Quote
RockRam
Because we have no doubt that the most politically correct NFL Czar in history, Goodell, there is no way that he is not going to push the owners to have some kind of replay involving fouls. It's just who he is.
Assuming that, then what ought to be reviewable and what should not? Let me be clear: I stand on the side of no reviews at all on any fouls because if you allow reviews for PI only to start, for instance, there is no way that it won't expand over time to other foul calls.
But beyond that, I would say NO review for non-called penalties. But if something has to be reviewed, then it should be called fouls for helmet to helmet (illegal) contact, illegal QB hits, and holding on Receivers. And, the call for a review must come from the HC. So you give the HC one more red flag use per game or half.
No way on anything else including PI. It just involves too many elements that revolves mostly around judgment. For instance, how do you judge when a ball is uncatchable? Exactly how close does an eligible Receiver have to be to where a QB is dumping the ball before it is called intentional grounding? Exactly what is in the grasp (since the goal is QB protection, then it's one thing for an immobile Tom Brady, it's another for Russell Wilson). On and on and on.
The idea has always been that the refs are just part of the game. Judgment is the byword on all but such things as offsides, illegal procedure, false start,12 men on the field, etc. Just as the players will make mistakes, so will refs.
Not only that, but all a replay official could ever go on was what is caught on camera. And lots of stuff that is not on camera happens, and could affect another call elsewhere. Football is a game that is NOT ever going to be "perfectly" refereed because judgment based on the circumstance plays too big of the role in a game
with 22 players on the field at once, and huge men moving at fast speeds often vastly spread out, or just as often piled on top of one another.
Lord, no.
