Holmgren's comments about officiating to be reviewed by NFL

[friesianrider]

Sounds like a bunch of sore losers if you ask me. Embarassing play calls, horrific time management, countless incomplete and dropped passes...nah, you couldn't have lost because of that. It's much easier to blame the officials I guess.

Enough already with the Super whining and bitching. In the words of ESPN's Gene Wojciechowski: "sorry conspiracy buffs, a loss sometimes is just a loss." The game is over - you lost. Shut up, go home and get ready for next season already.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/news/story?id=2322700

The NFL was unaware until Tuesday of the comments made by Seattle Seahawks coach Mike Holmgren one day earlier concerning the officiating in Super Bowl XL, but will "definitely look into" the incident, a league official told ESPN.com.

Holmgren could face a fine for the remarks.

<snip>

[fishnfla]

1. I think its a symptom of a disease and I wont shut up

I could give 2 flat fucks who won the SB. It was a shitty game and the refs sucked it off.

NEWSFLASH: They sucked all year long! Instead of a system that works, it gets worse and worse

I really hate people who sit there and say: "its part of the game, just live with it" That the height of ignorance, IMO

EDIT to add: the irony is, I started to feel this way 2 seasons ago, when the Steelers got raped in a series of games by blatant crap officiating that ruined their season. IIRC, Cower was ripping the NFL then

[Ravenseye]

2. What's the solution then?

The only thing I can think of is MORE reviews and replays, slowing down the game, making it abysmal to watch. More cameras stategically placed. More 'let it play out' and then automatically review it.

The golden age for referee's was thirty years ago when there were 2-3 cameras and no instant replay. If they made a call, it was made, and nobody talked baout it. BAd calls were made then, but they just weren't shown it again and again back then...

So what's the solution now? Full time refs? How does that help? What are they gonna do monday through friday that will make them better refs? You want them there 40 hours a week practicing...making calls? reviewing tapes of bad calls? MLB, the NHL and the NBA need full time refs because of their schedules, but the NFL doesn't.

So then what? A review flag? Instead of making a bad call, if the ref feels that a judgement needs to be made, they throw a blue flag onto the field, and then let it play out and let the replay officials decide from the tapes?

[fishnfla]

3. Take the instant replay off the field for one

Have the calls reviewed by a booth official

younger refs that are full time and in better physical condition. They should spend the entire year working out, looking at film and as stupid as it sounds making calls and blowing whistles. Why are calls missed b/c of a "quick whistle"?

the refs should have their names on their backs. they should be held accountable to the fans and press just like players and coaches are. They are making decisions which affect peoples careers

peer review- the refs should be held accountable by their own. If they make mistakes they should be fined. If they make enough mistakes, they should be replaced. When you screw up in your job what happens?

Continuing education and testing. Its embarrassing when refs make calls that are against written established rules ( example: Patriots/Broncos game, a ball fumbled forward out of the end zone is a touchback the other way, players know it, fans know it, the announcers know it. and the refs blow it. a written rule they are the last to know apparantly

[Ravenseye]

4. Ok some good here

I agree in younger refs in better physical condition. I'm not saying hire some 22 year olds, but I think a thirtysomething with ten years refing experience should have a go.

I still don't agree with the full time thing though. I think there is such a thing as overpreparation and there just isn't enough for them to do.

The rules of football isn't exactly the bible or the Quran, but there are people who coudl quote you those books back to front. The referee's should be able to quote you the NFL rulebook line by line. I don't know if that qualifies as putting them in a fulltime job, because I"d expect them to know that before their first game. Other than that, what kind of practice can they honestly get from looking at film all day all week? Maybe with computers and virtual reality they can play Madden 2007 but as the referees...

Names on the backs. Well since everyone knows their names even though it's not on their backs they're still accountable, to a certain degree. I don't think that would make a difference either way, so sure...slap their names on there.

I agree on the peer review and fines.

The thing I worry about is if too much of this is public then every game gets more tarnished. Lots of calls are 'close' and people tend to see them through different colored glasses. THere are peopel who watch the same tape who will swear on their child's life that Ben crossed the plane, while others would do the same saying he never did. He called this here, but not there? How is this holding, when that wasn't? Why is that incomplete, when this wasn't?

It seems the more it's talked about, the more people complain, and often it's about rules they don't apparently understand. I just worry that will get blown up more as well.

[fishnfla]

5. I understand about the colored glasses

I also understand about the tarnished image. We already have both.

I'm trying to look at this objectively which against my green and gold vision. More fans have to say it sucks when crappy calls go their way. It lessens the game. Why bother playing? Why bother watching?

The NFL already has a tarnished, flawed product. They have professional players and coaches, a great PR and delivery system (TV) but the officiating is substandard and is a drag.

Its a problem which can and needs to be fixed

[HuckleB]

8. The NFL is big business.

Tin hat or not, anyone who knows the history of sports knows the history of human shenanigans, and whether its just incompetence or worse, something does need to change, though nothing will until viewers turn away.

[WildEyedLiberal]

12. No kidding

I had no dog in this hunt and the refs ruined the entire game for me. I'm sorry, but if I'm a completely neutral observer and I notice atrocious bias, then something's wrong. Most gracious Steelers fans have acknowledged that the officiating was poor - it's too bad you have the sore winner asshats who continue to deny, beyond all reality, that the reffing was somehow fair. Hell, a prominent ESPN columnist pointed out the horrible reffing, so it's bullshit to claim that it's ONLY bitter Seahawks fans complaining. Sore winners like this are emblematic of the worst of sports.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

6. The Hawks, the Steelers and the Refs all played poorly.

[HuckleB]

7. Yup.

Still, the NFL's "don't cause any controversy" rule doesn't help matters. It only gives ammo to the tin hatter crowd.

[Robeson]

9. That's pretty much the bottom line.....

...but I also agree with the above poster that there needs to be full-time refs. I've yet to see a logical argument against it.

[Ravenseye]

10. I've yet to see an argument for it?

Oh the refs were BAD, they need to be full time...

Why? They work 17 days a year, and you want to make them full time? Talk about a dream job. There is such a thing as overpreparation. What are they going to do for 300 other days a year (being generous and giving them two months vacation) Review tapes? What will that do? How will that improve their play calling? Won't it make them just more nervous?

From what I understand the problem is threefold

1) The referee's feel the rules are too fluid and have complained about it for years. What constitutes a pushoff, when do you call it when do you not? When is it incidental, when is it intentional? There are too many rules that aren't cut and dry and are open to interpretation.

2) Instant Replay, not the act by the officials, but the one on television, puts into question each and every call made by the referees and their interpretations. This is done in ways never before seen twenty and thirty years ago. Referee's aren't worse these days, they're just under so much scrutiny that each questionable call gets blown up into a rigged game.

3) They are limited in their replay ability. They are trained to let a play go on if it's in question, but sometimes they may think it's not, but it is (like in hockey, if they can't see the puck the play is whistled dead, sometimes even though the puck is alive and swiftly goes into the net) In addition the camera's are not set up for the perfect circumstances. They need more cameras, on the goal line, on the end line, on the sidelines, specifically there to monitor plays.

Yet no matter what you do. Hundreds of cameras, replay each play by full time young hearty and tested officials....they're still human. THey make mistakes. Judgement calls need to be made, and when everyone else who doesn't know the NFL rulebook backwards and forwards watch it on television and some retarded ex-jock says "mmaaaaaa dat aint holding...maaaaaaa" everyone suddenly believes it....

Make me an argumetn for full-time refs and I'll listen, but I just don't see how it'll actually solve any problems. Younger refs? sure. More cameras for replay specifically running at high speed? Sure. Computerized tracking help, trackers in the ball, etc? Ok. I just don't see how someone watching game tapes monday through friday for 40 hours is going to do anyone any good when it comes down to a split second judgement call.

[Robeson]

11. "They work 17 days a year"?.....

...Do you really believe that? And if they did, that REALLY WOULD be a problem, and in and of itself, would constitute a reason they hire full-time refs....

But anyway, here's what I posted on another thread here...

"Not just film study, it would also include working out like players so...that they stay in top physical condition, in order to try and keep up as best they can with 20 "something" year old guys, because these 20 somethings are moving a hell of lot more faster than 60 year old fat guys. I'm 42. I'm not as fast as I was at 25, my eyesights not as good, and my hearing ain't what it used to be. Now, when I see some 60 year old guy out there with a paunch, is his any better?

Also, your ideas of speaking engagements, and teaching clinics is also a great idea. Also, teams have mini camps, training camps, team meetings, etc., throughout the year. Have them do seminars with teams during the year, educating them to rule changes, and what crews will be watching. Have them oversee practices to help instruct. In fact, some teams hire ex-refs or college refs to do exactly that. It would easily be a full-time job, and the tasks they could do would be limitless. These ideas are just scratching the tip of the iceberg. It would only make the game better. How could there be an argument against that?.."

I would also add, the NFL is a multi-billion dollar business. The cost of hiring full-time refs, would be pocket change. In a multi-billion dollar business, the best possible product should be put on the field, whether it's players, refs, or coaches.