Refs and bad calls have ramifications

[Orlando Tim]

I will give officials this much Defense- the NFL does not want them to be too good because then the headlines go away. If the NFL was truly motivated to improve officiating they could do a complete overhaul using the cameras and officials in the booths so the guys  on the field would have less responsibility. It is impossible to expect an official to be good at everything when you are asking them to monitor 20 moving parts at once. NFL is very ok with poor officiating

[Mr. WEO]

15 minutes ago, ßookie_tech said:

Ok so you meant to say get rid of "on field" refs. Huge difference. A ref in office is still a ref. And I am a fan of that idea. 

 

I'm speaking about penalties affecting human behavior altogether. Whether crime or occupation, accountability improves results. 

 

I'm not saying all refs are intentionally calling unfair games or making terrible calls in every game. Are some games? Yes, without a doubt. I've seen it for and against Buffalo. And I disagree, I believe if an unfairly reffed game directly affects the amount they get paid, they will call a more fair game. And yes, I know that each game is reviewed and graded. But then what? If they screw up, then what? They issue an apology? And yes, I know no sports league holds refs accountable through fines or decreased pay. What I'm saying is they should. 

 

 

If refs are throwing ('calling unfair") games, they need to be fired, not fined.  This should go without saying.

 

Otherwise, they calling games fairly to the best of their collective ability as a group on the field--but errors will always exist.  The NFL claims 98.9% accuracy of all calls.  I haven't found a site that shows a different number.  

 

maybe this will help you:

 

https://fansided.com/2021/11/22/nfl-officiating-crisis-fix-2021/

 

 

"When leaving the stadium, officials get a thumb drive with the recorded game to review. They spend hours watching every play and consulting with their crew and supervisors about their performance and how to improve."

 

"Officials who receive playoff assignments earn more. Officials are graded on every play based on an evaluation system started in the 1990s by officiating pioneer Art McNally, who recently became a Hall of Fame candidate. Officials fall into three tiers based on the grades, with the highest tier selected for the playoffs.

Austro says some officials can become so obsessed with the grading system that to avoid making an incorrect call they huddle and wait for a call from the instant replay booth. Daopolous believes replay can be a helpful tool, but says the increased dependence on it hurts the game-watching experience for fans left watching an official playing with their earpiece.

“There’s too much emphasis on New York,” Daopoulos says. “Officials make mistakes. Replay officials make mistakes—they make mistakes in New York.”

 

 

So...to reiterate:  there is accountability and poor performance is penalized with less money earned.

[Bookie Man]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

If refs are throwing ('calling unfair") games, they need to be fired, not fined.  This should go without saying.

 

Otherwise, they calling games fairly to the best of their collective ability as a group on the field--but errors will always exist.  The NFL claims 98.9% accuracy of all calls.  I haven't found a site that shows a different number.  

 

maybe this will help you:

 

https://fansided.com/2021/11/22/nfl-officiating-crisis-fix-2021/

 

 

"When leaving the stadium, officials get a thumb drive with the recorded game to review. They spend hours watching every play and consulting with their crew and supervisors about their performance and how to improve."

 

"Officials who receive playoff assignments earn more. Officials are graded on every play based on an evaluation system started in the 1990s by officiating pioneer Art McNally, who recently became a Hall of Fame candidate. Officials fall into three tiers based on the grades, with the highest tier selected for the playoffs.

Austro says some officials can become so obsessed with the grading system that to avoid making an incorrect call they huddle and wait for a call from the instant replay booth. Daopolous believes replay can be a helpful tool, but says the increased dependence on it hurts the game-watching experience for fans left watching an official playing with their earpiece.

“There’s too much emphasis on New York,” Daopoulos says. “Officials make mistakes. Replay officials make mistakes—they make mistakes in New York.”

 

 

So...to reiterate:  there is accountability and poor performance is penalized with less money earned.

99%  accuracy on all calls? Do you honestly feel like that is true? They make the same calls on a consistent week 99% of the time? 

 

Thank you for the link, but I am understanding what you have reiterated. I responded to this earlier by saying there is NOT ENOUGH accountability and NOT ENOUGH penalty. Not getting the extra playoff game is hardly a penalty. You could argue that some of the crews working the playoff games are equally as bad as the ones who are not. 

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

25 minutes ago, ßookie_tech said:

99%  accuracy on all calls? Do you honestly feel like that is true? They make the same calls on a consistent week 99% of the time? 

 

Thank you for the link, but I am understanding what you have reiterated. I responded to this earlier by saying there is NOT ENOUGH accountability and NOT ENOUGH penalty. Not getting the extra playoff game is hardly a penalty. You could argue that some of the crews working the playoff games are equally as bad as the ones who are not. 

 

 

 

I see nothing to dispute this 99%.  Think of how many plays there are every game and every single play is reviewed. A call not made also counts. Clean plays without a call also count.  

 

Assume about 150 plays per game on average for 17 weeks for 32 teams.  That's 40,800 plays this season.  3109 penalties were called.  If every single penalty that was called was an error, the error rate would be only 7.6%.  If 1000 bad calls (1 out of every 3!!)  were made in such a season than that's still 92.4% accuracy.  

 

Obviously this doesn't include missed calls but you get the idea of how many calls made would have to be wrong to even make a dent in the overall accuracy listed (99%).  That's 400+ bad calls/errors a season or 1-2 per game.  Double it to 800 bad calls a year and that's still 98% accuracy.  Triple it...you get the point.

 

So you are suggesting a remedy for a problem affecting tiny fraction of plays that would not conceivably alter the outcome anyway.  Docking pay would have zero effect on honest ref's work product.  It can't get to  100% accuracy from 98 or 99%.

 

let it go...  

[Bookie Man]

15 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I see nothing to dispute this 99%.  Think of how many plays there are every game and every single play is reviewed. A call not made also counts. Clean plays without a call also count.  

 

Assume about 150 plays per game on average for 17 weeks for 32 teams.  That's 40,800 plays this season.  3109 penalties were called.  If every single penalty that was called was an error, the error rate would be only 7.6%.  If 1000 bad calls (1 out of every 3!!)  were made in such a season than that's still 92.4% accuracy.  

 

Obviously this doesn't include missed calls but you get the idea of how many calls made would have to be wrong to even make a dent in the overall accuracy listed (99%).  That's 400+ bad calls/errors a season or 1-2 per game.  Double it to 800 bad calls a year and that's still 98% accuracy.  Triple it...you get the point.

 

So you are suggesting a remedy for a problem affecting tiny fraction of plays that would not conceivably alter the outcome anyway.  Docking pay would have zero effect on honest ref's work product.  It can't get to  100% accuracy from 98 or 99%.

 

let it go...  

I'm not talking about clean plays. If they wan't to frame their 99% accuracy rate around every single play, that is a misleading stat. I'm talking about plays that involved a flag or a play where there was foul, but no flag. What % of those are accurate and consistent with every other call they make. It seems calls vary week to week on what is a penalty and what is not. I see it. Even commentators have mentioned it during broadcast. If you think NFL reffing is A+ and there is no room for improvement, then I believe you may be one the very few. 

 

I believe it is a broken system and there is much room for improvement. I believe harsher pay grades would help. Doubt it will ever happen, but that is my view. 

[Mr. WEO]

6 minutes ago, ßookie_tech said:

I'm not talking about clean plays. If they wan't to frame their 99% accuracy rate around every single play, that is a misleading stat. I'm talking about plays that involved a flag or a play where there was foul, but no flag. What % of those are accurate and consistent with every other call they make. It seems calls vary week to week on what is a penalty and what is not. I see it. Even commentators have mentioned it during broadcast. If you think NFL reffing is A+ and there is no room for improvement, then I believe you may be one the very few. 

 

I believe it is a broken system and there is much room for improvement. I believe harsher pay grades would help. Doubt it will ever happen, but that is my view. 

 

No, I didn't say that either (nice try though!)-- it's not me who is "framing it" the way I discussed--it's the way the process works. Try to stay on point.

 

If  you are counting the plays where (you "see") a penalty is NOT called, then logic tells you that you have to include all plays to identify all those as well.  So.......you have to include all plays. 

 

Let's say I believe you and "you see" 1000 blown/missed calls a year (which of course is ridiculous, but for argument's sake) .  That leaves an accuracy rate 97.5%

 

Money can't change that margin.  You've given no cogent argument otherwise, except to insinuate guys are on the take and calling games "unfairly".  That belongs in the ref/conspiracy threads.

 

 

 

 

[Bookie Man]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

No, I didn't say that either (nice try though!)-- it's not me who is "framing it" the way I discussed--it's the way the process works. Try to stay on point.

 

If  you are counting the plays where (you "see") a penalty is NOT called, then logic tells you that you have to include all plays to identify all those as well.  So.......you have to include all plays. 

 

Let's say I believe you and "you see" 1000 blown/missed calls a year (which of course is ridiculous, but for argument's sake) .  That leaves an accuracy rate 97.5%

 

Money can't change that margin.  You've given no cogent argument otherwise, except to insinuate guys are on the take and calling games "unfairly".  That belongs in the ref/conspiracy threads.

 

 

 

 

Just to be clear, I didn't say "you" were framing it. I clearly said "they" (nice try to you though!)  Either way, It's a misleading stat. I never implied that any refs were on the take. I just think they're bad. And I think if you get in their wallet, they wouldn't be as bad. That's my take. Pretty simple really. And you disagree. It's all good. 

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, ßookie_tech said:

Just to be clear, I didn't say "you" were framing it. I clearly said "they" (nice try to you though!)  Either way, It's a misleading stat. I never implied that any refs were on the take. I just think they're bad. And I think if you get in their wallet, they wouldn't be as bad. That's my take. Pretty simple really. And you disagree. It's all good. 

 

You said I thought NFL reffing was A+ (even highlighted the sentence I was disputing).

 

You said they were calling the game unfairly--this can only mean they are favoring one team over another.  Otherwise they are honest errors, not "unfair".

 

I can't describe all of this in simpler terms.  But you are entitled to believe otherwise of course.  I was showing why that belief made no sense.  I disagree with people who say the Earth is flat too....

 

Cheers!

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Look who admits he gets away with favoritism 

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tom-brady-admits-theres-one-penalty-hes-probably-getting-away-with-way-too-often/

 

Tom Brady admits there's one penalty he's probably getting away with way too often

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by SlimShady'sSpaceForce

[Warcodered]

6 minutes ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

Look who admits he gets away with favoritism 

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/tom-brady-admits-theres-one-penalty-hes-probably-getting-away-with-way-too-often/

 

Tom Brady admits there's one penalty he's probably getting away with way too often
 

 

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/BenBrownPL/status/1482777049819398146?s=20
 

 

That roughing the passer stat they brought up I think is fairly subjective. I mean Brady typically has a very good O-line and always gets the ball out quick so how often is he even in a situation where it could come up?

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

10 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

That roughing the passer stat they brought up I think is fairly subjective. I mean Brady typically has a very good O-line and always gets the ball out quick so how often is he even in a situation where it could come up?

Disagree. 
 

Brady gets away with a lot of favorites 

 

He admitted it and is laughing at the shield 

[Bermuda Triangle]

10 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

If refs are throwing ('calling unfair") games, they need to be fired, not fined.  This should go without saying.

 

Otherwise, they calling games fairly to the best of their collective ability as a group on the field--but errors will always exist.  The NFL claims 98.9% accuracy of all calls.  I haven't found a site that shows a different number.  

 

maybe this will help you:

 

https://fansided.com/2021/11/22/nfl-officiating-crisis-fix-2021/

 

 

"When leaving the stadium, officials get a thumb drive with the recorded game to review. They spend hours watching every play and consulting with their crew and supervisors about their performance and how to improve."

 

"Officials who receive playoff assignments earn more. Officials are graded on every play based on an evaluation system started in the 1990s by officiating pioneer Art McNally, who recently became a Hall of Fame candidate. Officials fall into three tiers based on the grades, with the highest tier selected for the playoffs.

Austro says some officials can become so obsessed with the grading system that to avoid making an incorrect call they huddle and wait for a call from the instant replay booth. Daopolous believes replay can be a helpful tool, but says the increased dependence on it hurts the game-watching experience for fans left watching an official playing with their earpiece.

“There’s too much emphasis on New York,” Daopoulos says. “Officials make mistakes. Replay officials make mistakes—they make mistakes in New York.”

 

 

So...to reiterate:  there is accountability and poor performance is penalized with less money earned.

98.9% accuracy, eh?

 

What % of challenges are successful?

[Mr. WEO]

10 hours ago, Bermuda Triangle said:

98.9% accuracy, eh?

 

What % of challenges are successful?

 

Google says roughly 50% (39% since 1999).

 

That doesn't matter for this discussion because the 98.9% is the number based on the accuracy of ALL plays--which would include incorrect calls that were reversed.  In other words the reviewers would have counted that as an incorrect call as well. 

[LABILLBACKER]

14 hours ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

Disagree. 
 

Brady gets away with a lot of favorites 

 

He admitted it and is laughing at the shield 

He's had 20 years of favoritism starting with the tuck. I guess we'll find out Sunday who the next NFL/ officials darling is?

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

2 hours ago, LABILLBACKER said:

He's had 20 years of favoritism starting with the tuck. I guess we'll find out Sunday who the next NFL/ officials darling is?

I heard a talking head say that if the Bills win, Josh may be the next face of the NFL.

 

[Bermuda Triangle]

On 1/21/2022 at 7:35 AM, Mr. WEO said:

 

Google says roughly 50% (39% since 1999).

 

That doesn't matter for this discussion because the 98.9% is the number based on the accuracy of ALL plays--which would include incorrect calls that were reversed.  In other words the reviewers would have counted that as an incorrect call as well. 

Non-calls are factored in as well?

 

Would love to see the "1%" of calls that the refs missed.