Quote:
Originally Posted by RedinTexas
I really like this idea. I have always hated rules that ask the referees to make a judgement as to whether something happened. For reference, think of the QB "in the grasp" rule, or the rule on whether a receiver "would have landed in bounds if not for the defender." Asking the referees to make judgements like these distract them from officiating penalties like they are supposed to do. Furthermore, if there actually are crooked referees, rules that give them the judgement to determine plays like whether the QB was in the grasp are perfect opportunities to influence the outcome of a game.
Any rule change that takes away judgement calls from the referees and leaves them only with the power to call whether the ball passed the line of scrimmage or not sounds like a great idea to me. This is exactly the kind of rule change that improve the game and reduce the amount of bitching at the refs that occurs in every contest.
ETA - Two really good things are accomplished with that rule change.
1 - The referee is no longer making a determination as to whether there was a receiver in the area. This is highly subjective and can vary wildly depending on who is making the call. The change makes it so the referee is only ruling on whether the ball hit the ground before the line of scrimmage or not and that could be reviewed pretty easily.
2 - We no longer have to sit through determinations of whether the QBs arm was going forward or not. If the ball comes out it's a live ball just as long as it doesn't make it to the line of scrimmage. No more interminable reviews on the QBs arm.
|
Ok but what about spiking the ball to stop the clock?