How do we feel about the pass interference challenge?

[wackywabbit]

2 hours ago, Danger said:

I still hold by that with this, even more so than other calls it's going to require "clear indisputable video evidence"

And it has to be blatantly obvious. Nothing where you could say "well maybe....."

Why I don't like this: if it's not clear and obvious that any penalty happened, it shouldn't be flagged in the first place. It's either a PI or it isn't. The idea of a more severe PI being needed on video is a complication we don't need and refs clearly can't execute.

We are cool with refs throwing flags on the field when they DON'T think it's clear and obvious a foul occured? I'm not.

Edited September 27, 2019 by wackywabbit

[sammymvpknight]

8 minutes ago, footbull3196 said:

Because the nfl doesn’t actually care about solving the problem itself, they just care about their perception.  If they’re perceived to be taking some sort of action then they’re “good” in everyone else’s eyes

I’d like to say that they’re lucky the the second call was made so that the Packers fans had less of a gripe...but let’s be real...the NFL has no integrity. They’re too big to fail and they could care less what’s happening on the field while they’re fat and happy. 

[minutemancl]

It's the worst rule change in recent memory. There is 0 consistency game to game, and 0 consistency even within each game. It all feels extremely subjective. I can't stand it.

We also all know what the end result of this is: in the playoffs, a coach challenges asking for a DPI and the refs give it to them on a questionable call. It just gives the refs an extra chance to screw the game up.

[sammymvpknight]

6 minutes ago, minutemancl said:

It's the worst rule change in recent memory. There is 0 consistency game to game, and 0 consistency even within each game. It all feels extremely subjective. I can't stand it.

We also all know what the end result of this is: in the playoffs, a coach challenges asking for a DPI and the refs give it to them on a questionable call. It just gives the refs an extra chance to screw the game up.

Here’s a review of statistics. The rule has poor inter-rater reliability in that there is no consistency between different officials. The rule has excellent intra-rater reliability in the same official is consistent. The reason is simple...some of these officials have zero integrity and are butthurt over someone questioning their authority. 

Are you seriously going to tell me that a receivers arm being held down while the ball is upon him isn’t pass interference? Was he suppose to catch the ball ala Beckham with one arm or better yet with his feet?!? It’s just stupid. It feels like the rule change was done to question the viewers intelligence. 

[Bolts223]

I'll echo what some people have said before that it should be something that can only be overturned if the call on the field is very obviously wrong. Reason being that PI calls can absolutely swing the outcome in a game of inches. I think it needs to be made clear to coaches and refs that the intent is to only overturn calls that are blatant so we don't have something happen like what did with the Saints.

[TOUCAN]

How the one against Philly last night wasn't overturned I won't understand. I didn't see the other one, but the DBs back was turned to the ball and he actually his legitimately messing with the receivers ability to make a play on the ball.

[Danger]

5 minutes ago, JoshstraDaymus said:

How the one against Philly last night wasn't overturned I won't understand. I didn't see the other one, but the DBs back was turned to the ball and he actually his legitimately messing with the receivers ability to make a play on the ball.

Because they were being consistent with what they were calling all of last night. Like it or not, on both sides they were kinda letting them play.

[AZ_Eaglesfan]

It is a terrible rule that has almost no chance of doing anything but causing more mistakes.

[Ketchup]

13 minutes ago, Danger said:

Because they were being consistent with what they were calling all of last night. Like it or not, on both sides they were kinda letting them play.

Sure, they were consistent in the game. The trouble is they aren’t consistent from game to game. Plus, it added two booth reviews to the game that had no chance of being overturned. It cost both teams a timeout when it had no chance of being overturned. It’s stupid. 

[CrazyJoeDavola]

I guess my view is that it hasn’t really benefited anything or made the game better. So why add more delays. 

[Livewire]

Not a fan.

[Nozizaki]

It has very clearly been a mixed bag.

The most heinous misuse is the Vikings having a touchdown taken off the board for an iffy at best OPI non-call.

I'm glad it is able to be reviewed, but I think it's best to go with the call on the field unless there is egregious and blatant DPI or OPI.

[Malfatron]

[SkippyX]

I am not picking this because it was on an Eagle. I am picking it because its the 50 drunks in a bar rule.

You can't slap Alshon Jeffrey's hand away before the ball gets there and then not get called for PI on a review for PI.

 

The rule is meaningless if this and other equally OBVIOUS PI calls do not get ruled correctly on replay.

For the record, Green Bay's review was just as bad.

[Eagles23]

I do like it for pick plays