I do appreciate what they were trying to do. In theory, it is a great idea. There were some very specific instances where it was missed that led to trying this out. All of that said…SOOOOOOOOOOO happy this is gone. Eye in the Sky should be catching anything blatant, extreme, or legitimately effecting the play.
So they got rid of the reason for dropping the number of challenges from three to one, but didn't put it back up to three. Guess it does make the coaches think a bit harder about their challenges .
Other than that, fully support these changes.
Should just get rid of all of them.
It's time to give the refs some support.
Do you have that short a memory, or are you too young to remember what it was like before the challenges were added? There was a reason they were added.
That said, there is lots of room for improvement in how the challenges work. Make them quicker by putting a time limit on them. Only allow slow motion for line or ground contact decisions. Ask the on-field officials if they saw the contact and ignored it as inconsequential, and only allow the review if they say they didn't see any contact. Man the booth with spare on-field officials. But no need to eliminate them completely.
Applause , whistles and smiles . Mucho Gracias .
Good call! Less reviews the better.
Coaches would just find the next most weasily penalty to challenge for.
Love it! Best news in a while.
Back up to three? Yikes, that would be real bad!!!
I don't know about that. I am one of a few that believes there should be 3 challenges.
We know it's a fast moving sport on a big field and yes the officials are humans and they do make mistakes.
Sure it would fix the odd blown call, but would it be entertaining to you? Would others find it entertaining?
I can live with the odd blown call. By your own admission there is a problem with how challenges work. Unless there's a flawless system in place, which I don't believe there is, coaches challenges will only be detrimental to the entertainment value of the game. Lengthy reviews, coaches trying to find new things to go after, coaches trying to challenge something that isn't reviewable, etc
Call me old fashioned, but even though this is a step in the right direction--even if video reviews were left in the hands of refs and the eye in the sky--there is still the possibility of clutter, and I think the league should put on the best product. And that's entertaining, up tempo football, not football that is called perfectly with the help of video review.
Like it or not the league is under an unfair microscope. It shouldn't give the hate mongers any fuel.
From my perspective, numerous and lengthy delays are a serious problem at the game, but not so much on TV. At home I can get up and do something else, change the channel, whatever, but when I'm actually at a football game long delays are infuriating and one reason I don't go to as many live games as I used to. So, I can understand why this was done. I am just not looking forward to the howls of protest and invigorated hate threads about the refs that are guaranteed to result after pretty much every game.
Personally I think without coaches challenges on PI that you'll see that the refs will let the players play more often and more will be let go. Just what I think, I might be wrong.
I am a legalist. I want every infraction to be called regardless of impact on the play. I cant stand when players don't play by the rules.
I grew up playing where no contact was allowed on a receiver until they had the ball. I know it is possible.
So FYB, you think both the NFL and CFL allow too much contact such as just both receiver and defender going for the ball making contact? Or just some legal basketball type contact on a defender, jockying, a no go? That's called touch football I'm afraid in the truest sense, not something I want to see. When a receiver is running his route and the defender is matching him stride for stride, arms of both players are moving as they run, there might be some incidental contact that isn't interference and should not be called, just like in basketball. Not all contact is called in basketball.
Really? So, an offense is running a sweep around the right side. 20 yards away, their Left End is holding. You want THAT called? It has no effect on the play, why would you want a penalty called there? Or, a DB grabs the arm of a receiver while a ball is in the air...but the pass is poorly thrown or deflected and lands 10 yards in front of the players in question. You want that (PI) called too?
Your expressed desire would result in 5 hour games. The officials in football are the only things that are black and white...the game is anything but.