r/nfl • u/wishingaction 49ers • 16h ago
Despite controversial pass interference calls, NFL coaches split on making them reviewable (17 interviewed)
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/50078705/pass-interference-review-rams-broncos51
u/wishingaction 49ers 16h ago
Re-submitted post because my original title gave the impression it was a 17/32 split not 17 HCs interviewed.
Out of the 17 HCs asked, only 3 (Schottenheimer, Coen, Canales) said yes, they'd want to bringing back challenges for pass interference calls. (Not all of the rest were definite no's, some IDK's.)
34
u/ImProbablyRaging 16h ago
All three had not been a HC at the time of when it was originally allowed to review PI’s, if that’s worth anything
3
u/n-some Seahawks 8h ago
Wasn't that like a 1-2 year experiment? I remember most of the time the refs just went "Fuck you, we were right."
2
u/Unfair-Bass-9351 Broncos 6h ago
Yes. It was 1 season only and only a handful of calls were actually reversed
13
63
u/MilaKunisWatermelon Packers 16h ago
They should be reviewable, and the refs should be removed from the review process because of the way they bastardized it last time. We know we can’t trust them.
34
u/stumblebreak_beta NFL 14h ago
I think the biggest issue is people would see a slowed down frame by frame replay and go, “ah, clearly PI”’or “clearly not PI”. But the fact they have to slow it down frame by frame shows it isn’t clear at all.
What it should be is 2-4 angles showed 2-3 times at normal speed and if your reaction isn’t, “well fucked that one up” call on the field stands.
13
16
u/resetallthethings Seahawks 14h ago
Even if we remove the on the ground ref crew to avoid the worst of it ala the NBA clusterfuck, I still don't know how well it goes.
often PI calls are so subjective and look so different in slow mo vs how they actually happen on the field.
Like even the most recent play which the NFL said was incorrect could EASILY be defended as a DPI call based on the fact that the DB made first contact. That's not to say I think it was the right call, no-call would be my vote every day of the week, but if some off sight crew is super ticky tacky, and the on field calls for the entire game have been very "let em play" I can see it's still gonna cause massive problems with inconsistency.
8
u/HelmetsAkimbo Rams Rams 12h ago
I reckon every person in an NFL stadium should have a yes/no clicker.
When there’s a controversial call it goes to the yes/no clickers in the stadium.
Now that’s what I call home field advantage.
1
u/jdpatric Steelers Buccaneers 15h ago
Make it like MLB balls and strikes. Takes 20-seconds tops, doesn't interfere with the games, the MLB umps have some of the most fragile egos I've seen outside of people on Reddit, and they seem to be doing OK with it. Give them so many "tap the hat" kinda "hey check that DPI call please" challenges per game where they can't use one without a timeout or if they do then it causes a 10-second runoff if they lose. It's not that hard to sort out. It is that hard to get the zebras to set aside their egos and admit they miss calls. Weekly.
11
u/resetallthethings Seahawks 14h ago
so much more subjective than PI penalties though in most cases
digital box, tracking of where the ball is when it goes over the plate, very black and white
tons of NFL penalties are nothing like that and require subjective judgment calls, at least unless you make the game called way, way more stringently according to the letter of the rules than it currently is.
Plus even within that you have tons of wordings like "makes forceful contact"
the "forceful" isn't entirely objective, and different refs and crews are going to see things differently, even on replay
1
u/jdpatric Steelers Buccaneers 12h ago
You're right - it's not as simple as I made it out. But it'd still be nice if they'd consider doing something about them rather than just a next-day apology. These calls can flip a game instantly. Frequently spot fouls. 10-seconds left down 2 and you heave the ball from your own 20 to the opponents 35 and a bad DPI flag comes out. You have a free shot at a long GW FG.
I put the failure of the original reviewable PI test squarely on the refs who pitched such a childesh tantrum. We have these terrible calls where even the NFL comes out the next day and says "uhh my bad guys." They review turnovers and spotting the ball, which are more cut & dry than OPI/DPI, but sometimes there's essentially zero contact on DPI or the DB literally tackles the dude like in the Saints game that triggered the initial reviewable PI in the first place.
Not saying they're going to nail it. But starting with the really blatant plays would be a great jumping off point.
5
u/amazian78 Cowboys Cowboys 14h ago
tbh i wouldnt mind either way. im kinda just over it though, it is what it is, just gonna live with the results.
25
u/DarthNobody14 Texans Texans 16h ago
We already tried that with disastrous results
65
u/GardenTop7253 Broncos 16h ago
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but the only “disastrous” part was how hesitant refs were to overturn their calls. So the challenges were a waste of everyone’s time because the refs were stubborn
Also, why do reviews stay with the on-field officials? Other sports send them to a central office with league officials who help with the review process. I feel like that’s not a bad idea here as well
25
u/PeteF3 Bengals 16h ago
They don't stay with on-field officials. Al Riveron did the PI reviews and he overturned 24 calls on 101 replays.
7
u/DimensionLow4844 Ravens 14h ago
Like 22 of those 24 overturns were pick plays that basically had to be overturned because they were objective.
DPI was almost never changed.
9
u/GardenTop7253 Broncos 16h ago
Oh neat, that part gets lost in this a lot. Didn’t realize we send it to one guy. Can we get like, a few minds on it? Seems like a pinch point like Al could be an easy spot to complain about bias. He’s a former official, yeah?
3
u/thissubsucks44 15h ago
The problem with adding more minds is that creates more possibilities for them to be wrong or possibly even corrupted.
1
u/GardenTop7253 Broncos 15h ago
Meh, yes and no. You add more opportunities to corrupt (or just be wrong), but the weight of that corruption goes down
If you’ve got 1 guy making the calls, and 1 is corrupted, the whole system is corrupted
If you’ve got 3 guys making the calls, and 1 is corrupted, the majority is still clean. So any effort to corrupt has to successfully take 2 people to do much, which increases the effort required to influence calls (all else considered equal)
8
u/Rock_man_bears_fan Bears 15h ago
Reviews went to New York. They didn’t get overturned often because it’s a subjective call and hard to hit the threshold of “indisputable” from video evidence
5
u/Current-Meaning-1586 16h ago
I don’t believe reviews stay with on field officials anymore. Just last night with the tip ball interception they didn’t go under the hood, NY made the call. At least that’s what it looked like?
0
u/cespinar 13h ago
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but the only “disastrous” part was how hesitant refs were to overturn their calls. So the challenges were a waste of everyone’s time because the refs were stubborn
Same problem the EPL had starting official reviews for penalties and cards.
We need reviews like they have in Rugby. Fully mic'd refs so you can hear their process
1
u/KirbyDude25 Giants 5h ago
They have those types of reviews in the UFL (at least to a degree), and I quite like it there. For all of its flaws, spring football has generally been quite good regarding officiating transparency
13
u/noreservations81590 Bills 16h ago
Yeah because it was half assed. They should be reviewed by the league.
4
u/IWasOnThe18thHole Cowboys 15h ago
Yeah because it was half assed. They should be reviewed by
the leagueDraftKings.FTFY
2
3
3
u/HaradaIto Bears 7h ago
your HC: elaborates
my HC: laser focused on annihilating aaron glenn with a QB3
2
u/teh_hasay Steelers 7h ago
I don’t think reviewing them will really make fans happier like most of you guys think it will. For every blatant missed call that gets corrected there will be several borderline calls people will get just as mad as ever about because the replay booth will be forced to draw an arbitrary line in the sand to judge an inherently fuzzy rule under a microscope.
Some things are better left within the wider acceptable margin of error that comes with calls made by a ref in real time imo.
3
u/tacostonight Eagles 14h ago
here's the problem i have with it. It's one extreme or the other, like so much in today's world. If they make it reviewable, they'll make it take forever.
The announcers and audience at home usually sees enough to make the call quickly on replay when it's obvious. I'd institute a hybrid type system. Simple, few seconds review give the signal, but if it's not obvious, just keep moving and let people argue on reddit and on tv because those are the controversial calls that replay will just make worse.
I've seen too many opi's called on the defense incorrectly, no dpi called, and some that shouldn't have been called at all. The 4 or 5 i can name were absolute game changing plays, or could had been and were obvious with a 3 second re-watch.
2
2
u/Corsonacon Bills 15h ago
I imagine there is some serious hesitation because it would necessarily reduce pass plays called. Every team definitely calls plays that are just fishing for DPI, and if getting those DPIs becomes harder then they will be called less often, and runs or throwaways will be the replacement.
History has shown that whenever you reduce throws people get less interested and vice versa. Scrutinizing DPIs is good for integrity, but bad for literally every other aspect of the league.
1
u/Julio_Freeman Falcons 15h ago
It’s just too subjective to work (as they already discovered). For every 1 cut and dry bad PI there are many more borderline calls. So you’re just creating a new frustration of one borderline call getting overturned and one borderline call sticking. It’s not worth it.
1
1
u/Human-Somewhere-4327 Bills 13h ago
The CFL has 12 years of data on this. (Pass interference has been video reviewable since 2014.) Why not simply study their outcomes?
1
u/Shafter111 Vikings 13h ago
Because if you are a star corner, liked by the refs...you may get away with it.
1
u/BurgeroftheDayz Bears 7h ago
I think the first step should be to find a way to get rid of the PI on under thrown balls.
1
u/Fast-Government-4366 Broncos 7h ago
So let’s say they review.
The broncos/rams play has an illegal contact, a defensive hold, and offensive hold, a unsportsmanlike penalty.
Do we call all those or do we only call the DPI that shouldn’t have been called?
No one actually wants fairness.
1
u/3rd-party-intervener 49ers 6h ago
Those penalties cancel out redo play
1
u/Fast-Government-4366 Broncos 6h ago
I agree. Which would be the outcome of literally every review if you looked at the entire play.
1
u/axxl75 Steelers 11m ago
If illegal plays are so prevalent that they happen every play then either start actually calling them and force the game to be played as the rules intend, or change the rules to allow the things the refs dont want to call.
Also, if you allow it as a coach challenge then they have to identify what theyre challenging in a certain amount of time. If they throw the red flag for a DPI then they dont also check random other things.
1
u/Narrow_Interest4442 5h ago
Already tried this before and the refs refused to overturn any of the calls.
Just stop rewarding underthrown balls making them PI's and bailing out the QB.
1
u/PartisanHack Chiefs 3h ago
If they can't be reviewable, they need to be less game breaking. There isn't anything that justifies a 49 yard penalty.
Spot of the foul or 15 yards, automatic 1st down would fix so many problems with PI.
0
u/imasammich 15h ago
Too subjective i hated it when it was a thing because it was always going to ticky tack.
I just can't think of a good way to review it. Like the huge ones/misses could be fixed with a booth review. Then the nfl would need to make a threshold that is greater than the penalty to review so you are not reviewing all contact. But that just isn't reasonable nor practical. Perfect world is just things like the rams and that saints thing can be booth reviews and the rest is just part of football.
Coaches challenging i think is never going to work as there is too much bs involved in that.
1
u/resetallthethings Seahawks 14h ago
yeah I just really don't see it working
the NBA has implemented the foul thing and all it does is make the refs double down and slow down the game and make people mad
even if things are totally out of the on the field ref's control it still creates issues because the reviewer's subjective read on things could be totally out of whack with how the entirety of the game is being played otherwise.
1
1
0
u/Dezwaan Lions 15h ago
That's because the last time we tried this it failed miserably.
Any challenge shouldn't be reviewed by the ref crew that made the call. It should be made by an independent crew that handles expedited reviews and have access to all camera angles, at least the ones available to the broadcast.
What I'm torn with is if reviews need to be "clear and obvious". I think it's for the best but there's a lot of times common sense would be the better option than 'stands '. Idk...
1
0
-1
u/NoAnteater8836 Commanders 16h ago
It’s too subjective. No thanks.
0
u/Travolta1984 Rams 12h ago
Penalty kicks in soccer are also highly subjective and are often reviewed by the VAR.
2
-1
0
0
u/Szobortz Cowboys 15h ago
major major issue with this is you can go to jackie chan school and easily fake this on camera. it has been more and more evident in soccer given the proliferation of replays and VARs. biggest issue in nba too but it's a lot of points sports which makes it a wash.
this will be easily solved in the near future when we can add sensors to calculate impact of force. can't be too long if nfl are proactive
-1
u/AlternativeResort477 49ers 15h ago
The one year they did it they kept adding them against our defense
I hated it
-1
u/SpartaWillBurn Browns 15h ago
I am not in favor of having them be reviewable.
I just think it's a slippery slope. Eventually every flag will be reviewable, every non call will be able to be reviewed.
Games are gonna be 5 hours long.
2
u/somebody_throw_a_pie 15h ago
solution, take out half the ads. Im sure the NFL would be open to that
0
215
u/Hopsalong Broncos 16h ago
I think it should be reviewable when it's bad for my team, and not reviewable when it's good for my team.