New rules are killing the game

[trents]

Anybody see the game tonight between Lions and Packers?

A couple of phantom infractions for hands to the face/neck on the Detroit DE that were pivotal with regards the outcome. Honestly, I came away from watching that game saying to myself, "I'm losing interest in this sport." I can't tell anymore who really played well enough to win the game because the refs are deciding the outcome of so many contests.

All the new player safety rules are killing the game. I'm convinced that the league is pressuring the refs to be aggressive in their calling penalties. They will call a player safety type of penalty if there is the slightest suspicion it was committed. Rather than the players getting the benefit of the doubt in these situations, the refs are looking to throw a flag at the slightest hint of infraction. In my mind, the flags should stay in the pockets unless there is an obvious violation. But I don't blame the refs as much as I do the rules committee or whoever makes up these rules. Makes me wonder if the refs have been given a penalty quota to meet. Certainly, the refs have been given way too much more to keep track of.

And I think what's driving all this is the fact that American football is loosing ground at the pediatric level. Participation numbers in AAU/PeeWee, etc. is significantly down from what it was a generation ago cause all those moms and dads are funneling their kids away from football into safer sports. The NFL has taken note of that, is worried about it's implications for the future of their fan base, and is over-correcting in order to improve their safety image. Law suites from brain addled former NFL players may also have something to do with it.

[jshawaii22]

Naw, it isn't player safety... according to the pool interview with Clete Blackmon, it was the same ref lined up behind the line of scrimmage (so he only sees the back of the O-Lineman's face, never the front) who called both of those non-fouls, so my opinion is the Ref had a week's pay on the Pack to win or someone who did has a gun on his wife.

I also want to give a shout out to Booger McFarland. He probably risked his job by doing it, and he's a terrible 'color' man, but he just went off tonight after the second penalty for phantom hands to the face and rightfully, so. More power to him. This is another "fail-Mary" that GB is involved in.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/10/15/pool-report-clete-blakeman-on-tracy-walker-roughness-call-trey-flowers-illegal-hands-penalties/

[Hawktawk]

Yes throw in the non call on the obvious PI earlier in the quarter that would have put Detroit in FG range instead of having to punt. After the game Matt Patricia said they looked at the play and didn’t think they had a good chance to get a replay call. Obviously they have been watching these challenges of obvious uncalled PIs be rejected in almost every instance over the last few weeks by these out of control officials and their supporters in the mother ship in NYC. I’d say review everything but as challenging PI is turning out it’s obvious they will still wind up with the call they want. It’s time for the NFL to clean house starting with tossing the mentality that refs should be the biggest part of the game. One more thing. How does Packers player #81 wind up back in the game? He was obviously knocked out and didn’t move for 15 seconds and winds up making a big catch later . If that’s going to happen probably shouldn’t penalize the defender who was going for the ball anyway to”protect a defenseless player” ..what a joke

[RiverDog]

If I were a Lions fan, I'd be fuming. That was a horribly called game that was skewed heavily towards the Packers. Had that occurred later in the season with more on the line than just a Week 6 regular season game, you can bet that the competition committee's solution would be to approve replay for more penalty calls.

IMO the guys in the replay center in New York should have been in the ear drum of the crew chief and told them to reconsider those two hands to the face penalties and pick up the flag. It's what should have happened in the NFCCG last year.

As far as the PI call HT referred to, I was astounded that Patricia didn't challenge it. I'm pretty sure he had challenges and timeouts available at that point. All 3 of those calls were critical.

I don't want to see the game devolve into some sort of computerized officiating system nor do I want to see a constant string of game stoppages while the refs consult with NY, but there has to be some sort of middle ground that allows refs to see in real time the same things we see a few seconds afterwards, perhaps some sort of interactive goggles or something.

[Oly]

I have to admit that the officiating is also dampening my interest in football (both kinds). I follow both the Seahawks and Sounders, and in both sports the margins of victory can be so slim that a bad call can change the outcome, and does so pretty regularly. I do feel bad for the refs, and I don't think there is anything shady going on, but I hate the feeling of devoting my afternoon to watching a game only to have some BS call change the outcome. I have invested over 30 years into being a Seahawks fan, and that's not going to die, but I'm certainly watching fewer games these days and it's entirely because of officiating.

[trents]

The irony is, while trying to convince the public that football can be made safer so as to preserve the fan base, they are losing that fan base because it is becoming disgusted with what the hyper officiating is doing to the game. And on the faces of the players and coaches who are the victims of this you can see the disillusionment with the current state of officiating. They are obviously frustrated and confused. How do you play a game built around violent contact without making violent contact?

And the checklists that guide the officials in determining if an infraction has occurred are a joke. With every other play they are checking the list of guidelines. "Let's see. Did he lower head? Did he launch? Did he leave his feet? Did he turn his head to the side? Did he hit the player in the shoulders or above? etc, etc, etc.

Usually it's obvious if a defender is going out of his way to hurt someone. It's obvious to me as a fan anyway. I don't need a checklist. If it's not obvious, beyond the shadow of a doubt, call it. Otherwise, let the guys play. Just use the general headers of unnecessary roughness and unsportsmanlike conduct that served well for years.


If this rule and officiating overreach is not rolled back, there will be room for another football league where the players are actually allowed to play football.

[RiverDog]

One of the things we're missing here is the ineptness of the Lions coaching staff. They got called for too many men on the field on a red zone FG attempt, resulting in a first down and a subsequent Packers touchdown.

I'm also wondering why Patricia didn't throw the challenge flag on an obvious pass interference that wasn't called late in the 4th quarter. Unless I'm mistaken, he had timeouts and challenges available. Can anyone explain that?

[trents]

I don't disagree with you but this issue is bigger than that one game. It is pervasive.

The point I'm trying to make is that the only time the refs should throw a flag is when an infraction is blatant. As it is, they are throwing flags right and left for mostly marginal or possible infractions and that is slowing the game down, confusing the coaches and the players and alienating the fan base.

I'd also like to see the refs start relying on what they see on the jumbotron most of the time instead of going to the sidelines and looking over and over at the same frames for minutes at a time many times over in a game.

[Hawktawk]

One of the things we're missing here is the ineptness of the Lions coaching staff. They got called for too many men on the field on a red zone FG attempt, resulting in a first down and a subsequent Packers touchdown.

I'm also wondering why Patricia didn't throw the challenge flag on an obvious pass interference that wasn't called late in the 4th quarter. Unless I'm mistaken, he had timeouts and challenges available. Can anyone explain that?

A couple of things here. #1 yes the Lions got called for 12 on the field but in the first half the Pack had 13!!!! on the field with no call. #2 I think I already addressed the PI challenge thing. The last 4 weeks neither the refs nor the mother ship in NY is giving anyone a reversal. I think its high 20s no reversal to 1 reversal last few weeks.

In the Thursday night game a Patriots player undressed Tate I believe it was with no call and they challenged and lost. My circle of FB friends blew up on that one too. They are just refusing to enforce it or use a rule passed by the competition committee. So why burn a timeout? Patricia was correct he needed all of them and minus the second BS hands to the face call of the half against Flowers who had NEVER BEEN FLAGGED FOR IT HIS ENTIRE CAREER they would have gotten the ball back with about a minute, no timeouts down 2 with a field goal kicker with a howitzer for a leg. Kind of like SB XL back in the day, that could have been such exciting football for the fans instead it's another GD flag coupled with some critical no calls ruining the game for everyone. I agree with Desmond Howard who was a star for the Pack who said the refs need to be investigated and have their bank accounts checked out. Id go so far as to say polygraphs, the whole gamut. There are billions at stake between league revenues and bettors all over the globe. Way too loose with these officials. No accountability. League needs to clean house but I think they like it this way.

[trents]

"League needs to clean house but I think they like it this way."

You mean as in purposely generating controversy?

[jshawaii22]

One of the things we're missing here is the ineptness of the Lions coaching staff. They got called for too many men on the field on a red zone FG attempt, resulting in a first down and a subsequent Packers touchdown.

I'm also wondering why Patricia didn't throw the challenge flag on an obvious pass interference that wasn't called late in the 4th quarter. Unless I'm mistaken, he had timeouts and challenges available. Can anyone explain that?

RD, since the start of the year only ONE of 20 or thereabouts PI calls have been overturned. Looks like it has to be as bad as the Rams/Saints before they'll turn the call or add a call. And my opinion on that non-PI was it looked a lot like the LoB typical defense from a few years ago. I think Patricia was correct in not calling for a review.

[RiverDog]

RD, since the start of the year only ONE of 20 or thereabouts PI calls have been overturned. Looks like it has to be as bad as the Rams/Saints before they'll turn the call or add a call. And my opinion on that non-PI was it looked a lot like the LoB typical defense from a few years ago. I think Patricia was correct in not calling for a review.

Boy, I dunno. It looked a lot worse in replay than it did in real time. There was definite contact prior to the ball and it did impede the receiver. Considering what there was to gain and that the Lions were ahead at the time, meaning that timeouts weren't as important as they would have had they been trailing, makes it a better risk. Pete successfully challenged a no call PI on what IMO was a less flagrant play in the Pittsburgh game.

[RiverDog]

A couple of things here. #1 yes the Lions got called for 12 on the field but in the first half the Pack had 13!!!! on the field with no call. #2 I think I already addressed the PI challenge thing. The last 4 weeks neither the refs nor the mother ship in NY is giving anyone a reversal. I think its high 20s no reversal to 1 reversal last few weeks.

I am in full agreement with the consensus that the Lions got hosed. The calls were blatantly one sided, one of the worst I've seen in a long time. The one penalty we didn't talk about is when one of their DB's got called for a helmet-to-helmet when he was going after the ball. The defender has just as much right to go after a ball as the receiver. That's another situation where NY should have been in the crew chief's ear and told him to pick up the flag. They can do stuff like that without interrupting the flow of the game. Ironically, had that been a college game, they would have reviewed the play for a possible targeting and more than likely decided to pick up the flag.

As far as the too many men on the field, the point I was trying to make was that the Lions had controllable issues that had a dramatic impact on the game, of which that penalty was one example. There's occasions when the officiating is so horrible that we tend to forget the times the victimized team shoots themselves in the foot.

[jshawaii22]

In Clete's post game interview he was asked about the helmet-to-helmet hit and said just like the rule of dual possession that goes to the offensive player, in this case, they were right to call a penalty for it, and the offensive player is always given the right to be there first... so that is why the flag was what it was, at least in the eyes of this one Crew official (he is a crew chief) --

There sure were a lot of questionable calls last night. And they seemed to all be against the Lions.

[Aseahawkfan]

Ref's are too invasive in modern football.

[RiverDog]

In Clete's post game interview he was asked about the helmet-to-helmet hit and said just like the rule of dual possession that goes to the offensive player, in this case, they were right to call a penalty for it, and the offensive player is always given the right to be there first... so that is why the flag was what it was, at least in the eyes of this one Crew official (he is a crew chief) --

There sure were a lot of questionable calls last night. And they seemed to all be against the Lions.

So by that interpretation, if there's a fumble on the field, the defensive player should pull up and let the offensive player fall on it so as to avoid a possible helmet-to-helmet contact?

I've always been taught that when a forward pass is in the air, that each player has an equal right to go for it. That's why we have pass interference rules on both offense and defense.