the analysis when the booth is reviewing it; often the discussion is around what are we really seeing. Did the ball touch the ground?  Did his knee touch the ground?

As for fans, they’ll be pissed every time a call goes the other way. That is one aspect of the sport that will never change. 

Strive at all times to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate.

HS
GVerrilli92's picture

Well I mean yeah, this is all assuming that the technology exists to be able to do these things. But then again the US military can place a warhead on a dime from 50,000 miles away, soo I'm willing to bet that the technology definitely exists to be more accurate than the human eye in almost any and every case. If we can build a car that drives itself, we can get a computer to tell us if somebody's knee touches the ground.

Now the part where I do agree with you is to do with the writing of the algorithms. If there's integrity in that process, then there's no way with what we have today that the human eye could ever be more accurate. Now, if you want to put your tin foil hat on then it would theoretically be a lot easier to skew the game in a team's favor by changing the adherence to favor that team over another, rather than seeking out a team of referees and paying them off. But if there's REAL integrity in the process of designing the programs, you will never convince me that either team was given an advantage. Make the officiating infallible. It's a sport to test the athletic ability and acumen of coaching - not to test the lack of perfection in officiating. If my team is better than yours and plays better than yours on that day, they should win - period.

Kitties aren't supposed to smell like cigarettes, they're supposed to smell like kitties.

HS
osu78's picture

Well I mean yeah, this is all assuming that the technology exists to be able to do these things. But then again the US military can place a warhead on a dime from 50,000 miles away, soo I'm willing to bet that the technology definitely exists to be more accurate than the human eye in almost any and every case.

It's not that you couldn't build a more accuraet sensor, it is being able to locate it so it gives an accurate assessment of a moving object. Hitting a stationary target with a guidance system is a relatively stratightforward problem. A tomahawk can use lookdown radar, know geographic characteristics, and GPS to accurately reach a designated targets. Similarly for ICBMs, except you need not be quite as accurate to get the same results. Tracking afottbal players, the ball, and the ground location is a lot more complex and one camera palcement may be able to see the result and another not. Know, if you put sensors all over uniforms and the field then you could combine sensor data to detremine when and if contact occurs. You would no longer miss a hold becasue you could tell if the back of a jersy is grabbed and by whom.

If we can build a car that drives itself, we can get a computer to tell us if somebody's knee touches the ground.

Self driving cars wiork well in a stable environment, but say on a rcetrack mixed with real drivers where are unpredictable actions they would have issues. I am not saying that soemday w may see such tech, just right now it would not be any better than a human.

Strive at all times to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate.

HS
GVerrilli92's picture

It might be possible, but definitely not cost efficient.

Great convo, still feel that if you could theoretically take human subjectivity out of officiating - you should. I'm all for a tech convo, I just roll my eyes at those who claim that human error in observing the legality of a sport is totally acceptable, which you aren't. I really hope that technology is more utilized within sports when it becomes cost efficient to do so.

Sounds like something the Ohio State Sport Science research team would be on the forefront of.

Kitties aren't supposed to smell like cigarettes, they're supposed to smell like kitties.

HS
osu78's picture

I agree we should look at ways to use technology to improve officiating and remove human error whenever possible. I doubt we will ever be able to completely remove it since people have to create the technology and write the associated algorithms which will introduce errors and biases; and the limits of sensor resolution mean the edge cases, was he just out of bounds or not?, will still result in judgement calls or at least complaints that the computer got it wrong.

One way I look at it is what is the philosophy in using the tech? Does it limit the ability of the refs to make or overrule decisions, or is it an adjunct that is available to help ensure the correct call?  That has impact beyond just getting the call right; it will impact how the game is played as well. For example, take the case where you monitor BB players to see if they travel. It's a straightforward rule, and sensors could be devised to determine if a player traveled. Would making every traveling call make a BB game better? There would be no missed or no-calls, at the expense of stopping play more often. To me, it's a philosophical as well as technological issue and merits discussion from both angles. What is the right balance between technological and human decision making?

I agree it is a good conversation, but then again that's expected from the 11W commentariat.

Strive at all times to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate.

HS
colo_buckeye's picture

Fine the player that commits PI for 25K every time, whether offense or defense.  If upon review, there is a overturned call/non-call, fine the refs 25K.  If the NFL comes out AFTER the game and says the call was botched (yes that verbiage must be utilized), commence torch and pitchfork mob and fine someone else again, maybe the mob leader if he/she chooses the wrong person.

God > Family > Buckeyes football

HS
Angry Panda's picture

I know i'm not the only one and it's been said by several people before but, it's driven me away from the NFL game. Not PI specifically but the rules at large.

I know the college game has its issues (does it ever) but i just can't get excited about the NFL. Plus living in New England with sanctimonious New England fans probably has a bit to do with my lack of enthusiasm.   

HS
RBurgundy4's picture

I'm with you, Panda. Can't remember the last time I watched a whole game, but I did yesterday while doing some brainless tasks for work - uploading files and such. It was a reminder of why I stopped in the first place many years ago. I find it to be frustrating, laughable garbage. Nonsensical. To each his own.

HS
CTBuckeyeFan's picture

Cool, now please fire everyone that officiated this weekend.  Dead weight needs to be cut.

HS
bd2999's picture

I am not sure the rule needs to be changed. Just have them call the clear penalties. That is it. In the NFL in particular PI is a rough penalty. Sometimes obvious and sometimes ticky tacky. It is a rough call to make.

I would worry a little about teams just starting to throw it up there more for potential penalties that may or may not be called and then challenge. That said, with only two challenges it may limit that some but maybe not the impulse to throw it up and hope for a flag. That said, it happens now, this just makes it easier since it would allow them to use it on a few plays that may matter and have more ticky tacky calls in that situation.

HS
Buckeye Chuck's picture

It's pretty sad that it's come to this. Making pass interference reviewable has the potential to make games ridiculously long, but the kind of whistle-swallowing we saw in New Orleans yesterday (don't forget, there was another pretty blatantly missed PI on the Rams earlier in the second half) can't be permitted to happen again.

The most "loud mouth, disrespect" poster on 11W.

HS
Fatpants's picture

Why don't they just add a couple more officials to each crew? Guys that stand a little more downfield to watch for it. I think the extra cost would be a pittance.

PG <3 PG

HS
Wargor's picture

This is something that always baffled me about soccer.  World cup matches use the same 3 guys (on field) as a middle school game.  Sure, they're in better shape, well trained, at the top of their game, etc., but at the end of the day it is 6 eyes compared to 6 eyes.  They miss stuff all the time, but adding say 2 more assistant refs isn't even thought of.

HS
LCT's picture

It's because most of the stuff Soccer players roll around on the ground about is phony anyway.

Lifetime vs. UM: L 9-1, C 8-0, T 5-0
Ohio State University President Jim Tressel

HS
Wargor's picture

More refs to catch dives.  

And given the drive killing 'injuries' that are starting to happen in football....

HS
High St Heismans's picture

LCT 

It's because most of the stuff Soccer players roll around on the ground about is phony anyway.

Loathes

Contacting

Terrain

HS
osu78's picture

That's because soccer refs, like soccer players, aren't wimps that need to be rested every few plays.

Strive at all times to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate.

HS
GVerrilli92's picture

By this logic Brock Lesnar would be scared of a marathoner.

Kitties aren't supposed to smell like cigarettes, they're supposed to smell like kitties.

HS
Wargor's picture

Yeah, but I'm not talking about rest, I'm talking about having enough eyeballs to make the calls and catch what is missed.  And plenty is missed that really should be called.  

HS
CTBuckeyeFan's picture

That's because soccer refs, like soccer players, aren't wimps 

Yeah, they're the epitome of tough..........

HS
osu78's picture

Yes, and better actors than those WR who seem to be horribly interfered with on every play and come up motioning for a flag...

Strive at all times to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate.

HS
tcm1968's picture

Some fixes... one there's a freaking ref looking right at the play in the Saints game. That dude needs to be done for the season, suspended some games and fined. No reason refs shouldn't be held accountable the same way players are...

Second thing just give coaches an extra challenge in the last 2 minutes of the half and game where they can challenge ANYTHING. 

Third thing would be some sort of booth buzzer on OBVIOUS missed calls. I would leave holding and pass interference off of this because that happens on every play but just about everything else should be free to be overturned imo. The Brady roughing was an obvious goof that someone could have instantly buzzed down and said pick up the flag... 

Fourth thing that would clean things up would be just expanding the boot review.. Last 2 minutes right now... why not make that last 3 minutes or last 4 minutes of each half...

Go Bucks~

HS
ohiopanda's picture

Why can't the on-field refs use their little headphones to communicate directly with those watching replays and make calls on the fly. We don't need to wait 10 minutes and stop play for them to go through a useless process, and it's moronic that such bad penalties are being missed/made routinely in big games.

If a penalty was obviously missed (like on Sunday), those seeing replays could make the call in 10 seconds and skip the crap. Let the field official know and correct it right away with minimal disruption to the game. They don't need to look at each play with a microscope, but obviously missed calls should be fixed. Still allow the couple challenges a game, but obvious penalties should be fixable on the go and it would barely affect the flow of a game. 

Also, they need to go to college OT rules or play out a full quarter/10 minutes. Coin flips shouldn't decide games

HS
kiddbuckeye's picture

The point is there are several good options to make this product better but as we have seen the NFL has an innate ability to make simple tasks VERY COMPLEX. Hey NFL..your PRODUCT SUCKS and its why CF is PASSING you by

HS
DroneBuck's picture

This would be AWFUL! Everything looks like a mugging in slo-mo. They’re gonna get under the hood, look at these bang/bang plays in super slow motion and assess a penalty for any contact that occurs prior to the ball getting to the target. This will make football unwatchable. Pass interference is like holding, you can call it on every play.

HS
GlassCityBuckeyes's picture

Let's lengthen the game even more so we can collect some more commercial revenue is the underlying reasoning.

Ann Arbor is America's asshole.

HS
silverbullet71's picture

I think they should go with an under 2 minute type rule. That way only big plays are reviewed and it.doesnt slow the game down much more

HS
CTBuckeyeFan's picture

Can they add Roughing the Passer to review as well?  Or should we just accept that slapping a QB in the chest when he has the ball will be called by the refs to bail teams out?

HS
thedewman10's picture

This is ridiculous. Leave it to the NFL to try to deflect. Just throw the flag on an OBVIOUS PI that everyone on this planet, and if their are people on other worlds, saw.

TheDewMan10

HS
wigmon's picture

I believe its a bad idea as others have stated.  There is pass interference (offensive and/or defensive) on probably 50% of the contested passes in the league if you are following the letter of the law.  If you could somehow limit the rule to  calls where a defender comes from off the receiver and gets there too  early, then maybe it wouldn't be so chaotic, but I think you are just opening a can of worms on this one call.
 

HS
youra6's picture

Guarantee this will be in the headlines for another week and everything will be forgotten and swept under the rug. Nothing will change.

HS
btalbert25's picture

Welcome to 6 hour long football games!

HS