User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.6844 seconds
50 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
I also would not be surprised to see that holding on the OL on running plays is not getting called so much, but I think that they are calling it on the (more obvious) passing plays.
I sort of assume this is just an accident and not Pete Goodell Secret Enforcement Order.
It seems to me that since penalty calls are pretty much random now, it's led to players basically doing whatever they want and hoping they get away with it. Sometimes they do get away with it, sometimes they don't, and sometimes they get flagged for doing nothing, so you might as well go for broke. It sure makes for sloppy football.
the referees have no leverage. people are ######## about the replacements, yeah, but they're still buying tickets. they're still watching games on television. they're still writing about it on the internet and talking about it at the office the next day.
going back to last year, going back to the players' lockout, the NFL was willing to kill the entire season right up until the point where it would have cost them money. with the referees, there's no such penalty. the league is making more money than ever, so, really, what incentive is there for the league to cave on any of the referees demands?
The MNF crew was openly mocking the final ruling.
These dreadful officials distort the 2012 season every bit as much as the non-union players who were in three games that counted distorted the 1987 season.
It was a 4 point spread, too, so GB was poised to cover.
At first I thought calling a TD instead of INT made sense because "scoring plays are reviewable"... but inside 2 minutes all plays are reviewable on the booth's decision.
@206 - the other thing is that every single incomplete pass results in a receiver making a beef about "where's the flag?" QBs have been doing this for a couple of years now in the "15 yard penalty... Touching the Brady" era, and WRs did it a bit, but not all the time.
If there are, I'm not watching.
I thought somebody (ex-ref?) on ESPN said that the actual possession question wasn't reviewable - that is, the booth couldn't change the call from catch to interception. All that was reviewable was whether the ball hit the ground (and, of course, it didn't, because it was nestled safely against Jennings' chest). Which is incredibly stupid if true. What's the point of reviewing the play if you're limited in how "right" you can get the play? I think I agree with Gamingboy - probably the most bizarre thing in sports I've seen: if not the play itself, certainly the aftermath, where the ENTIRE postgame conversation focused on the obvious wrongness of the final play.
Gruden himself said that the refs never call the push-off from the offensive player on the game-ending hail marys. So that can't be a replacement ref issue.
And as for the interception, I agree it was an interception - though it wasn't THAT clear, especially with the naked eye - but what makes people think the regular refs wouldn't have screwed it up?
You'll never work for the NFL again? Is it actually criminal? I guess you could be subject to a civil suit.
But how could you ever prove anything? It's all judgement calls... and what if you just said "Yeah, I blew that call. My bad." I guess all you have to do is document payoffs by a gambling interest - doesn't matter what actions you take/don't take during game.
And they do seem subjectively worse - i.e, more calls seem just pure randomness - but it's extremely hard to be objective about it. It's even worse in situations like this Monday Night Game where the ESPN announcers just rip into them.
Normally - I just assume the announcers are wrong and ignore them, but they can be persuasive in an emotional sense.
Because the regular refs suck ass as it is.
Well, to give you an idea of the quality of refs that are acting as replacements right now, I'll point out that some of them had been fired before for incompetence...
...by the Lingerie Football League.
What's interesting is that with the all-22 (Coaches) film this year - some really bored person COULD go back and document all instances of holding/PI etc on every play this year... but ironically there's no film available from last year to compare it! I suppose you could make do with the regular TV feed (if you had all 256 games), but I think you couldn't possibly make an inference of all the NON calls that could occurring, and that might leave 1/2 the data or more "on the field".
I actually have not thought the regular NFL refs were particularly bad. I mean, they made some mistakes for sure. I don't think MLB umpires are in general really bad- although I think that robots should call balls and strikes (affirmative action just for you, Ray)
Would they get as many hits writing articles like "Replacement refs not really that bad". I don't think so. I think they feed of the (perceived) failure.
Like I said - I cannot objectively tell whether the refs are worse. And if there is such a thing as a self-fulfilling prophecy, it would look just like this. But how can you tell?
Things in the scab refs disfavor:
People are now aware of the poor resumes of some of them.
The procedural errors (awarding too many timeouts) that would be big news even once with the regular crew.
Replacement authority figures are treated differently than other sorts of replacements.
The NFL has chosen to keep them nameless on screen. Trying to protect them I guess, but it reduces sympathy if they are just anonymous. Real refs have names.
I'm surprised they've lost the broadcasters. Hard to do. I did not watch the 1987 scab games, but I don't think they lost the broadcasters back then. Of course that was a strike and you had players crossing, different situation. This is a lockout, plus with this particular group of guys (refs) all of them have full time jobs anyway, so they are not going to be missing the paycheck all that much.
unless the league has promised something extraordinary why take all the abuse?
the pass interference that got the seahawks out of first and forever was odd
1. I thought instant replay fixed everything. I'm confused.
2. I don't know who TJ Lang is but if I were a guard on a team that allowed my quarterback to get sacked 8 times in the first half I think I'd keep my trap shut about anyone else not doing their job properly.
don't know if point 1 was sarcasm or not but on that last play they are not allowed to determine possession.
by my count neither lang nor sitton were responsible for any sacks. 3 were clearly on bulaga who was going against a rookie who only has a single move which is to fly off the edge. bulaga was destroyed last night and i think should have been benched briefly to get his head back in the game. 3 were on rodgers desperate to pass the ball deep which in that setting was dumb but that is how he is coached. one on newhouse. one on john kuhn the fullback.
last night you saw the best and worst of mccarthy.
mccarthy is ridiculously stubborn and desperate for big plays so in the first half despite the offensive line getting whipped, the seattle defense playing at fever pitch and the noise not helping the packers kept trying to throw the deep ball when every defense so far has put their safeties 20 yards down field and dare green bay to run the ball and/or dink and dunk.
mccarthy, after 10 quarters of being embarrassed, finally woke up the packers did what was needed and drove the ball down the field in the second half. but instead of scoring 17 points they got 12.
the green bay defense whipped the seattle offense most of the night as the seattle offensive line was overmatched in pass protection. their guys are good run blockers but can't move their feet in pass blocking. shame on dom capers only rushing three at the end and double shame on the one green bay guy for playing pattycake versus really rushing
I don't buy any grand conspiracies, but it sure seemed like the Packers were playing against the Seahawks AND the officials for most of the 4th quarter.
At this point, why bother with the regular season? Between NFL parity and the 'officiating' wildcard, might as well just draw 12 teams out of a hat, then have them roll dice to determine who plays in the Superbowl.
That's it, in a nutshell. They also seem unsure of themselves, and the reviews are more frequent, and taking longer.
So Andy Reid can call enough pass plays to insure that Michael Vick will never walk past the age of 40.
I have to disagree on that. I think the last play was a tougher call than many people are giving the refs credit for (well not the offensive pass interference, but the catch decision), but there have been multiple instances this year where the refs have marked off penalties from the wrong yardline. They told John Fox he couldn't challenge a too many men on the field penalty (at least they eventually got that one right). They gave the Niners 2 additional challenges yesterday. And, as you point out later on, they seem to have no control over any of the games and the players/coaches have no respect for them.
Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot the play in the Skins game on Sunday where they tried to give a 10 second run off after an offensive penalty with the clock stopped that would've ended the game, only to have Kyle Shanahan vehemently tell them they were wrong, which lead to, of course, an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty on Shanahan.
Like I said, the play at the end of the game seemed a little tougher (to me, at least) than a lot of people are saying, but there have been too many instances where they simply are getting rules wrong or enforcing penalties incorrectly. (I believe Gruden mentioned there was one last night as well but I don't recall the details right now).
Definitely agree on the last point... There were multiple shoving matches that escalated right in front of officials last night. Sure, that happens on occasion - you've got a bunch of big, testosterone-laden guys hitting each other for 3 hours so such things are inevitable... but there just seems to be a ton more of this sort of thing than I can recall seeing before and no one seems all that interested in being the cooler head. I'll be mildly surprised if we don't see an uber-brawl at some point soon.
I think I speak for everyone when I say, I'm down with that.
With all the talk of lawsuits against the NFL on the concussion issue, I'd think using refs that everyone in the game says suck during a lockout - that is, when the real refs are available and willing - might open you up to something bad: lawyers?
Since I'm not in anyway a football or NFL fan, can someone sum up the labor issue involved? It seems like a lot of bad PR when there just isn't that much money involved. But googling, at this point, just turns up lots of ranting and raving about how terrible the scabs are.
My understanding is that is that the biggest hinge is on pensions... the NFL wants to convert them to 401(k)s and the officials have balked. It should be noted though - I've seen it misreported in several places - the officials aren't striking, it's a lockout by the owners. There are additional items - pay, of course, and the NFL would also like to make at least a portion of them full-time, but I think the benefits package restructuring is the biggest sticking point.
The time is fast approaching when Vick will be thrown to the dogs.
2) Clearly GB was right to go for 2 when the TD made it 12 to 7; however, consider their last possession, when they had to punt from their own 4 yard line. If the score had been 13 to 7, they could have taken a deliberate safety and the free kick, with much better field position. An unlikely outcome which doesn't change the calculations about going for two but a thought.
Link.
I don't think its been mentioned, but my God did that seem like a dirty play.
This is it.
I don't really think the accuracy of calls has dropped significantly. If regular refs get calls right 95% of the time(*), these refs are getting them right 93% (completely made-up numbers).
The issue is the lack of control, on two fronts.
One is that they take forever to make calls, and do so with very little conviction. This has led to players and coaches trying to intimidate the refs more, which has largely worked - teams are getting extra timeouts, more late flags come in after a player has asked for one, etc.
The other control issue is with player safety and behavior. It's clear that the replacements have no idea how to quickly stop chippy behavior, such as fights and dirty play.
So even though I think the same call gets made on the final play of last night's Seahawks-Packers game if regular refs were in place, if it winds up being the last straw to give leverage to the regular refs, I'm all for it.
(*) And before you cut down my estimate, remember just how many calls are made. Yes, one or two incorrect decisions might be made per game, on average, but there are literally hundreds of calls (and non-calls) refs make in a given game.
The actual, unstated position seems to be that NFL owners hate unions more than they love the integrity of the game.
I wasn't watching very closely, but I'm pretty sure that when GB was behind it was the recipient of a very questionable interference or roughing call that kept the scoring drive alive. The questionable calls went both ways.
Yeah, also, if players/coaches think penalties are random (*), then they might decide to just sell out and play ultra-aggressively on every play.
(*) Well, more random than regular penalties, I guess. As I keep pointing out, the calls and non-calls from the regular refs are pretty bleeping random also. Now, I'm open to the idea that the replacement refs are worse, and/or are screwing up the actual rules, which I agree I _don't_ see from the regular refs a whole lot. So, yes, I can see that perhaps they are worse.
----------
OT slightly, but WTF was up with the field goal at the end of the Pats-Ravens game. Why do the goalposts not extend higher than a human being can possibly kick the ball? It seems so simple. Same question for foul poles in baseball.
When Steve Young made this point last week he used the word "inelastic" and Stuart Scott and Trent Dilfer looked at him like he was speaking Chinese.
It is unquestionably worse because they don't understand the rules. This has been shown week after week.
This was discussed a bit on "Hang up and Listen" but I believe replacement refs don't directly cause an inherently more dangerous workplace than regular refs. I suppose it could be litigated, but I don't see it being successful.
I will not have you sully the good name of Ed "Too Strong" Hochuli. It was Phil Luckett who screwed up the coin toss.
I always thought the NFL had the best officials of any sport. Mostly because they review plays after games and are held somewhat accountable. I'd probably rank em (1) NFL (2) MLB (although they have been dreadful the last two years) (3) college basketball (4) college football (5) NBA (6) MLS. I don't watch enough NHL to say about that.
I won $5 on the Seahawks, so thanks scabs!
IIRC, I think it was a roughing the passer call... I think it was a hit at/below the knees (or whatever the rule is regarding where you can't hit a QB) -- again, by no means a Packer fan, and no, it didn't seem like a malicious hit, but my (limited, admittedly) understanding of the rule is that it was actually the proper call.
That said, there were certainly some other "whaaaaatttt" calls in the game that did go against SEA.
As Michael Rosenberg wrote about the Ravens-Patriots Sunday night game --
While the focus on the 4th quarter probably tints my view of who should have won last night, that's probably a pretty good synopsis of the state of things. Seattle's D/GB playcalling was absolutely burying the Pack in the 1st half, but Seattle's offense wasn't exactly lighting things up either. I suppose that, on one hand, you could say it was a toss-up game - and thus, a toss-up call (to be charitable) might have been an appropriate ending... but I do really think there's this sense of the scores not quite lining up with the play by a pretty good margin.
This. The owners have, as Steve Young pointed out after the Falcons-Broncos MNF game last week, a product with an inelastic demand curve. (Watching Stu Scott try to follow Young discussing inelasticity in demand was worth the price of admission, which is listening to Jon Gruden talk.) As such, they have no real concern about 1) the integrity of the play on the field, or 2) player safety, or 3) anything else they might jackoff to the media about. They have a product that's going to sell tickets regardless. They have $3billion guaranteed from the TV rights. They could give a flying #### about how bad the scab refs are. There *only* interest is in breaking the officials' union, and their only interest in that is blind, ideological hatred of unions by a bunch of billionaires living off of publicly funded stadiums and various other forms of the corporate-welfare dole.
Wasn't it Hochuli who made a major screw-up up that affected the outcome of a Broncos-Chargers contest?
Yea, something like a forward pass that wasn't a forward pass. But don't say it too loudly or he will beat us up.
I've only spent 30 seconds thinking about it but I can't see how.
Football fans have only themselves to blame for this.
{whistles, walks off.)
The NFL should eliminate Goodell's employer-provided health insurance too. Then they could eliminate that for the refs as well, because hey, if the CEO doesn't have it, logically the employees shouldn't have it, right? They might have to increase Goodell's salary by $1 million or so, but if they could save another $2 million on the refs, they'd come out ahead.
Although I'm trying to imagine what a defined-benefit pension program would look like for an "employee" like Goodell, who reportedly makes $20 million annually.
---
---
---
I'll refrain from commenting substantively at this juncture, since people here are interested in discussing football and the usual suspects are intent on spewing their political BS about unions.
Well sure, but that's inherent in football. Teams that get outplayed win all the time. See, e.g., the NY Jets this week (not that the Dolphins didn't do everything they could to earn that loss).
If it's not, then I apologize for the implication.
Not saying I agree with it, but them are the facts.
Scab players are not the same as scab referees. You really think that baseball fans wouldn't watch MLB games if there were scab umpires working?
edit: I'm referring to the guy who a couple years back, caught the ball, palmed it, took a couple of steps and released it and they called it incomplete.
My experience is the opposite. I know I can certainly name many more head referees than baseball umpires. We're on a baseball discussion site, of course people here will know more umpires. But among equivalent NFL fans, you'll find the refs are fairly well-known, along with their crews' tendencies (more likely to call holding? DPI? etc.).
It might be my position. Not being adequately informed as to the specific issues involved in the negotiation, I can't say. If you know what the issues are, Andy, please explain.
Otherwise, I don't see what's legitimate or serious about "Oh, the NFL has a lot of money, they should just pay employees more than they think the employees are worth." Clearly the NFL, at least to this point, thinks the demands being made by the union are too much such that it's worth suffering with replacement refs.
1) Clemons sack in the first half that was disallowed because of a face mask penalty. Clemons did have the upper shelf of the helmet (up around Rodgers' forehead), whatever that's called, but not the mask itself. It's entirely possible that grabbing that shelf is the same as grabbing the mask, I have no idea.
2) Browner decking Jennings
3) PI called on the Seahawks on a short five yard dump on the TD drive, got there simultaneously
4) Roughing on the interception - with the proviso mentioned above about the below-the-knee thing. If that's the reasoning, good call, I guess.
5) K ball used for the 2 pointer
6) PI called on GB after Sidney Rice mugged the defender on 1st and 30
7) No PI called against Woodson after he mugged the TE on the last drive
8) No PI called on Tate on the last play
9) Everything else about the last play
- The two guys didn't confer
- Making opposing signals
- Referee not conferring prior to going to replay
- XP fiasco
They did get some stuff right - Jennings going out of bounds and not scoring, then the Rodgers mark on the next play. But PI was a mess all night long on both sides, and holding is the same thing. They might as well be playing sandlot call-your-own-fouls out there.
Yes, and it was in play long before Calvin Johnson played his first NFL snap, too.
In regards to the final play of Packers-Seahawks, it does matter. In order for it to be an interception, Jennings had to maintain possession all the way to the ground. That is where the window opened up for Tate to also possess the ball(*).
But once he's landed, no, another player can't come and push him out of the end zone or "pop the #### out of him"(**). The play is complete once he's on the ground.
(*) I'm not sure that simultaneous possession was the correct call, but it's not as obviously wrong as most people are claiming. I probably would have called it an interception, but in realtime, it looked like a tossup.
(**) To be fair, they certainly could do those things, but they would likely be penalized for a late hit.
Of course, there's no comparable market, exactly, for NFL refs, and in any case it should also be no surprise that the refs don't want to give the pensions up.
My experience with labor negotiations in other industries is that it goes something like this: management says they've made a tremendous offer that is incredibly generous compared to the rest of the market. Union says the offer is misleading, terrible, and says that management isn't negotiating in good faith. Management throws up its collective hands and says they're trying but the union just won't come to the table. Union says they'll come to the table when management gets serious about a legitimate offer. Acrimonious back-and-forth press releases continue right up until the day an agreement is reached, whereupon management trumpets its dedication to organized labor and taking care of its employees, and union trumpets the incredible gains they were able to make for their members.
It's a bit different in this situation thanks to the lockout and monopoly, but the song remains the same.
I think it's just unrealistic to make them that high. They would have to be a LOT higher than they are now so you'd run into general engineering issues where you'd need a change of materials which would probably cost significant money. Also, if you watch any football game the poles bend and sway. I think if they got to high the bending would actually change what is or is not a good field goal.
It seems that there would be some technology to deal with this (e.g. a chip in the ball, a camera on top of the pole) but I think what you suggest, while it sounds logical, is probably pretty challenging.
I think we've reached that point now. My gut feeling is a 5% drop this weekend, slowly building to a fall in ratings by say 20% in a few weeks.
According to the talking heads I heard last night, simultaneous possession requires simultaneous INITIAL possession. If player A catches it first and then B comes in afterward, that can't be simultaneous possession. So, I don't think there was a window open for Tate to also possess the ball, once Jennings caught the ball.
If that does happen, in combination with decreased gate revenue, and the continued media backlash; then the owners will come back to the table. I'm not too optimistic that will occur.
It doesn't matter how many John Claytons, Steve Youngs, or Peter Kings continue to harp about the problems, I don't think the owners will budge until it manifests itself in the bottom line.
Next MNF game is Bears vs Cowboys. Ratings will not suffer.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main