Turnover Automatic Review

[Rich_C]

So there has been much talk about the Jessie James TD that wasn't but what I'd like to discuss is the pick and the holding call which was not called on that play which was equally as blatant. My question to the group is if on a review there is a penalty which COULD have or LIKELY caused a turnover to occur would the review of that turnover not force/ enforce that penalty to be applied?




As you can see clearly the jersey of the steelers player was being tugged on for a good portion of the back-end of that play. IMO - if the calling of that penalty is not in the rule books then it should be.

thoughts?

[Rastic]

Are they allowed to call a penalty during a review of a play when that penalty was not initially called or under review (as in a challenge)? I always thought review was limited to what was called prior to the review never what was missed.

[L.M.]

It should be. The whole point of review is to make sure things are called right. Additionally, coaches should be able to challenge penalties. Whatever it takes to make sure the rulings are fair and the game isn't being decided by officiating errors.

[Rastic]

It should be. The whole point of review is to make sure things are called right. Additionally, coaches should be able to challenge penalties. Whatever it takes to make sure the rulings are fair and the game isn't being decided by officiating errors.

I agree with your premise. Where I question this - including myself - is the fact that we know a penalty can be called on nearly every play. I think that statement is more than cliche and if taken to be true, if a penalty not seen until a replay was called for something else, then a penalty can theoretically be called during every review. Right?

And we complain for how many penalties are called and the length of game already. Could you imagine?

[Denver Scores]

Are they allowed to call a penalty during a review of a play when that penalty was not initially called or under review (as in a challenge)? I always thought review was limited to what was called prior to the review never what was missed.

If the penalty is for an illegal forward pass or 12 men on the field, it can be reviewed. Referees can't call holding after review that was not initally called on the field.

[Denver Scores]

It should be. The whole point of review is to make sure things are called right. Additionally, coaches should be able to challenge penalties. Whatever it takes to make sure the rulings are fair and the game isn't being decided by officiating errors.

Coaches are allowed to challenge whether the ball was tipped, which would negate pass interference, but not the DPI itself. I would like to see coaches be allowed to challenge uncatchable passes. Why do zebras say there is DPI if a ball went way over the receiver's head?

[#87Birdman]

Coaches are allowed to challenge whether the ball was tipped, which would negate pass interference, but not the DPI itself. I would like to see coaches be allowed to challenge uncatchable passes. Why do zebras say there is DPI if a ball went way over the receiver's head?

Because if the receiver was held up in anyway it would make it hard to prove if it was uncatchable if the receiver was not interfered with. Some of those that look uncatchable could potentially be caught with no interference.

[Denver Scores]

Because if the receiver was held up in anyway it would make it hard to prove if it was uncatchable if the receiver was not interfered with. Some of those that look uncatchable could potentially be caught with no interference.

You probably have seen the kind of passes I am talking about .The QB throws a pass so high and far over the receiver's head you can tell even without DPI, he could not have caught it.

[L.M.]

I agree with your premise. Where I question this - including myself - is the fact that we know a penalty can be called on nearly every play. I think that statement is more than cliche and if taken to be true, if a penalty not seen until a replay was called for something else, then a penalty can theoretically be called during every review. Right?

And we complain for how many penalties are called and the length of game already. Could you imagine?

Coaches still have limited challenges, it's not like every penalty should be reviewed or would be, just the ones which are flagrantly wrong to the entire world! There's just no excuse for getting it wrong this often in this day and age!

Zebras need better training, and higher wages with financial incentives for achieving accuracy - and take it out of the commish's paycheck and "perks"! If you combine that with better use of technology, you'll have less errors and more efficiency (as well as accuracy) in officiating.

[Denver Scores]

The NFL has 24 full-time officials this year. Unfortunately that does not include all 17 referees. (I read Pete Morelli is one of them.) Chances are they get a lot of money because of the 2012 lockout.

[beastlyskronk]

I don’t remember which game it was but there was an official that threw a flag after a review for unnecessary roughness and then against the Bucs last week they reviewed a fumble and overturned the unnecessary roughness they had originally called. I think the refs do have some leeway with calling/overturning penalties that directly influence a play but the rules are just getting too convoluted now. The whole rule book needs to be thoroughly reviewed and any rule with a potential grey area should be fixed.

This catch thing is ridiculous because there’s no set standard for what a “football move” is. James caught the ball, tucked it and in the rule book once you tuck the ball you’re now a runner, and then reached out. He already had a knee on the ground when he tucked it but since no one touched him he’s still a runner. That was a TD and the refs messed it up. They took football move out of the rule book but they act like it’s still there even though they don’t know what it is.

[Denver Scores]

I don’t remember which game it was but there was an official that threw a flag after a review for unnecessary roughness and then against the Bucs last week they reviewed a fumble and overturned the unnecessary roughness they had originally called. I think the refs do have some leeway with calling/overturning penalties that directly influence a play but the rules are just getting too convoluted now. The whole rule book needs to be thoroughly reviewed and any rule with a potential grey area should be fixed.

This catch thing is ridiculous because there’s no set standard for what a “football move” is. James caught the ball, tucked it and in the rule book once you tuck the ball you’re now a runner, and then reached out. He already had a knee on the ground when he tucked it but since no one touched him he’s still a runner. That was a TD and the refs messed it up. They took football move out of the rule book but they act like it’s still there even though they don’t know what it is.

They took "football move" out of the rulebook to end the confusion. Everyone knows what "clearly a runner" means, right? That phrase makes a lot more sense than "a football move" as written previously.

The penalty reviews are just to determine where to spot the ball on a play that is revewed for smoething else.

[Rancid]

Rich this is great topic and it seems logical that the officiating should 'get it right' by whatever means they have to do that.

Best I can tell is that the 'review' is just that. It is a review of the call made by the official. It is not a supplemental officiating tool.

https://operations.nfl.com/the-offic...eplay-process/

To me, once the receiver broke the goal line the play was over-- TD! It seems every time I see a RB scampering down the sidelines to dive and reach the ball just in side the pylon-- without ever touching anything in bounds it is ruled a TD, but when a receiver breaks the plane the play evaluation continues to consider whether or not it was a catch with no consideration of calling the play dead the instant it is a Touchdown.

Therefore, it is impossible to get excited about any kind of a big play in the NFL anymore because the majority of them are called back for some penalty or scrutinized under a microscope for any possibility of something being not absolute. It is dumb and for me, ruined the game. I do not see that stuff when watching college ball.

[Denver Scores]

So you are opposed to having a replay system? The problem is what we have discused in antoher thread: stupid catch rules. If the definition of a catch was simplifed to include any catch that shows complete control of the football with both feet down in bounds, there wouild not be a problem with official reviews overturning awesome catches and big plays.

[beastlyskronk]

They took "football move" out of the rulebook to end the confusion. Everyone knows what "clearly a runner" means, right? That phrase makes a lot more sense than "a football move" as written previously.

The penalty reviews are just to determine where to spot the ball on a play that is revewed for smoething else.

By the rule if you tuck the ball after catching a pass you’re now “clearly a runner” so when James brought the ball into his body before reaching out, that would be considered tucking the ball and thus establishing himself as a runner. So then it becomes what rule overrides the other

I would like to see the rule changed to where the ground can’t cause an incompletion if you’ve already established possession ie two feet down clear control of the ball with no juggling/bobbling. If the ground can’t cause a fumble why can it cause an incompletion?