Why the hate against replacement NFL referees?

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by storyteller0910

Right. I'm dumfounded by how the media is spinning this as all about Goodell. I keep reading articles today on how Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft or Daniel Snyder is going to come down on Goodell if the situation continues. Folks, if Jones and Kraft and Snyder et al wanted the referees back, they'd be back. Goodell is utterly powerless without the collective backing of the owners, and his job is to represent their wishes, not enforce his own.

It's part of the deception. Direct the hatred toward the replacements, the striking officials, then Goodell. The publicity and the belief there's a new random factor added to the game will probably increase viewers and ticket sales. The strike continues, the NFL owners win. Eventually one side will cave, the strike will end, and everyone will remember how much the original officials sucked at doing their job.

[Rick]

After further review it was determined that the runner missed second base
Touchdown Celtics

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Rick

After further review it was determined that the runner missed second base
Touchdown Celtics

Actually I saw this ending at a recent WWE event.

[Marley23]

Originally Posted by storyteller0910

Right. I'm dumfounded by how the media is spinning this as all about Goodell.

Because at this point all NFL stories are sculpted to fit into the narrative of Roger Goodell the tyrant.

[Enginerd]

Originally Posted by storyteller0910

Right. I'm dumfounded by how the media is spinning this as all about Goodell. I keep reading articles today on how Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft or Daniel Snyder is going to come down on Goodell if the situation continues. Folks, if Jones and Kraft and Snyder et al wanted the referees back, they'd be back. Goodell is utterly powerless without the collective backing of the owners, and his job is to represent their wishes, not enforce his own.

This is a point made by ESPN's Dan Graziano in a blog entry entitled "Jerry Jones thinks you're stupid."

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by storyteller0910

Right. I'm dumfounded by how the media is spinning this as all about Goodell. I keep reading articles today on how Jerry Jones or Robert Kraft or Daniel Snyder is going to come down on Goodell if the situation continues. Folks, if Jones and Kraft and Snyder et al wanted the referees back, they'd be back. Goodell is utterly powerless without the collective backing of the owners, and his job is to represent their wishes, not enforce his own.

I think that's really the point the commentators are making. They're not suggesting that the owners call up Goodell and ask him to please negotiate an end to the strike. They're saying the owners should call up Goodell and tell him they've decided to accept the officials' offer and tell Goodell to sign the contract.

[Uncle Jocko]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

The strike continues, the NFL owners win. Eventually one side will cave, the strike will end, and everyone will remember how much the original officials sucked at doing their job.

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

They're not suggesting that the owners call up Goodell and ask him to please negotiate an end to the strike.

Nitpick, perhaps, but it's not a strike. The officials are not refusing to work. The NFL is refusing to allow them to work. As I understand it, the officials are willing to work while they continue negotiations. The NFL (okay, the owners) took a hard line and told them they could sit at home on their keisters and think over the league's offer some more. After all, anybody can be an official! How hard can it be?

[Little Nemo]

Okay, it's a lockout not a strike. Which makes even less sense from the league's point of view. As I said in an earlier post, these officials aren't hurting for money - they can readily afford to forego whatever money they would have been paid for officiating these games. And by trying to replace them, all the league has done is demonstrate how valuable the regular officials are.

[Agent Foxtrot]

Has there ever been a precedent set for the NFL recalling/nullifying a game due to lousy officiating?

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

Originally Posted by Rick

After further review it was determined that the runner missed second base
Touchdown Celtics

You pronounced that as "Keltics"!

[kenobi 65]

Originally Posted by Agent Foxtrot

Has there ever been a precedent set for the NFL recalling/nullifying a game due to lousy officiating?

I don't believe so. They have, on rare occasions, come out later and said that an incorrect call was made, but I don't believe that they've ever reversed the results of a play, much less a game outcome, due to that.

In this case, the NFL's statement admitted that Tate should have been called for offensive pass interference, which, had it been properly called at that time, would have nullified the touchdown.

However, penalties like that aren't retroactively called, and so, the play (and the game result) have been allowed to stand. For that matter, a number of former officials have noted that, even if pass interference did occur, on a play like that (Hail Mary / jump-ball to end the game), officials (even the "regular" officials) will rarely make a PI call unless it's truly egregious.

Edit: it looks like an e-mail was sent out today by NFL spokesman Greg Aiello (read the second-to-last paragraph of this article), reiterating that Goodell "does not have authority to change the outcome of a game when it concerns judgmental errors or routine errors of omission by game officials."

In short: "Sorry 'bout that, Packer fans, but tough noogies."

[Girl Next Door]

Originally Posted by Sitnam

Fuck the people in charge for turning the NFL into Calvinball.

OMG, I love you.

[Saint Cad]

Originally Posted by Agent Foxtrot

Has there ever been a precedent set for the NFL recalling/nullifying a game due to lousy officiating?

They won't even correct the error that denied the Pottsville Maroons the 1925 Championship so they ain't gonna change the outcome of a game.

[Airman Doors, USAF]

Another thing that amuses me is that the players are claiming that the replacement refs are actually making the game less safe. These are the same players that are actively suing the NFL in a class action suit for game-related long-term injuries.

So, how is the game more unsafe than it was last year? The players, claiming that the safety of the player is paramount, are actively cheap-shotting each other every chance they get. They take swings at each other, they start scrums and precipitate shoving matches and near-fights, they grab, clutch, hit, claw and pull at each other, all contrary to the rules, and then they turn around and blame the officials for their plight, because like criminals they only behave when The Man is watching.

So much for integrity and concern for your fellow players. What, it makes too much sense that if the game is getting dangerous it might be something that you as a player and collectively as a players' union might want to self-police? I love the real-world precedent this sets: I can sue the police for arresting me after the fact, because had they been watching I never would have done it, therefore it's their fault.

This whole thing is a farce. All parties concerned are full of it.

[mlees]

I came in to say the same thing, Airman.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/25...lacement-refs/

On Thursday, the NFL Players Association sent a letter to league owners saying the decision to hire replacement referees "has led to a deteriorating of order, safety and integrity."

"This affirmative decision has not only resulted in poor calls, missed calls and bad game management, but the combination of those deficiencies will only continue to jeopardize player health and safety and the integrity of the game that has taken decades to build," the union wrote.

Why isn't the players taking their share of the blame for their own actions? [The "seeing what we can get away with" actions.]

When the coaches, players, and fans creating an atmosphere of elevated stress and distraction leads to more blown calls, why is that solely the refs' fault?

*sigh* I hate mobs.

[HookerChemical]

Originally Posted by Marley23

Twice.

In fairness, if you're going to screw up, you should screw up consistently. If they change the standard for holding to require that the lineman hold the jersey with both hands, dragging the defender to the ground, while the other lineman strikes at his knees with a bully club, they should call it that way all the time for that game. Which appears to be the case, as I've seen them let single strikes with the club go unflagged.

[Intergalactic Gladiator]

Saturday Night Live had a funny skit years ago with John Goodman as an NFL referee on a TV show where audience members would ask him about the type of excrement in his head and invite him to have sex with himself.

I think they should dust that one off and either re-run it in a new episode or re-write it to fit the current situation better. Maybe they'll get a recurring character out of it -- with Kristen Wiig gone, nobody's doing bad one-note recurring overused characters anymore.

[divemaster]

I'm no fan of the replacement refs and certainly hope the NFL and the real refs work thing out soon.

But let's not venerate the real refs. They can massively screw up the end of a game as well.

A few years ago, I believe it was a Monday Night game, the last play of the game, the Steelers picked up a fumble and returned it for a touchdown. The real refs inexplicably ruled the play dead or something and did not count the TD. A total fiasco on the field with much discussions and whatnot.

The next day the NFL ruled that the refs were wrong and that the TD should have counted, but that they would not officially change the score of the game.

Who cares?--you might say. What's the difference between the Steelers winning 11-10 or 18-10? A win is a win, right?

My bookie cared. Which means *I* cared. In fact, Al Michaels, during all the on-the-field discussions mentioned that a LOT of people cared about whether those extra points counted or not.

So, yeah, the real refs can fuck up big time also. Not just missing a call, but totally blowing a rules interpretation even after 10-20 minutes of field and booth discussions.

[Great Antibob]

Originally Posted by divemaster

But let's not venerate the real refs. They can massively screw up the end of a game as well.

It's a false equivalence.

Nobody is saying the real refs are perfect, but they're a damned sight better than the replacements.

Arguably bad calls are common in the NFL. Atrociously bad calls are rare.

The replacements are making the atrociously bad calls with regularity.

I'll post this link again, because it makes the point better than I do: "Comparing NFL replacement refs to real refs is like yo-mama to Yo Yo Ma".

[For You]

Originally Posted by Girl Next Door

OMG, I love you.

Susie? Susie Derkins, is that you? You stink!

[D_Odds]

The refs should throw flags like yellow is the new black tonight and all weekend. They need to re-establish the game as it should be refed. This is especially true for the mauling going on in the secondary on both sides of the ball.

[Laggard]

It wasn't just judgement calls they were screwing up. There were times where it seemed that they didn't quite know all the NFL rules and procedures.

[Hamlet]

Originally Posted by D_Odds

The refs should throw flags like yellow is the new black tonight and all weekend. They need to re-establish the game as it should be refed. This is especially true for the mauling going on in the secondary on both sides of the ball.

They should throw flags on penalties, nothing more nothing less. In the Packer game ... scratch that ... in the Packer fiasco, the officiating crew ... scratch that ... braindead monkeys ... threw 24 flags for a total of 245 yards, which was more than the total yards of offense the Seahawks had. They flagged things that weren't penalties, which hurt their credibility almost as much as the flags they didn't throw.

Call the game right and call it consistently. Don't throw ticky tack flags to try and get control.

[gnoitall]

Originally Posted by Hamlet

They should throw flags on penalties, nothing more nothing less. In the Packer game ... scratch that ... in the Packer fiasco, the officiating crew ... scratch that ... braindead monkeys ... threw 24 flags for a total of 245 yards, which was more than the total yards of offense the Seahawks had. They flagged things that weren't penalties, which hurt their credibility almost as much as the flags they didn't throw.

Call the game right and call it consistently. Don't throw ticky tack flags to try and get control.

To get control, you call every Technical Foul and Unsportsmanlike Conduct with rigid adherence to the letter of the rule, with appropriate escalation of consequences if necessary. That means just one warning for the first significant extracurricular scrum, and then laundry. Ejections.

Plus appropriate fines after the fact.

The game has been allowed to descend into barbarism. This will end.

ETA: I don't think we disagree, but I want to emphasize that the refs need to re-establish sanity, and they have to be in a very vigilant and non-tolerant mindset. Frankly, expect less "no harm, no foul" and "let 'em play (offense|defense)" rationalizations. If it's discernably against the rules, it should be flagged. Consistently and correctly, as you say.

Sadly, that may require some "examples". I hope the players have the wisdom to see that and avoid providing those examples.

[BigT]

Originally Posted by Intergalactic Gladiator

I think they should dust that one off and either re-run it in a new episode or re-write it to fit the current situation better. Maybe they'll get a recurring character out of it -- with Kristen Wiig gone, nobody's doing bad one-note recurring overused characters anymore.

And you want them to start?!!!!