The incompetent state of sports officiating

PA-PLAYA · 2016-11-28T22:20:08+00:00

Jim Harbaugh's tirade against the officiating on Saturday against OSU will probably earn him a hefty fine from the Big-10 officiating committee, not that he...

sdandrea1

It's so bad in the NFL, I now have absolutely ZERO idea what defines pass interference or holding.

LBlack14

Go Bucks!! Harbaugh's a hyp. 1st down has been shown in still pics. Goes both ways and I watched it myself.

PA-PLAYA

LBlack14

I knew that would draw you out of the woodwork! LOL!

lambo

Part of the problem is the attitude of play on the field. It probably boils down to the money at the end of the day. Every team and player seems to be seeking to play on the edge of the rules, whether in blocking, pass defense, quarter backs trying to provoke off sides, offensive formations that push the bubble, pass receiving routes that are often designed to be borderline offensive interference, ball inflation, etc., etc. It has become extremely difficult for an official. As is often stated you could probably call holding on most every play. But, why is this true? Because everyone is doing it and is only called when it is flagrant. This make officiating extremely difficult. I believe the officials are better today than ever, but the challenge is also greater than it has ever been.

PA-PLAYA

Seattle doesn't need to be holding and grabbing on defense to be good, but the fact that they employ said tactics on every other play means they go from being good to this perception of being great. And they play dirty-aggressive because they know the officials aren't going to penalize for it on every play. This is a rare situation where a team's overly aggressive style of play becomes an asset, especially near the end of the game when refs are prone to keep flags in their pockets.

You take away Richard Sherman's ability to hold and get away with it - he's little more than an average corner. What he should be is the most penalized corner in the league, but he's not. In fact, Seattle should lead the league in penalties, but they're ranked 11th.

They epitomize the old-school style of football: if you ain't cheating, you ain't trying to win.

letthebigdogshunt

I had no dog in that fight either. It was a great game, but it was sullied by several calls. The first down call when I first saw the play I thought the ball was stopped because the player never put it forward, it was always back behind his shoulder. A defender kept it their until the play was called dead. Then an official played the ball down on the back of the yardage line. Another official picked it up and moved it over a couple of yards and placed the nose of the ball the width of the yardage line so it the nose wasn't on the back of the line but on the front of the line. I never thought it even made it to the line much less the very front of it. It is a shame because that one call changed the whole game. It should have been game over with Michigan winning 27-24.

letthebigdogshunt

My New York Giants are 8-3, but I still refuse to watch a NFL game.

Weirfan

Bogus officiating is directly correlated to big money betting.

In the past we didn't notice as much, now with a million , super, slow mo angles we see more of what is going on.

Sneakylong

Officiating is only bad when it goes against your team (smiley face). That said it does seem like it's gotten worse lately. Here's an idea. There's no need for the refs to view the replay themselves on the field. Takes too much time. The field refs are the last to know what everyone already knows from viewing the TV replay.

Just have a ref in the booth review the questionable call and relay the decision via a communication device to the head ref. I believe they do this now on certain allowed reviewable plays in the NFL with under 2 minutes to go.

The viewer sees the video of the replay, but then has to wait for the ref to view it. This process could be made much quicker with a booth ref making all questionable calls. They'd look at the replay quickly just as the TV viewer does and relay the decision down to the ref.

The only thing this process would change is speeding up the process which is a good thing. They have the technology to get this right, they're just not utilizing it correctly and efficiently. The bottom line is to get the call right with as little delay as possible.

mcavoy

PA-PLAYA
I don't want to get all Toulon conspiracy minded here but there was a lot that went on in that game officiating wise that didn't pass the smell test. Harbaugh complained about a pass interference call against them earlier in the game saying the ball was uncatchable. It was but when the corner made contact he might not have known that so I think that was the correct call. Which made the non-call against OSU late in the game when Michigan was driving so suspect. That was so blatant it was embarrassing for it not to be called. The spot on the 4th and short that went OSU's way. Too much. Of course Michigan could have made that all not matter had they not made offensive mistakes in the second half that officiating had nothing to do with. But it sure seemed in a tight game waaaaay too many calls went OSU's way.

PA-PLAYA

mcavoy

Harbaugh had a legitimate gripe, no two ways about it. Above and beyond the questionable ball-spot, there were too many other officiating mistakes made in what was undoubtedly those two teams' biggest game of the season, with everything at stake.

LBlack14

PA-PLAYA it goes both ways. Just depends on who you root for.

azgreg

I'm in the school that officiating isn't any better or worse than it's been for decades. It's just that the technology avail now to verify catches errors more often.

sdandrea1

azgreg

Yep - every TV viewer and any official with camera access has a better view than the refs. They have a tough job making split second decisions and getting them right. They're also human, so bias plays in as well as eyesight, position on the field, (and maybe $) etc.

garyt1957

azgreg

That's my thought. How many times do we see a replay in slo mo from three angles and still have a hard time making the call? And the refs have one shot in real time to get it right.
I do agree that in the NFL the rules have gotten so goofy it's hard to know what is what. When 99% of the people watching think a catch is a catch and you call it "not completing the process" you have a problem.

fatshot

I agree with a lot of what's been said here.....the players are SO fast, SO skilled, and SO motivated to break
the rules if they can get away with it. Slo-motion instant replay also highlights the mistakes that conscientious refs are going to make simply b/c they're human. I also think (even though I can't prove this) that the ranks of referees
now come from people who never played the game at any competitive level. It used to be that many MLB umpires,
NFL refs, etc. had played those sports, and therefore understood how the game was played. I see this at the
high school level all the time, where refs are often overweight, out of shape guys who can't keep up with the
game, and wind up looking like buffoons.....just my 2 cents worth....

PA-PLAYA

I'm nearing a point where if they're not going to use the technology for things like pass-interference and spotting the ball, especially during the last several minutes of the game, then maybe there's really no point in using instant replay at all.

Horrendous no-calls have just as much influence on the outcome of a game in the waning minutes as do the confirmation replays of what is or isn't a catch, which differs from one officiating crew to the next.

If the technology is available to insure a level competitive playing field, then either use it across the board or just do away with it altogether. It seems kinda pointless when a team, who is trailing by 2 points with less than two minutes in the game, throws a deep pass and an obvious defensive pass-interference call is ignored.

Either use the technology to the fullest extent in those situations or just do away with the practice altogether.

potbunker

The more cameras and replays on every play will reveal a greater # of mistakes.

Golf is going through the same issue, except for those players not in contention.

Harbaugh is a whiner anyway and gets the big "mute button" from me every time he is on local news. (I live about 50 miles from U of M).

Whether he is justified or not is not an issue to me as it is Harbaugh and my following of college athletics has declined considerably as it is now all about $$$$$.

If a replay review still gets it wrong, oooops, humans are not infallible.

PA-PLAYA

potbunker

The point is that replay review shouldn't get it wrong. When it does, that either means (a) the rules need to be changed to negate whatever personal judgements remain in the gray area, or (b) there shouldn't be replay reviews whatsoever.

But that aside, and IF the review process is going to remain, then it should also include every action within the last 5 minutes of the game that involve the act of making a play on the ball, to include those no-call instances of pass interference (both offense and defense). A team should not get screwed over simply because an official was out of position to make the call, or even worse - avoids making the call altogether due to the usual league MO of preferring the officiating to not influence the outcome.

The time issue is definitely a consideration, it's not something that should extend the full duration of the game, start to finish. But the last 5 minutes... bang-bang plays, happening so fast that refs aren't expecting it, or react late to it, or don't call it because they were out of position, or even simple deep routes when corners like Richard Sherman grab a receiver's arm opposite the referee and holds him. That should be called, especially in the closing minutes of a 1-possession game.

Good Lord, they've got the ability to get it right. Just do it for crying out loud.

mikeintopeka

PA-PLAYA Yes, but.....how many times have the play by play or color commentator in the booth been wrong when 'predicting' or 'stating' how the review in the booth is going to go? Darn, I've heard the 'former' director of officials from numerous leagues cite the rule and then point out how it applies to the replay they are watching with a comment 'that call will be reversed' or 'that call will be confirmed/the play will stand'? Geez, these guys live and die football, have attended or personally conducted countless rules sessions, and they still can't come to a consensus.

potbunker

mikeintopeka

Yep, when humans are involved there will be mistakes and something new will crop up. That is why they keep adding rules and those who are knowledgeable will still disagree.

If you want a mistake free game, add a ton of extra cameras and review every play. Six hours later something will still remain in question unless we are all asleep. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

PA-PLAYA

mikeintopeka

Exactly. There's too much wiggle room with too many personal interpretations of how the rules apply, which highlights the inconsistencies a few of us talked about.

Football, at both levels, has become quicker and more athletic over the years. Talent scouting has dramatically improved. Coaching has gotten better. But officiating hasn't kept pace, for a myriad of reasons. The biggest reason in my opinion is because the rules over the years have become too technical. When more than one condition has to be considered for what is or isn't a catch, then suddenly you have a situation where interpretation takes over. Did the receiver maintain control of the football... did he maintain control long enough prior to becoming a runner... was the ball secure when the player caught the ball and landed on the ground...

It seems "secure" and "control" are two key points. Yet no two officiating crews seem to consistently maintain the same criteria as it relates to securing and controlling. Hell, one officiating crew struggles to maintain the same criteria from one play to the next in the same game some of the time.

We talk about how ridiculous and wordy golf rules are. Well... click on the link I've provided below and note the laundry list of conditions that have to be met for an official to determine what is or isn't considered a catch.

http://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-video-rulebook/completing-a-catch/