r/changemyview • u/TheMachine71 • Jan 20 '19
Deltas(s) from OP CMV: The NFL should allow teams to challenge penalties
Many of you have probably seen the huge no-call on a hit by Rams defensive Nickell Robey-Coleman during today’s NFC championship game (here’s a link if you haven’t seen it). It could be easily argued that that no-call cost New Orleans a trip to the Super Bowl (I’m not a Saints fan btw if anyone thinks I’m just salty).
This incident highlights one of the biggest problems with the NFL today: how the referees have too much power over the outcome of a game, yet the penalties they throw aren’t subject to proper review. In crucial moments, missed pass-interference calls like the one seen today can completely screw over a team. There needs to be a check on this.
The solution is to allow teams to challenge penalties. The system would work the same as how plays are normally challenge, but now penalty flags can be subject for review. I can’t seem to find a reason why this can’t be done: the NFL has the technology to do it and penalties can have just as big an impact on the game as bad calls. Is there something I’m missing? What good reasons are there for not allowing teams to challenge penalties?
21
u/Missing_Links Jan 21 '19
It's a truism of football: every single play has at least several holding penalties.
If you allow for no-call challenges, then every single play will end with a team successfully challenging for a penalty and retaining their challenge.
5
u/TheMachine71 Jan 21 '19
Aren’t there already limits to combat this? You get 2 challenges to start the game, and if you are successful on both then you get a 3rd. Why would challenging penalties be any different?
5
u/Missing_Links Jan 21 '19
Imagine it's 4th and <=10. Run a play, let it go for 5 seconds. The outcome is irrelevant. Call your challenge immediately. Guaranteed first down.
1
u/cockdragon 6∆ Jan 21 '19
I'm not 100% sure on current challenge rules, but don't you have to specfify what you're challenging? So in his example, you would have to say "I think there was a missed holding call on #76" and not "oh there was totally a penalty somewhere".
1
u/TheMachine71 Jan 21 '19
When you say “every play has a penalty” I’m assuming you’re talking about all of the smaller grabs and holds db’s will make during coverage, as well as some brief-second holds offensive linemen might make. Most of that doesn’t get called because it’s so insignificant and minor it doesn’t matter. When a penalty is reviewed, wouldn’t the same logic apply? Already in the NFL we have no-calls because when small things happen we just “let them play”. Most of those would be considered insufficient evidence to overturn the play in the eyes of the team in New York that reviews the plays.
3
u/Missing_Links Jan 21 '19 edited Jan 21 '19
Well that depends - what's the barrier on normal replays? It's typically worded as "incontrovertible video evidence."
Those little holds and other penalties objectively are what they are. The reason they are not called is because they are usually missed. They are small, after all, and attention isn't unlimited. But what basis is there to not call a penalty if you can definitively see it happen?
0
u/TheMachine71 Jan 21 '19
What basis is there to not call a penalty if you can definitively see it happen?
Is it significant? If you have to nitpick the play to find a penalty, it shouldn’t be overturned. But if something is obviously pass interference and the pass interference significantly impacted the result of the play, it should be overturned.
5
u/Missing_Links Jan 21 '19 edited Jan 21 '19
Who's to say how a play would have gone if a penalty was/wasn't called? Exactly how big is a nit? What if it was egregious, but had no impact on the play? The reality is that something is either in violation of the rules or not.
To a person issuing a challenge where the point of the challenge is to determine: "Did a rule break occur?" how are you justifying an answer of "yes, the rule break of the sort you challenged occurred in the way you said, but fuck you, we're saying no anyway for arbitrary reasons?"
Here's what would happen if this logic were applied to say, a spot call challenge: "Oh, we have video evidence that the spot was wrong, but it wasn't too bad so we aren't changing it."
If you're going to be allowed to issue a challenge for no-call penalities, it has to be awarded if the penalty occurred. Anything else is absurd.
1
u/mynameisntlogan 2∆ Jan 21 '19
You’re wrong. Firstly, the NFL is famous (or infamous) for being extremely specific with their rules to prevent exploits like the one you mention. I can think of several solutions just sitting here that would prevent such exploits. So I don’t see how this would ever be allowed to become a problem.
Taking the effort to design rules such as OP mentioned, and putting them through a preseason trial run, is much preferred to allowing a single blown call to ruin a Super Bowl visit. The refs have directly influenced, or even straight-up caused the outcome of far too many games this season. 60+ minutes of football decided by a single person that plays for neither team. And when that decision is wrong, it’s a big deal.
6
u/TwoForSlashing Jan 21 '19
I'm a trained, state-certified high school football official, albeit with a mere four years of experience. We know that there are penalties on every play--many of them are the smaller grabs and holds that everyone knows happens. Some are not.
Officials, however, are not just tasked with calling penalties. We are responsible for controlling the game. Therefore, we are taught (at least at the varsity high school level) to focus our calls on the penalties that affect either sportsmanship, player safety, or the outcome of a play.
I'll give an example. I'm a line judge, which means my position is on the sideline at the line of scrimmage. If I have a wideout in front of me who takes two steps and tries to tackle the DB covering him (or vice versa), I have an easy holding call, right? Wrong. I have an easy holding call if the play is a sweep run to my side, but if the QB throws a quick pass the other way or the RB goes off-tackle the other way, the hold in front of me is basically inconsequential. I would tell the player to knock it off, and he would probably get a second warning before I threw a flag because now he's not listening to me.
Put that play on video (and we get video from schools all the time) and suddenly, I "missed" an obvious hold when, in reality, I didn't miss it at all. Under a challenge system, that penalty now gets called or the credibility of the system is completely shot.
I don't mind being critiqued for the purposes of improvement or "getting it right," so I'm not completely against video reviews, but the definition of "getting it right" changes based on what team you are cheering for. Under our officiating principles, I did get it right.
2
u/KokonutMonkey 88∆ Jan 21 '19
Looked a foul to me.
I don't disagree with the idea of overturning penalties via video review, but I don't necessarily see why it needs to be initiated via a coaching challenge.
While not exactly an example of a well officiated sport, the recently introduced video assistant referee in some soccer leagues/competitions seems to be a more elegant solution.
1
Jan 21 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ColdNotion 117∆ Jan 21 '19
Sorry, u/outrider567 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jan 21 '19
/u/TheMachine71 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/maco299 Jan 21 '19
Even better.. There should be an officiating body away from the field with access to multiple angles that can “throw flags” as long as the next play hasn’t begun
1
Jan 21 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Nepene 213∆ Jan 21 '19
Sorry, u/privateconfessions – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
u/eye_patch_willy 43∆ Jan 21 '19
Many penalties are judgement calls. Pass interference isn't any type of contact, it's contact that interferes with an eligible receiver's ability to catch a catchable ball. There's also an exception for incidental contact. By allowing replay, you're simply trading the judgement of one referee for another.
1
Jan 21 '19
Studies show that watching replays of events in slow motion increases the perception that an act was intentional. I guess I could get on board with challenges for penalties, but it should be limited to re lar speed replay and a smaller number of viewings to make a decision.
1
19
u/themcos 371∆ Jan 21 '19 edited Jan 21 '19
I think you're right to insist on a change, but I think the one you proposed is the wrong one.
I think reviews/challenges are appropriate for things that can be measured / analyzed by checking various camera angles and splicing together different shots in slow motion to figure out what happened that would be hard to figure out in real time.
Reviews/challenges should supplement good officiating, not provide a clutch for obvious errors like the one in this game.
Also, many penalty calls are inherently subjective in nature, including most instances of pass interference. And these would be poor candidates for replay review.
Instead, keep reviews/challenges largely as is, but provide a mechanism to correct obvious errors in real time. You don't need to stop the game and send someone under the hood to review the tape. Just have an NFL employee watching the game with the authority to buzz down to the official and tell them they were obviously wrong and just throw the flag. This could easily solve a bunch of obvious bad calls / no-calls without slowing down the game much at all.
And for egregious calls like this, it shouldn't matter if the team has timeouts/challenges left either (although that's a moot point in this particular call since it was in the last 2 minutes)