MattM Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 After the latest officiating fiasco which looks more than a little shady (multiple calls and no calls going one way late in a game helping a popular team to victory, such perception not helped by the "party bus" incident), is it feasible or desirable for the League to require their officials to submit to periodic lie detector tests? Could the League condition employment on agreeing to take such tests? Not a labor lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), so I don't know the answer, but do think it might go a long way towards placating some folks who can't help but think something untoward is going on based on what they're seeing with their own eyes. My father of all people recently raised this possibility. He's watched football longer than the Bills have been around and seemed to think it would be a good idea. If that's possible, how would fans go about demanding it, as personally, I think it would indeed be a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flomoe Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 If the labor unions ever agreed, sure, but there is no way that in this country it would ever fly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 7, 2015 Author Share Posted January 7, 2015 If the labor unions ever agreed, sure, but there is no way that in this country it would ever fly. You are probably correct, but in some cases workers (even unionized ones) are subject to things like drug tests, although in most or all of those cases there may be at least a sheen of "safety" as the rationale for those tests. I do also recall a colleague a number of years ago (at the police dept of all places) talking about needing to pass a lie detector test on drug use and ethics for a job in the securities industry--as it turned out, he had previously dealt coke so failed the tests (true story). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) After the latest officiating fiasco which looks more than a little shady (multiple calls and no calls going one way late in a game helping a popular team to victory, such perception not helped by the "party bus" incident), is it feasible or desirable for the League to require their officials to submit to periodic lie detector tests? Could the League condition employment on agreeing to take such tests? Not a labor lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), so I don't know the answer, but do think it might go a long way towards placating some folks who can't help but think something untoward is going on based on what they're seeing with their own eyes. My father of all people recently raised this possibility. He's watched football longer than the Bills have been around and seemed to think it would be a good idea. If that's possible, how would fans go about demanding it, as personally, I think it would indeed be a good idea. There is nothing that will help these types of people be disabused of their point of view. But anyway, just to further the entertainment value of this thread, what would you ask a NFL ref employment candidate while he is hooked to the electrodes? What answers to what questions would allow you to sleep at night as these guys are selected? Edited January 7, 2015 by Mr. WEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtbag Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 But anyway, just to further the entertainment value of this thread, what would you ask a NFL ref employment candidate while he is hooked to the electrodes? not for nothing, but i would totally be on board with hooking up some jumper cables to the nipples of that dude who called the "just give it to them" pats game from like 15 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma Pecoraro Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Pseudo-science, not for nothing, but i would totally be on board with hooking up some jumper cables to the nipples of that dude who called the "just give it to them" pats game from like 15 years ago. Did your nipples heal from our last bout? Come to Momma! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtbag Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Pseudo-science, Did your nipples heal from our last bout? Come to Momma! mamma's dead, fraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 You don't need lie detector tests, what you need are full time officials. I've often heard the argument the current ones are often lawyers, bank presidents, all high income earners beyond being bribed. In today's world, whatever they make isn't above bribery, so I'd throw that argument out. Thought I read that the officials around $15k per game times 16 weeks that's still over $200k per year. While not an obscene amount of money if you're making $200k as a full time ref or say $1/2 mil as lawyer and another $200k from the NFL, it probably would have little bearing either way whether you'd take a bribe or not. I've heard the argument if they went full time, too many good experienced officials would quit. I'd phase it in, each year one to two positions on the crew move to full time. In the mean time you keep the remaining PT but experienced guys around. I'm sure you could easily find 20 to 50 people every year willing to go full time either from the current ranks,, maybe college, or other places. Once you have transitioned over to all full time those that didn't want to make the switch. I'd offer some of the most experienced ones positions as raters, go to games and evaluate the crew. There's enough work they could do all week to be useful, film study, working out, time spend working with teams in practice to reduce penalties, evaluation etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 7, 2015 Author Share Posted January 7, 2015 There is nothing that will help these types of people be disabused of their point of view. But anyway, just to further the entertainment value of this thread, what would you ask a NFL ref employment candidate while he is hooked to the electrodes? What answers to what questions would allow you to sleep at night as these guys are selected? Very simply questions about bribery or outside interference with their judgment of any kind, for ex., blackmail. Push works as well as pull, as in sending a nice looking young woman to the hotel bar the night before the game and Mr. Ref is paid a visit the next morning along the lines of "see these pictures of your nice, happy family. Would be a shame if anything happened to it." If these guys can periodically pass those tests, and assuming the science behind the tests is sound, then I think that would help the integrity of the game. As others have noted here and elsewhere, the game is reffed by human beings--human beings can be bribed or extorted. The League should put in place measures to prevent that, to the extent possible, particularly after similar things have happened in other leagues. I'd personally feel a little better about the game if such measures were possible and used. Don't personally know enough about the science of lie detection to know if there would be any real value in it (and if the obstacles to it, such as privacy rights issues and union objections, could be overcome), but if there was, I would think it might be worth the League's while to consider it, particularly if they and their owners have nothing to hide. Were the idea floated, it might be interesting to see who objects (on the League/owner side, that is--I could understand why the refs might object simply on principle). I think any reasonable person would agree that the League's reputation took a large beating in Dallas this weekend and the playoffs are only partially over. One more similar incident (and we all know both New England* and Dallas play this weekend) and this kind of trouble could actually get some legs, rather than die down like it usually does. You don't need lie detector tests, what you need are full time officials. I've often heard the argument the current ones are often lawyers, bank presidents, all high income earners beyond being bribed. In today's world, whatever they make isn't above bribery, so I'd throw that argument out. Thought I read that the officials around $15k per game times 16 weeks that's still over $200k per year. While not an obscene amount of money if you're making $200k as a full time ref or say $1/2 mil as lawyer and another $200k from the NFL, it probably would have little bearing either way whether you'd take a bribe or not. I've heard the argument if they went full time, too many good experienced officials would quit. I'd phase it in, each year one to two positions on the crew move to full time. In the mean time you keep the remaining PT but experienced guys around. I'm sure you could easily find 20 to 50 people every year willing to go full time either from the current ranks,, maybe college, or other places. Once you have transitioned over to all full time those that didn't want to make the switch. I'd offer some of the most experienced ones positions as raters, go to games and evaluate the crew. There's enough work they could do all week to be useful, film study, working out, time spend working with teams in practice to reduce penalties, evaluation etc. I disagree--to cover off the issue I'm concerned with, corruption, full time officials won't work, not unless you pay them a helluva lot more than you're discussing there. Incompetence is a whole other separate matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Very simply questions about bribery or outside interference with their judgment of any kind, for ex., blackmail. Push works as well as pull, as in sending a nice looking young woman to the hotel bar the night before the game and Mr. Ref is paid a visit the next morning along the lines of "see these pictures of your nice, happy family. Would be a shame if anything happened to it." If these guys can periodically pass those tests, and assuming the science behind the tests is sound, then I think that would help the integrity of the game. I asked--and you did not disappoint! Tempting Bimbos! Threatened families! Assuming lie detector "science" is "sound"! Thanks man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I think they should just develop an app and let fans vote on replays. Would it be accurate? Hell no, but it'd be fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 After the latest officiating fiasco which looks more than a little shady (multiple calls and no calls going one way late in a game helping a popular team to victory, such perception not helped by the "party bus" incident), is it feasible or desirable for the League to require their officials to submit to periodic lie detector tests? What's the legal status of lie detector tests? I know employers can require them - but in court, are they allowed as evidence? I thought they were fairly widely debunked - that there's a lot of influence of the person giving the test, that they can easily produce false results if the person taking it is either stressed, or good at controlling their stress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 7, 2015 Author Share Posted January 7, 2015 I asked--and you did not disappoint! Tempting Bimbos! Threatened families! Assuming lie detector "science" is "sound"! Thanks man! Always glad to be of service, although you got the last part wrong--I thought I made it pretty clear that I have no idea whether the science behind lie detection is settled or not. What's really kind of funny is that the guy with perhaps the most consistently cantankerous, negative, sarcastic view on this board doesn't buy into a negative view of human nature that presupposes a need for such corruption controls. I, at least, find that kind of funny. I also hope that you noticed that I was one of the few who supported your Gary Kubiak flier--it's to bad that the Bills don't seem to be listening to you/us on that one! What's the legal status of lie detector tests? I know employers can require them - but in court, are they allowed as evidence? I thought they were fairly widely debunked - that there's a lot of influence of the person giving the test, that they can easily produce false results if the person taking it is either stressed, or good at controlling their stress. No idea either way. That was one of the questions that I had myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 What's the legal status of lie detector tests? I know employers can require them - but in court, are they allowed as evidence? I thought they were fairly widely debunked - that there's a lot of influence of the person giving the test, that they can easily produce false results if the person taking it is either stressed, or good at controlling their stress. I don't believe they are admissible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted January 7, 2015 Author Share Posted January 7, 2015 I don't believe they are admissible. http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/eppa.htm Nor, as per the link above, do they appear to be allowed under Federal law (a couple of non-applicable exceptions). There's the answer I was looking for above. Too bad, because it might have helped solve the League's perception problem on this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 simple relegation the worst nfl ref's get demoted to college. 1 crew per year. the best college ref's get promoted to nfl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Always glad to be of service, although you got the last part wrong--I thought I made it pretty clear that I have no idea whether the science behind lie detection is settled or not. What's really kind of funny is that the guy with perhaps the most consistently cantankerous, negative, sarcastic view on this board doesn't buy into a negative view of human nature that presupposes a need for such corruption controls. I, at least, find that kind of funny. I also hope that you noticed that I was one of the few who supported your Gary Kubiak flier--it's to bad that the Bills don't seem to be listening to you/us on that one! No idea either way. That was one of the questions that I had myself. You cannot control corruption. And unless you also plan to wire up every ref after every questionable call, forcing a "lie detector test" on a new ref as a prerequisite for employment makes no sense. I thought both of these points were obvious, but I guess not... But I will give you points for company sponsored entrapment. Good thinking. And I do appreciate you concurring on Kubiak. I had assumed you had come to that conclusion on your own because I didn't start that thread as a means of seeking "support". Just to start a discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickelCity Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Lie detectors are a joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts