If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   For possibly the first, and last, time in the recorded history of sports, fans gave referees a thunderous standing ovation as they walked on to the field Thursday night   (sports.yahoo.com) divider line 37
    More: Spiffy, history of sport, NFL referee, NFL, John Harbaugh, Shawn Springs, Gene Steratore, opinions, Connecticut Post  
•       •       •

919 clicks; posted to Sports » on 28 Sep 2012 at 11:57 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



37 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-28 09:43:04 AM  
the players, ray lewis especially, looked like 10 year olds crying in dad's arms after a particularly long and scary weekend with the baby sitter.
 
2012-09-28 09:51:06 AM  
I never realized how good the officials were until we saw bad ones. In a season we might see half a dozen bad calls....but not dozen horrendous calls in a few weeks.
 
2012-09-28 10:23:41 AM  
The difference was like night and day.
 
2012-09-28 10:31:34 AM  
Last time?

I think they'll get recognized at this weekend's games, and then that should be it.

Never thought I'd miss those guys so much, but wow... What a difference.
 
2012-09-28 11:09:05 AM  
Research idea for someone who actually has the time, resources, and inclination to do this (hell, maybe I'll get to it when I start grad school) - see how much the announcers affect how we feel about referee calls. And how much pre-existing information, like knowing "these are the pros," affects it.

Basically, show last night's game with different groups of people:

People that are told they're replacement refs
People that aren't told anything about the refs
People that are told that these are professional refs

People that watch the game with announcers supporting the refs' decisions
People that watch the game in silence
People that watch the game with announcers criticizing each flag/non-flag

I'd be really interested to see how much influence those two factors have on our opinions of how games are officiated. I think it was better with the "real" refs back, but it was interesting how much the broadcasting team supported the refs' decisions on every single play, even describing things that didn't happen as having happened in order to make it seem right. Compare it to how critical they were of the replacement refs, especially last weekend (not to say that they didn't deserve it, but they were pretty quick to point out that it was a bad call on any questionable call, or at least they'd trot out the old "you have to wonder about whether the regular refs would've called that" line).
 
2012-09-28 11:24:18 AM  

IAmRight: Research idea for someone who actually has the time, resources, and inclination to do this (hell, maybe I'll get to it when I start grad school) - see how much the announcers affect how we feel about referee calls. And how much pre-existing information, like knowing "these are the pros," affects it.

Basically, show last night's game with different groups of people:

People that are told they're replacement refs
People that aren't told anything about the refs
People that are told that these are professional refs

People that watch the game with announcers supporting the refs' decisions
People that watch the game in silence
People that watch the game with announcers criticizing each flag/non-flag

I'd be really interested to see how much influence those two factors have on our opinions of how games are officiated. I think it was better with the "real" refs back, but it was interesting how much the broadcasting team supported the refs' decisions on every single play, even describing things that didn't happen as having happened in order to make it seem right. Compare it to how critical they were of the replacement refs, especially last weekend (not to say that they didn't deserve it, but they were pretty quick to point out that it was a bad call on any questionable call, or at least they'd trot out the old "you have to wonder about whether the regular refs would've called that" line).


You make a very good point. I wondered that myself. And, well, I have nothing to add.
 
2012-09-28 11:53:54 AM  
I also wonder about instant replay - I'm sure other people notice when they don't play a replay on a play that you really want to see a replay on, because there was something questionable about it, but the announcers are too busy praising the play to bother pointing it out...you can't get SUPER outraged because you don't know for sure, but at the same time, you wonder about it for a while.

Oh, I liked last night when the announcers acted like it was a brilliant observation, starting with "I think the Cardinals are doing well not because of Larry Fitzgerald and the offense, but because of their defense." NO F*CKING SH*T, you think that a defense giving up 13.3 points/game might be more responsible for their success than the guy who is currently 40th in the league in receiving yards with one TD? I'm sure no one else thought of that!
 
2012-09-28 12:00:23 PM  
This headline submitted by Gene Steratore.
 
2012-09-28 12:25:27 PM  

IAmRight: I also wonder about instant replay - I'm sure other people notice when they don't play a replay on a play that you really want to see a replay on, because there was something questionable about it, but the announcers are too busy praising the play to bother pointing it out...you can't get SUPER outraged because you don't know for sure, but at the same time, you wonder about it for a while.


My pet peeve for the last few seasons is they don't show replays of 'minor plays' when an RB gains like 2 yards or there's an incomplete pass. I've been watching the game focused on the O-line and D-line a lot, and on a lot of those sort of plays, the D-line steps up big and someone makes a really nice play. But because it was some anonymous 300lb monster amidst a pile of other monsters instead of a personable skill player on someone's fantasy team, it never gets recognized.
 
2012-09-28 12:35:22 PM  

Jubeebee: I've been watching the game focused on the O-line and D-line a lot, and on a lot of those sort of plays, the D-line steps up big and someone makes a really nice play.


I've started to try to focus on those (the NFL player from the school I work at is an O-Lineman, as is the best player from my alma mater - both are FCS schools so it's not like there are a ton of them getting pumped into the NFL), and yeah, it's annoying to not see any line play. There are a few times I want to see the holding calls and what is/isn't called on a regular basis.

But yeah, there's no reason there shouldn't be instant replay of pretty much every play, given the time between plays. Except for f*ckers like Peyton Manning who have to get up to the line immediately then pretend that they're just about to snap it for 30 seconds while everyone watches him dance like a chicken/set up the play/call protections/whatever.
 
2012-09-28 12:38:59 PM  

Jubeebee: My pet peeve for the last few seasons is they don't show replays of 'minor plays' when an RB gains like 2 yards or there's an incomplete pass. I've been watching the game focused on the O-line and D-line a lot, and on a lot of those sort of plays, the D-line steps up big and someone makes a really nice play. But because it was some anonymous 300lb monster amidst a pile of other monsters instead of a personable skill player on someone's fantasy team, it never gets recognized.


I found that really frustrating when trying to describe the different roles of players to my wife. She comes from a basketball background and thinks football is just a free-for-all (well, she used to). It's hard to really show good run blocking and QB protection because of the fact that they do what you said; they either ignore the linemen in replays or they just don't show the replay of plays that die near the line of scrimmage. I ended up having to plug in Madden and do slow motion replays of players engaging in their roles.
 
2012-09-28 12:43:14 PM  
All is right with the world. We can go back to abusing refs for being human rather than for being incompetant.
 
2012-09-28 12:47:44 PM  
BTW, here's a nice follow-up on the play that everyone got so mad about that they idiotically proclaimed the "worst call ever." And apparently I'm not the only one who doesn't think it was a bad call.
 
2012-09-28 12:57:57 PM  

This Looks Fun: I found that really frustrating when trying to describe the different roles of players to my wife. She comes from a basketball background and thinks football is just a free-for-all (well, she used to). It's hard to really show good run blocking and QB protection because of the fact that they do what you said; they either ignore the linemen in replays or they just don't show the replay of plays that die near the line of scrimmage. I ended up having to plug in Madden and do slow motion replays of players engaging in their roles.


I've had some pretty good success with educating my girlfriend about what the players on the line do just by telling her to watch a specific number on the line for an entire series. As a Bears fan, it's usually either Julius Peppers, Henry Melton, or our turnstile fark of an LT, Jamarcus Webb. Focusing on one player at first and seeing what they do from play to play makes understanding the entire flow of the line easier.

IAmRight: There are a few times I want to see the holding calls and what is/isn't called on a regular basis.


Agreed. A hold is as good as a sack a lot of times, and if you look for it, you'll be surprised at what isn't called. That speedy bastard Irvin on your Seahawks had people putting him in headlocks from behind the entire second half on Monday night, and I think he drew one flag.
 
2012-09-28 01:02:37 PM  

Jubeebee: That speedy bastard Irvin on your Seahawks had people putting him in headlocks from behind the entire second half on Monday night, and I think he drew one flag.


I don't think there was a single one called in the second half, which is why I made a point of mentioning the fact that the Packers' line went from 8 (really, 9, but the face mask penalty for barely getting a hand on the facemask as Rodgers was already being pulled down) sacks given up and a hold, a hands to the face, and another penalty in the first half to nothing at all in the second half...yeah, that ain't coaching adjustments. You don't go from "on pace for literally the worst performance in NFL history" to "completely spotless" over a 15-minute break, using the same players against the same team, based on running the ball a bit more.

And yeah, during the rare occasion where they do show Peppers, you get the feeling like it's weird that he DOESN'T get a sack on every play.
 
2012-09-28 01:08:54 PM  
They are officials, after all. Hardly here to be the show.

That sound you hear is every baseball umpire simultaneously saying "we're not???"
 
2012-09-28 01:11:32 PM  

IAmRight: Research idea for someone who actually has the time, resources, and inclination to do this (hell, maybe I'll get to it when I start grad school) - see how much the announcers affect how we feel about referee calls. And how much pre-existing information, like knowing "these are the pros," affects it.

Basically, show last night's game with different groups of people:

People that are told they're replacement refs
People that aren't told anything about the refs
People that are told that these are professional refs

People that watch the game with announcers supporting the refs' decisions
People that watch the game in silence
People that watch the game with announcers criticizing each flag/non-flag

I'd be really interested to see how much influence those two factors have on our opinions of how games are officiated. I think it was better with the "real" refs back, but it was interesting how much the broadcasting team supported the refs' decisions on every single play, even describing things that didn't happen as having happened in order to make it seem right. Compare it to how critical they were of the replacement refs, especially last weekend (not to say that they didn't deserve it, but they were pretty quick to point out that it was a bad call on any questionable call, or at least they'd trot out the old "you have to wonder about whether the regular refs would've called that" line).


+1 a thousand times over.
i have never seen this stated any better.
 
2012-09-28 01:19:54 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: The difference was like night and day.


^This especially the speed. 1pm games where running into 4pm games significantly because of just how slow everything was becoming.
 
2012-09-28 01:30:43 PM  

IAmRight: BTW, here's a nice follow-up on the play that everyone got so mad about that they idiotically proclaimed the "worst call ever." And apparently I'm not the only one who doesn't think it was a bad call.


Quit being such a homer and living in such denial. That play call was terrible and if it was any other team than the Seahawks you'd be saying the same thing.

The complaints against the replacement refs weren't that they weren't perfect, but that the sheer amount of terrible calls was so far above and beyond any other normals Weeks in NFL history that it overshadowed everything else that was happening.

You would go from maybe 1 really bad call a week that you'd see replayed on Sportscenter a bunch, to 5 calls of that level every single game.

There was also so many instances where the refs just had no clue what the actual rules were. Teams getting extra timeouts and challenges, balls being spotted wrong, wrong amount of yards being given on penalties, etc.

Even things like the ref who threw his hat at Kevin Ogletree I the endzone which he tripped on and blew a possible touchdown. I was watching that game and that same ref kept throwing his hat over and over for no apparent reason on random plays
 
2012-09-28 01:41:25 PM  

Incog_Neeto: Marcus Aurelius: The difference was like night and day.

^This especially the speed. 1pm games where running into 4pm games significantly because of just how slow everything was becoming.


And that's extremely significant to how the game is played. People like manning who favor an up-tempo or no huddle offense get jobbed when the refs slow everything down and tiring defense can suddenly get a breather and do substittuions because of the zebra fight over where to spot the ball
 
2012-09-28 01:45:56 PM  

JonPace: Quit being such a homer and living in such denial. That play call was terrible and if it was any other team than the Seahawks you'd be saying the same thing.


Feel free to read the article instead of just saying whatever you want based on stupid announcers like Gruden. Anyway, I wasn't saying that the replacement refs were good. They sucked. It's just that the call that they based their whole outrage on wasn't even a bad call at all.
 
2012-09-28 01:48:45 PM  

IAmRight: BTW, here's a nice follow-up on the play that everyone got so mad about that they idiotically proclaimed the "worst call ever." And apparently I'm not the only one who doesn't think it was a bad call.


Well hey, if the guy who compiled the database of fourth-quarter comebacks for pro-football-reference.com says it was a catch then I'm sold.

/I don't want to argue about this anymore.
//Why do you?
 
2012-09-28 01:52:40 PM  

Harv72b: Well hey, if the guy who compiled the database of fourth-quarter comebacks for pro-football-reference.com says it was a catch then I'm sold.

/I don't want to argue about this anymore.
//Why do you?


Because, within that article, there's video from behind the play that shows Tate does have a hell of a lot of control of that ball. It also makes a pretty goddamn solid case for simultaneous possession, and the idea that someone would call that the worst call they've seen in their life is beyond offensive, as it wasn't even the worst call of the season, weekend, game, half, quarter, drive, or even the worst mistake of the play. And I'm not cool with everyone just going on believing horsesh*t fed to them by a whole bunch of people with amazingly biased viewpoints. (Mine is biased as well, but its in the interest of truth that both sides have their voices heard and evidence presented, rather than one-sided crap).
 
2012-09-28 01:57:45 PM  

IAmRight: Feel free to read the article instead of just saying whatever you want based on stupid announcers like Gruden. Anyway, I wasn't saying that the replacement refs were good. They sucked. It's just that the call that they based their whole outrage on wasn't even a bad call at all.


Read the article. The guy doesn't know how possession works on a catch. Tate was going to ground when he (allegedly) caught the ball, on account of M.D. Jennings was falling on him, so possession isn't established until he's all the way down. The fact that the guy can get such a well-known rule wrong (Megatron says hi) is... discomforting.

But yeah. It was a bad call, but not "WORST CALL EVER." And if the real refs had done it, the announcers would probably be saying "bang-bang play" or some crap like that.
 
2012-09-28 02:01:17 PM  

Olympic Trolling Judge: Read the article. The guy doesn't know how possession works on a catch. Tate was going to ground when he (allegedly) caught the ball, on account of M.D. Jennings was falling on him, so possession isn't established until he's all the way down. The fact that the guy can get such a well-known rule wrong (Megatron says hi) is... discomforting.


You should watch the video from behind the end zone that's linked in the article. I agree that there's nothing that shows that it's obviously Tate's ball, but it does show that it's not obviously Jennings', and if it's not obviously Jennings', then it's Tate's by rule.
 
2012-09-28 02:44:23 PM  

IAmRight: Because, within that article, there's video from behind the play that shows Tate does have a hell of a lot of control of that ball. It also makes a pretty goddamn solid case for simultaneous possession, and the idea that someone would call that the worst call they've seen in their life is beyond offensive, as it wasn't even the worst call of the season, weekend, game, half, quarter, drive, or even the worst mistake of the play. And I'm not cool with everyone just going on believing horsesh*t fed to them by a whole bunch of people with amazingly biased viewpoints. (Mine is biased as well, but its in the interest of truth that both sides have their voices heard and evidence presented, rather than one-sided crap).


It was not the "WORST CALL EVA!!!1!!!", but nothing really was. As I believe we've agreed upon, there were at least two other calls in that fourth quarter which were far worse and far less debatable (that's not counting Tate's OPI that everyone agrees on), but since they didn't occur on the last play of the game most people have apparently forgotten them. FWIW, I still hold that the 27-yard personal foul in Tennessee was the most glaring example of replacement ineptitude.

Either way, it's in the past now. If you're a Seahawks fan then you got the win, if you're a fan of some other team then you got your officials back. In the grand scheme of things I have serious doubts that this will end up being as significant as the Immaculate Reception or Tuck Rule (or Super Bowl XL, I suppose).
 
2012-09-28 02:47:20 PM  

Olympic Trolling Judge: Read the article. The guy doesn't know how possession works on a catch. Tate was going to ground when he (allegedly) caught the ball, on account of M.D. Jennings was falling on him, so possession isn't established until he's all the way down. The fact that the guy can get such a well-known rule wrong (Megatron says hi) is... discomforting.


The author actually broke down the differences between "possession" and "control" rather well. I don't personally agree with his definition of control, but in the end it doesn't make a bit of difference what he, I, you, or IAmRight thinks.
 
2012-09-28 03:30:38 PM  
What this entire debacle has proven is that the game of football has become so convoluted and confusing that you need a Master's degree to effectively officiate it. All of the rules favor pass happy offenses that put up college basketball type scores, stifle any type of real defense, and god forbid of the QB gets his shirt dirty. Back in the day of REAL football, you could pick up a couple of guys from the local bar, give them a ref's uni, and tell them to have at it.
 
2012-09-28 03:41:37 PM  

IAmRight: I'd be really interested to see how much influence those two factors have on our opinions of how games are officiated. I think it was better with the "real" refs back, but it was interesting how much the broadcasting team supported the refs' decisions on every single play, even describing things that didn't happen as having happened in order to make it seem right. Compare it to how critical they were of the replacement refs, especially last weekend (not to say that they didn't deserve it, but they were pretty quick to point out that it was a bad call on any questionable call, or at least they'd trot out the old "you have to wonder about whether the regular refs would've called that" line).


I'm sure there's going to be a bit of a confirmation bias, but I'm equally sure that the regular refs are not likely to throw their hats beneath players' feet during a play, or mix up which 44-yard line the ball is supposed to be spotted at.
 
2012-09-28 04:26:10 PM  
Being a Ravens fan with two prime time games this week, it was nice that last nights ended closer to 3 hours vs 4 hours for Sunday's game.
 
2012-09-28 05:15:22 PM  
We all agree, Seahawks ending was bad, but not the worst calls by far over the weekend. Just happened to have the biggest media impact. Too bad really, since there were so many better, terrible calls to focus on last week.

I still think the ball directly over the goalposts on the Ravens win was the weirdest ending.
 
2012-09-28 07:53:31 PM  

Gosling: I'm sure there's going to be a bit of a confirmation bias, but I'm equally sure that the regular refs are not likely to throw their hats beneath players' feet during a play, or mix up which 44-yard line the ball is supposed to be spotted at.


Yeah, as I said, I'm interested in finding out how much of an effect there is, I'm not saying definitively that they change everything.

I suppose you'd also have to have them playing in nondescript uniforms. I also would like to know how much sway they have if depending on who the person watching is a fan of.

Harv72b: FWIW, I still hold that the 27-yard personal foul in Tennessee was the most glaring example of replacement ineptitude.


I think my favorite thing about it is that both that and Washington's 20-yard personal foul are both recorded in the play-by-play as though they were perfectly normal things.
 
2012-09-28 07:57:09 PM  

IAmRight: I think my favorite thing about it is that both that and Washington's 20-yard personal foul are both recorded in the play-by-play as though they were perfectly normal things.


Plus Stephen Tulloch now holds an unbreakable NFL record for most yards penalized on a single personal foul. :)
 
2012-09-28 07:59:31 PM  

IAmRight: BTW, here's a nice follow-up on the play that everyone got so mad about that they idiotically proclaimed the "worst call ever." And apparently I'm not the only one who doesn't think it was a bad call.


I didn't realize blind people watched football.
 
2012-09-29 05:28:31 AM  
Does anyone think that the NFL will come up with the ability for the fans to have a 22 man camera view of every play from behind the offense? Maybe a subscription service on NFL.com?
 
2012-09-29 11:06:09 AM  
I love how everyone forgets that it was the real refs who Got the coin toss wrong!
 
2012-09-30 01:40:27 AM  

toby8915: I love how everyone forgets that it was the real refs who Got the coin toss wrong!


Is that the one where Bettis himself later admitted to calling "Hea-tails"?
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report