Log in Register

Login to your account

Username *
Password *
Remember Me

Create an account

Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.
Name *
Username *
Password *
Verify password *
Email *
Verify email *

fb mb tw mb

Friday 28th Apr 2017

I am really up to here with all the crap regarding replacement refs.

Seriously. I don't think anything will ever modify us as a small minded stupid culture any more than this chunk of one month craziness over--are you ready?--a game.

OK, let me set some basics here.

First, I love playing games, be it Scrabble with a board, Words With Friends on my IPhone, Fantasy Games, trivia. You name it, I probably get a kick out of it. I have even logged into the National Bible Quiz on TV for a minute just to see what that was, and amazingly, I was better at the Old Testament than any of the contestants, which shows what ten years of Sunday School and Bar Mitzvah Hebrew classes will do.

Further, I love watching football. In some ways I love it more than watching baseball, for to me it is really chess in motion. And, that is pretty complex and cerebral stuff.

But, the replacement ref stuff is just crazy with terrible moves and decisions being made by everyone involved. (Which makes it almost as stupid and poorly managed--though no less interesting--than politics.)

To start, how the owners and Roger Goodell ever boxed themselves in over $3 million out of $9 billion in annual revenues (that is .33% of the total, according to my calculator, which is one-third of 1%) is simply beyond me.

That is such a pittance in such a profit making machine that the amount barely merits write off (not that I would not be happy were someone to drop the money into my lap).

But, then locking the refs out, rather than simply continuing the negotiations again simply spells stupidity and some sordid combination of being greedy and chintzy that falls squarely on the shoulders of the exceedingly wealthy owners cartel.

But, as with replacement players, how anyone in charge of the NFL brand and product could possibly think the replacement refs was a good idea is again beyond me.

Which is not to say I blame those very same replacement workers, whom I believe overall tried to do a good job and take their work seriously.

It is just they lacked the actual real time experience to do the job properly, which is not really their fault, and it surely is not their responsibility.

I mean, I am a big Food Channel junkie, and a couple of the shows I like are Restaurant Impossible and Restaurant Stakeout. On both of these programs, the core problems of operating a restaurant on a daily basis is lack of training, either by the management of the place, or the staff, or worse of all, both. In fact, usually bad management precipitates bad training, cascading a business into an abyss irrespective of the type of business.

Well, if it is hard to get untrained wait-folks to know how to work properly, how realistic is it to think that the replacement refs would be able to professionally manage 22 moving bodies conjuring up 120 or so plays over the space of an hour and even close to get it right?

So, bad calls or not, I think it is unfair to blame the refs, and I say this noting that last Sunday, when watching the Ravens and Broncos go at it, there were at least three molestations of wide receivers that I spotted and went unnoticed.

But, like knowing in baseball that when there is a play at first you watch the feet and listen for the pop of the ball into the glove, if that process is sort of foreign to the arbiter, well, some questionable calls will result.

And they surely did, fueling outrage from fans and players and coaches, with the players even incredulously claiming that their health was potentially being compromised by the bad calls.

Really? I mean these guys chose to participate in a serious contact sport wherein they are paid millions of dollars, and suddenly, because of a bad call or miss their life is now in jeopardy where it was not before?

That is kind of like NASCAR participants complaining because they cannot get a new technology helmet.

As for fans, well, they will always be fans. The root of the word fanatic, in fact, is "fan" and if you choose to remember, fanatic is "an irrational belief in something" so really, the fans are asking for trouble by definition.

carroll

Remember though that every bad call for one team is indeed a good call for another, and if you doubt that, remember Pete Carroll's face after Golden Tate's game winning catch last Monday (BTW, it was a game winning catch for that is how it was ruled on the field, and well, that is all that counts, right? Further, if anyone actually thought the NFL would reverse the call and set the precedent of undermining one of its judges as such, they were really dreaming).

But mostly I just want to scream at everyone involved, "Just shut up and deal with it." This is how your universe works in the here and now. Play the game and deal and move on.

And that goes for fans and coaches and players and owners alike.

Although I do have to admit how much I loved Scott Walker and Paul Ryan--two of the most anti-union politicians on the planet--begging the league to compromise with the ref's union. Funny how when their team loses unions are important, but when our teachers or firefighters or policemen are involved, then screw them.

Couple that with the agreement being made, and the "real" refs returning to play on Thursday night to a standing ovation--and talk about duplicitous--along with Goodell's apology for the fiasco just adds to the overall silliness of the whole matter.

Mind you, it is not that I don't want to get things right, let alone have low standards. Quite the contrary. But, I also know that being perfect might be a fine goal, but hitting that target is generally beyond all our capabilities. So, if we don't want to see some Jetsons-esque version of futuristic football with robots clanking one another, then that is what we have to deal with.

Furthermore, people do make mistakes, however, errors are one opportunity to learn and not repeat an offense.

So, hopefully the Roger Goodell--and maybe Paul Ryan, Scott Walker, the NFL coaches, and angry fans--will learn accordingly.

Truth is I believe the laws of karma will make it such that the good and bad breaks for every team--and that means those now 1-2 Packers--even out over the long run. So, as with life--because do remember, we are talking about a game here--again, deal with it, let go, and move forward.

Comments   

0 #9 John Verdello 2012-10-01 12:59
Remember ...there's a third parameter here ...just ask Megatron. You have to complete a football move as well. Complicates things significantly.
Quote
0 #8 Todd Zola 2012-09-30 16:36
Yes, but previous to the launch, he has established possession in bounds with ball-in-hand and has possession as the ball crosses.

With a reception, it is not complete/official until he has possession and establishes he is in bounds with the reception - even in the end zone. Merely having it in your hands, even if under control, does not establish possession if your feet are off the ground.
Quote
0 #7 Lawr Michaels 2012-09-30 16:26
maybe...but...an RB can be airborne, launching inbound before moving the ball across the plane and land out of bounds and that counts, right? so technically he never even steps into the zone?
Quote
0 #6 Todd Zola 2012-09-30 15:04
I think the difference is the RB is "in bounds" when he crosses the plane of the goal line but until a the player catching a ball in the end zone gets two feet or a body part down, being "in-bounds" is not established.

There is a link being passed around in Facebook, I believe from the Seattle paper, that has an angle showing what can be definitely considered dual possession when they hit the ground.

But, as the NFL admitted, that push by Tate was just SOOOO blatant, it was laughable.
Quote
0 #5 Lawr Michaels 2012-09-30 13:26
i guess the other TD arugment would be if an RB has possession and breaks the plane and then fumbles, it is a TD.

does that mean just that possession--however short--translate to the defense?

ie, the length of the pick in the zone does not matter: it is the act of the initial pick that counts?

just curious if nothing else?
Quote
0 #4 Todd Zola 2012-09-30 01:13
Actually, by the letter of the law, the call of TD was not as egregious as it seems.

The reason being possession cannot be judged until someone in possession is rules down. Everyone points out that Jennings had almost 100% control at the beginning, but by the time both players hit the turf, there is actually a legit argument for simultaneous possession, or at least there was not ample evidence to overturn it. Had it been ruled a pick and then reviewed, I don't think that would have been overturned either. Inconclusive evidence to rule 100% either way.

The part about the refs that frustrated me the most weren't the mistakes, but rather the length of the games.

And, it would not shock me if the fiasco Monday was not the primary impetus for the quick agreement. There is a faction that no one has mentioned -- it would not shock me if Vegas was putting some pressure on the league to get the refs back. I'm not talking about the money that changed hands due to the TD, but simply the ability of the odds-makers to set the lines such that the house gets maximum vig. We think we know our fantasy stuff and are stat nerds, the guys that set the line KNOW EVERYTHING including who is going to ref, their tendencies, etc. There is a reason why football has passed baseball as the national past-time and it isn't the grace and beauty of the game -- it's the "bettability".
Quote
0 #3 John Verdello 2012-09-29 23:07
I agree ...but the problem I have is that there were NFL league officials there and they did nothing to, let's say, prevent the size of the scrum from it's initial count of 5 to 15 or better including two civilians. Imagine if someone got injured when the population of the end zone crowd increased dramatically.

And another thing I found curious and that seems to have gone unnoticed. Side judge and back judge in the end zone. Ref and his confidant heading towards Replayville. Where were the other three officials and why weren't they in the end zone helping to get control of things? I know it's a moot point - but I'd be assuming things like this got management off its ass real fast.
Quote
0 #2 Lawr Michaels 2012-09-29 18:28
no argument, kid. the ball was stripped by tate after the pick, and if nothing else, it should have been overturned via replay. and those are just two mistakes.

and, i hope i supported your contention that the replacement refs were unprepared in what i wrote.

but, neither of these things really matter.

i mean, expecting the call to change now is sort of like expecting MLB to rectify armando gallaraga's "perfect game," right.

however, it never should be that one play like that is the lynch pin for a change in policy, and i still don't blame the refs for making bad calls: i blame the league and owners for their lack of foresight.

which means all the outcry and bad calls fall to them, and well, that means too bad packers.

this all could have easily been avoided, don't you think? otherwise it would not have been resolved so readily when push came to shove.

i do find it ironic that game viewership has increased over the replacement games, though, huh?

like people who watch NASCAR for the accidents, maybe?
Quote
0 #1 John Verdello 2012-09-29 16:17
It's hindsight, I know, Lawr - there was more than one mistake on that play - actually there were several (and I don't mean Tate's push off) - that seem to escape notice. The play showed how totally unprepared the replacement refs were to officiating these games. I won't go into them all, but they are there for those who look (give you two - ref never consulted with side or back judge - went straight to the hood. Ever seen a play on the field where not only a blue jacketed civilian and a red jacketed cameraman were part of the pile?) There are more, but you get the drift.

After the game was over, one of those teams tried to steal it in a scrum in the end zone by taking advantage of these replacements - on national TV. And the Shield seemingly doesn't have a problem with that.
Quote

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

Latest Tweets

 2017Platlogo

 

LABRLOGO

xfl

toutwarslogo-new

Our Authors