Should coaches be allowed to challenge penalties?
 

With all of the extra flags being thrown nowadays for roughing the passer and helmet to helmet hits, should the red challenge flag also be able to be used for penalties?

The refs have been instructed to err on the side of caution, and thats fine, but frequently it's resulted in some some pretty poor judgement calls that are made in real time. These calls could be corrected if the ref had the chance to review it in slow mo.

So, leaving the challenge rules as they are now, and just adding in penalties as a challengeable item, would it be a good idea?

"Well, here we go again Dan. This is the 37th consecutive defensive snap that that Andy Reid has thrown the red flag challenging the non-call for holding on Tamba Hali."

"I'm telling you Greg, at some point the Chiefs are going to lose a timeout on these challenges."

Personally, I would just as soon they lose instant replay altogether.

ROFL

I am almost to this point as well. I liked it at first when the coach got two challenges a game, but it's gotten to the point where they're reviewing way too damn much. It ****s with the flow of the game.

Not as bad as the refs are.

No

it was one thing when only a coach could challenge but now we have IR with every single TD and every single turnover. It is out of hand.

Whew. I don't know, man. With how bad the refs have been, I don't think we can go back to no replay.

By all means let us continue to allow men who can be easily controlled by gambling interests or organized crime to affect a multimillion dollar activity.

The refs have always sucked, and it's not like it's perfect with all these reviews anyway.

Fair point. Twice last week I saw the refs go into the instant replay booth and come out with the incorrect call.

Yes. If there is going to be replay, everything should be reviewable.

My main reason for this are calls similar to the Flowers roughing the passer call this past week, or penalties where they call helmet to helmet on a defenseless receiver and the replay shows an obvious clean tackle.

****s yeah.

and to all the naysayers, well i loves me some nfl so anything to keep the game on longer is a thumbs up for this guy.

All it does is increase the amount of commercial breaks.

**** YES. There should also be a guy for each team who can point out obvious missed penalties (like Tamba getting held 300 times a game).

It will never happen, though. This is how they keep the games bent.

With the technology we have just watching replays at home on TV, there is no excuse why some referee in a booth can't make a quick and correct call on any questionable call and radio it down to the lead officials ear monitor.

There is no need to have 3 refs run across the field to some little tv screen and have a meeting. Waste of time. There could be much more replay if the NFL would utilize technology.

I like how college is reviewing personal fouls for helmet hits, but I don't like that the offense still gets 15 yards even if they overturn the foul

For regular penalties, no. But for the big ones (15+ yarders), yes. I think helmet to helmet should be automatically reviewed without the coach using a challenge.

Wait, what? I don't watch college much at all, so I wasn't aware they were doing this. Might I ask, what is the point of reviewing and overturning the call if they still give the offense the penalty yardage?

Because helmet to helmet is an automatic ejection so when they review it, it's to determine whether the player should be ejected or not, not whether the flag should be picked up.

Ah, thanks. I agree with Josh, then. That makes absolutely no sense. "We've reviewed the play and determined the defender did not make an illegal hit, he will not be ejected but the offense will still be awarded the penalty yardage." WTF?

I'd be OK with it as well. The "controlling the ball to the ground" is the most damning example of instant replay failure IMO. They can't tell WTF is a catch and what isn't anymore because the rule is so nuanced.

Just call it based on what it looked like on the field and be done with it.

:thumb:

That roughing the passer call on Flowers was so incredibly bad. I screamed and cursed at the TV in the bar when it was dead silent and everyone looked up stunned, especially the bartenders. I never yell and I'm there every week.

TBH officiating can be improved, but not like this.

I'm all for eye in the sky officiating. hell, put a sensor in the ball that, when it breaks the plane of the endzone (which has a sensor line in it), the auto TD is called (like they have in hockey kinda). **** the human element--have one or two refs on the field to catch the obvious stuff and two in the booth that watch the all-22 in real time and get the intermediate and difficult things to catch.

No, but they should consider making the penalty for Pass Interference less severe. I hate when a deep bomb is thrown, the catch isnt made and the team gets the ball at the spot of foul. Cheap yardage.

That's not an issue with replays, its an issue with the rule.

Well, my point is that the nuance wouldn't be as hotly-debated since the refs would just get one look at it to make a call.

In the old days when a great play happened, the ref made the signal and you celebrated. Very spontaneous and fun.

Now when there is a an exciting play, you wait on pins and needles, watch a Geico commercial, wait for the referee to make the call and by that time the excitement is over.

Yeah, let's ditch replay. The calls come out even in the end.

BINGO

Yep. Replay has brought a level of attention to the rules and every little possible scenario that may occur rather than just going with what makes sense on the field. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be every effort to call it right, but just that I'm OK with saying "well, it looked like a catch in real time" and saying that's good enough. I don't need to know if there was a blade of grass touching the ball before it was caught - if it was close, it's a toss-up and just go either way. It'll even out over time.

Man, can you imagine if they allowed you to challenge holding? We'd be debating whether someone was close enough to the play for it to matter, whether the grab was obstructing movement, whether it was inside the pads, etc. It would be a nightmare.

I hate it in college when a guy could have caught a 40-yard pass but for the defender grabbing him, and instead they get 15 yards.

It proabably offsets all the times when an offensive player pushes off and the defender gets called for PI.

I will say this, and wondering if I'll hear a halleluiah.

It drives me crazy that coaches can call timeouts from the sidelines. I'm sorry, but if nobody on the field of play has awareness that the clock is running out, a coach should NOT be able to bail those guys out.

Agreed.

No!

Yeah, that one irks me too. It's like the assumption is made that the receiver would've caught the ball without the interference, which isn't necessarily true. It's as dumb as the push-out rule that was thankfully eliminated a few years back.

while I agree to a point, if they lessen the penalty I can see the corners getting more physical. Actually, that would be a good thing. Bring it on.

There is no sensor in the puck in hockey. The refs actually make the call. Now, if there is a question as to if the goal was actually scored, they have refs in Toronto at the NHL headquarters who will review and simply call the refs on the ice.

I'd go for personal foul penalty calls to be review-able on a challenge.

To hell with that.

Its not like it happens with every "exciting play", it happens with very, very few of them. The refs are nowhere close to good enough to go without replay, I want egregious mistakes to be corrected.

To those who say "well, they don't get the call right on replay, so it doesn't matter", bullcrap. Almost every single time we have a replay, I agree with what they decide after review, the replay system is working fine, and its not really slowing the game down.

As far as the OP is concerned, I would only agree with reviewing those few penalties that are absolutely black and white with either no or very little judgment needed. 12 men on the field, lined up in the neutral zone, OK review that if they got it wrong. Holding or interference, no way.

Now this is a change I can get behind.

And the original system of 2 challenges per game per team adequately addressed that. The majority of the reviews seem to end up being inconclusive and the call on the field often stands.

Unless there is a flag, which happens all too often. Then you are still stuck waiting to hear from the officials to see if the play will stand or not.

I am willing to go back to the old system of 2 challenges, getting 1 back if you win, and let the booth handle the last 2 minutes. Reviewing after every score or turnover might be a bit much.

Though, when its obvious that the score or turnover was correctly called, they usually do a good job of getting ready for the next play while whoever is reviewing the obvious, and not bothering to announce the play stands when everyone knew it was good.

It's conditioning. If a play happens along the sideline I'm wondering if he stepped out. If it happens on a special teams play I'm wondering if there was holding (not really replay related). If it happens on a turnover I'm wondering if it will be overturned. If there is a goal line play I'm wondering if his knee touched before he broke the plane. If there is a pass play along the sidelines I'm wondering if he got both feet down. If the ball moves as the player goes to the ground I'm wondering if he caught it clean. It happens on a lot more plays than you think. Replays are intrusive to the game and lessen my enjoyment of it.

Just imagine if there was a way to review them calling OOB on Bowe earlier this year against the Titans. Had the refs just allowed that to play out rather than whistle the ball dead instant replay would have fixed it. Unfortunately, the refs got in the way of even getting the correct call.

If it is a sack strip I'm worried about if his arm was going forward or if the tuck rule applies. If a PI is called I'm wondering if the ball was tipped. If we recover a fumble I'm wondering if the opponent's knee was down.

This is an incredibly good point. It changes how you watch the game.

I just don't want to lose another playoff game to the donks because some ref misses our TE knee touching the ground before going out of bounds in the end zone. I still with the people upstairs had the power instead of wasting our times with a ref shoving his head in a box. It would make things go a lot quicker.

ON this I completely agree. There is absolutely NO REASON for this to be decided by the ref on the field with ONE small screen.

Hey man, state your opinion on instant replay, that's fine. That's what this thread is about. But you leave Geico commercials the hell alone. What have they ever done to you?

Geico commercials are well and good. I just don't consider them part of my Chiefs-just-scored-a-TD celebration.

lol...during a few of the Pioli years, the Geico commercials were probably the best part of watching the Chiefs play.

There are so many phantom calls that change games and with all the vegas/big money involved I don't see the problem with a calll or two per half depending on your ability to get it right in place.

Each coach gets three challenges to use on any questionable call, that's it. No automatic reviews on TDs, refs call it, coach challenges it. Holding, fumbles, TDs, hits, blocking calls, whatever. If you win three in a game, you get three more. Lose one and lose a timeout.

Leave it on the team to have replay "officials" on their bench or in their own booths to make the call to the coach.

No.

How has this thread not turned into an Alex/Geno thread yet?

No he was actually using scissors to cut his underarmour on the sidelines during the Raiders game it wasn't those lineman, stand up dudes over there in the bay area..Raiderfan

The problem with this is that DBs in the NFL, knowing that they are about to give up a huge pass play, would commit a the PI, preferring the 15 yards.

So we want to challenge penalties called and penalties not called? A real mess.

Coaches would challenge every penalty so I do not believe that would work

They might want to put in a non bias penalty review system to look at these penalties and make sure they get them right since so much can change on one shitty call

kind of like the world series huddle where the one ump was over ruled by the huddle. Got the call right. It might suck when it doesn't go your way and it might slow down game tempo but if they get it right at least they get it right instead of just saying sorry about that later on after you already got ****ed out of a win

No.

But I'd like them to do away with replays under the hood. Just have someone upstairs review everything as soon as it happens

Agree. There was a time when team captains actually meant something - at all levels of football. (Any player can call timeout, but back then it was usually the captains' responsibility.)

I would say only certain penalties being challengeable. The main ones being the roughing the passer and the helmet to helmet hit penalties. Those are usually drive changing penalties and too often they are getting them wrong.

I also fully agree that it doesn't even need to be an under the hood review or even challengeable for that matter. Just somebody upstairs buzzing the corrected call to the refs on the field is enough. It can be quick and effective.

Defensive PI is one of the most bullshit penalties called. I can't even distinguish what is and what isn't a penalty any longer.

No

not unless they change they way they do challenges

If they do them like in college where the booth does it all and we don't have to waste time watching the refs run over to a screen and are expected to overturn themselves.


all booth = faster (which would allow for more)

Defensive pass interference should be spot of the foul and repeat the down unless it's advanced past the marker, holding needs to be redefined so that it doesn't "happen on every play" but egregious holds such as the patented Choke-a-Tamba are still called.

I may be in the minority, but I don't really get worked up by bad reffing. I'll comment on a bad call, but I don't think its a major issue.

I hate the new QB roughing and defenseless receiver rules, but reviews aren't the solution.

Overall its just a non issue for me.

How awesome would it be if they just had a referee in a box upstairs reviewing all the angles making the penalty calls. He could even make circles and shit on screen to support the penalty call and it could be integrated into the broadcast in some way.

Absolutely yes. Coaches need to be able to put incompetent and/or biased refs on the spot and force them to make the correct calls.

I really have yet to see the problem with this one and think they took the guess work out of it.
You control the ball all the way through hitting the ground and every inch of movement caused by your momentum.

By those rules, I have yet to see one gotten wrong.

I'm sure there are some I haven't seen, but the one against us a few weeks ago was not a catch.

And yes I am all for challenging flags, but not no calls.

They got a catch/no catch call wrong in the Seattle/Tampa game just last week.

For PI and roughing the passer calls.

They should have both.

refs on the ground and super ref(s) in the camera room

in fact, i imagine they can make software to identify certain penalties for automatic review.