Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

I agree that they need full time officials, but they'll never be as good as the replays that are relayed in slow motion. They'll always miss calls because they are human. There's no way around it. The only solution is an "eye in the sky" replay official that can make quick calls one way or the other via a bank of video monitors and a buzzer or mic to the lead official to either throw a flag or pick one up. Even with that there will be missed calls both ways. It cannot be totally avoided.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Yeah that's true, the main annoyance to me is how each crew seems to have a difference of opinion and that's what I think having them study film would resolve.

One crew let WR's and DB's hand fight, another crew will throw a flag at the slightest touch between them.

Zero consistency and that's what annoys me.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Agree completely with that. One would hope that full time officials could develop at least somewhat of a more consistent degree of judgement and/or definition of infractions.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

No it's not. I'm not *****ing about new rules and pussifying contact, that's fine. I am all for rules that are put in place for safety. What pisses me off is blatant no calls, lop sided officiating, and when they “let teams play” until it's conveniently late in the fourth qtr that pisses me off.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Inconsistent and incompetent officiating, at times, with no check. I can agree with that.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

I'm a rugby referee and appreciate how a good referee controls the game. Bad refereeing is costing this game any respect it may have had in the past. Well, that and Rodger Goodell running the show.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

I really don't think the officiating as any worse than it's ever been. The problem is that with replays, multiple camera angles, and remarkable video quality we are seeing more of those bad calls and non-calls than ever before.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

The XFL & AAFL "SKY JUDGE" seemed to fix all of those problems, almost instant calls. Raises the question WHY doesn't the "most popular form of ENTERTAINMENT' implement the same system? Is it that the ENTERTAINMENT portion of SPORTS/ENTERTAINMENT may become more SPORTS oriented?

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Support is growing for the "sky judge" type addition for the very reason that you point out, the entertainment value. That value is being attacked over the bad calls and non-calls. If it was for the "sport" alone it would never be addressed.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

I brought up that the "SKY JUDGE" would push the SPORTS side more into the forefront by taking away the "power" of the field officials. The viewer sees what the SKY JUDGE sees.

Why the call for full time officials? If as you say "If it was for the "sport" alone it would never be addressed." Sounds like the line from North Dallas Fourty" to me.........."Every time I call it a business (ENTERTAINMENT), you call it a game!(SPORTS) And every time I call it a game,(SPORTS) you call it a business!(ENTERTAINMENT)"

Full time officials could control the "ENTERTAINMENT SIDE" AKA "SCRIPTED" much better, couldn't they?