Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

That's a hard one to answer. It can be the best it's ever been and still be bad. The game is being played at such an extreme speed as compared to just a decade ago that it's just that much harder for the part time officials to get it right. Add to that the fact that more and more cameras with more and more capabilities are being added every year that replay exposes every tiny flaw.

Are the officials better than they've ever been? Perhaps they are, but that ain't sayin' much, Roger.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

no, i like the old days much better when men were men.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

By that he means they are following the script.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

It's hard to agree with Liars. So, no I don't agree with anything that man spews. Ask Drew Brees or Sean Payton if they believe anything that Roger Godhell says. His credibility is down at the bottom of the bucket with George Santos / Anthony Dubrovsky.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Well said Guido. Comparatively, it may be better, but still a lot of bad stuff happening.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Better for who Roger?

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

It'll never be good until they hire full time officials.

Allowing people who don't study film and learn from mistakes, to fully dictate the outcome of a game is ridiculous.

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?

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Off the meds again? :D ;)

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

If we can see the remarkable video and camera angles, why can't they see them and correct the calls?

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

And thus the growing demand for the "eye in the sky" and/or expanded challenges. It's only a matter of time from what I have heard and read. I believe that pushback may be coming from the broadcasters in that it could feasibly lengthen the game by a tad. I suppose that could create some programming issues.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

No.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

And this will be his response until viewership declines.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

First thing that needs to happen is get Pererra and who ever else they have chime in after calls out of the picture, i hate 'em. Can't wait til Vinnovich gets his turn, what a turd.... I don't need justification for either a correct or missed call on the field. It doesn't change the call. Maybe have an ex DB (for PI calls, DL/and OL chime in missed holding calls, or QB roughing calls chime in, now that would be entertainment. Officiating is just being more scrutinized because of better angles, drones, eye in the sky, slow mo. i just despise anything that leaks from the lips of Goodhell.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Perrera is the Anthony Fauci of football.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

In other words ... forever.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Predictable as 20 - 0 Baby!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

The NFL has Yes Men Who explain why the incorrect calls were correct after all, no matter what you see. Pereira is there to make sure that you understand Rodger Goodell is doing this for the Integrity of the game. Oh wait, I meant to say Integrity of the entertainment.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

I'm not sure what y'all are listening to, but Dean Blandino, FOX rules analyst, makes weekly appearances on NFL Radio's SiriusXM Blitz with Bruce Murray going over all of the questionable calls and non-calls of the week. He doesn't give any excuses and more times than not says the official blew the call or should have made the call. I've heard pretty much the same thing from Pereira on other shows. Now, they both have given reasons why they feel the call was blown by the official, but they routinely point out that the bad calls (or non-calls) did take place.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

I was anticipating your response……I would expect nothing less. All I read is blah blah blah blah

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

And I expect no less either.

;)

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

The NFL "Board Of Entertainment Head" Roger Goodell has former "Washed Up Officials" explaining to the "FANS" how and why the current group of "Bad Officials" routinely make bad calls (or non-calls) and that "officiating in the league has never been better. "

He said this with a straight face (Difficult to see with all the clown makeup he had on) despite a "blown call" that cost the Vikings a TD against the Colts during the greatest comeback in NFL History.

Read this and tell me "Officials" know what they are doing!

"NFL senior vice president of officiating Walt Anderson later noted that while it’s technically a dead ball when the officials (on the field) rule that a runner is down by contact, you can award the opposing team the ball with a clear recovery, but with no advancement."

A SKY JUDGE WOULD HAVE IMEDIATELY SEEN.........

“There was a subsequent loose ball and then a recovery by Minnesota and an advance. Minnesota challenged that and by the time they challenged, we had good views. We had an expedited review to announce that it was a fumble, and we had a clear recovery. But all we could do was give Minnesota the ball at the spot of the recovery.”(Because of the on field officials "Blown Call")

SIRIUSLY, THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT Y'ALL!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

.

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

https://media.tenor.com/UTW60Fgn5NYA...e-the-meds.gif

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Re: Do You Agree With RG ?
 

Actually, you make some very valid points about officiating.