Monday, February 16, 2009

Midseason Rant

We have got to come up with a way to settle close calls that involves less arguing. It is greatly detracting from our game. Everyone who played in a game a few weeks ago that didn't have a single argued call can tell you it's a lot more fun.

Here are the most commonly disputed calls:

1) Whether the QB was sacked before the ball was thrown;
2) Whether the receiver was in bounds for the catch (two feet in) and whether the runner stepped out of bounds (and where); and
3) Premature calls while the play is still alive.

Of these, the first four are most serious in terms of frequency, impact on the game, and vociferousness of the argument.

Pass/Sack - The problem with this one is that in almost every case, the QB was in fact in the process of throwing the ball and so the question is whether or not the ball was out of the QB's hand by the time the flag was pulled. Often the person in the best place to make this call is one who was out of the play but not too far away. The lineman getting the flag often has his head down - his best angle is when he is coming in from behind on the QB's throwing arm-side. The QB may not hear the flag pop as he's throwing since people are often yelling. Having people yell when the ball is away might help a bit but I doubt it since there is the potential for early calls on the throw as well as the sack. A referee could clearly help this situation since the ref would be behind the line of scrimmage and his primary duty would be to look for Sack/Throw.

Feet In/Out - The problem with this one is that with the exception of 1 sideline and the 40 yard line, we have no lines to speak off on our field. Yes, it is possible to see some of the lines occasionally (I can usually find all but those where the grass is completely gone as we had at one end of the field we used this last week) but generally not during the play. So the key in such plays is to have other players marking the feet and then looking carefully for the line to see if the feet are in. If the defender has really good coverage, he's not likely to be in a good position to mark the feet (since his head will be up tracking the ball to try to pick or defense it). At the same time, players who are more than 15 yards away really have little hope of seeing it clearly.

A second ref could help with this because we'd place him deep and along the sideline that has no painted line. Another solution which I would be willing to pay for is to buy green paint and a line painter - but we'd need to find the right color in a can that is use for ground marking (if you doubt my willingness, ask Day or Nick about the lines I cut into the field at Murchison years ago). I figure the school wouldn't get ticked if we got paint that was close to grass-colored - noticeable enough that players could see it but not so noticeable that it would screw up the soccer markings.

Premature Calls - The problem here is when a player yells "sack" or "got you" or "TD" etc. before the play is really over. This last week, Nick had a nice run where he was missed twice in quick succession early in the play but people were calling him down even though he had all three flags. This is the one that should be easiest to fix. If you're getting the flag, don't yell until it is in your hand. If you're not in the play, don't yell until you clearly see the flag in someone's hand.

One thing that seems to exacerbate the above problems is calls made by players who are not close to the play. Now, I know that sometimes distance doesn't necessarily mean that you can't see a play (such as the Sack/Pass issue where a player some distance away but with a clear line of sight), but often it does (particularly on the Feet In/Out issue).

I now open this up for discussion. I'm happy to listen to suggestions people have. Refs could work but that would either add costs or require people to sit out on every series (even if we have even numbers because we'd need 2 refs). So I'd really rather find ways to avoid needing refs.

10 comments:

Mark Neubauer said...

I agree with you, however I don't see an available resolution. In almost 100% of cases the people from a long way away always seem to see the play as it agrees with their team. Offensive linemen ALWAYS say the ball was off, defensive linemen ALWAYS say it is a sack. Receivers ALWAYS say they are in, Secondays always say they are out.

If we had a ref this would be easier, however we don't. Even if we got one, I think a ref would quit 15 inutes into our game because they don't want to deal with us. The fact of the matter is, is that football has a lot of close calls, such as the ones you mentioned. Somehow we have to figure out a better way to make calls because it does detract from the game. Additionally we have calls such as "the ball was across the line, but at the time but the flag was 1/8 inch behind the line." Realistically nobody knows exactly where the flag was when a person is down by contact. We don't have video to assist. I know that I am not proposing a solution just restating the problem, however I don't see and available solution.

In terms of the punting, I don't think we should change it at all. Our field is 80 yards long. The average punt in the NFL is 41 yards. Our field is 20% shorter, and our punts are roughly 23% shorter. The net impact of punts on our field given our game are clsoe to the same as the pro game.

Erik said...

I think we can do a few things to improve the arguing situation. I think the easiest thing to do is to take advantage of when we have an odd number of people. The person on the sideline will be on one of the teams, but I'd like to think that we're all honest people and they can provide the referee duties while they're waiting to come back in. If they saw the play we respect their call. The example last week was Curtis watching the goal line play at the end of the game. He said BB was down, I think that's where the argument should have ended.

When we don't have an odd number, I think it's silly to have two people sitting out just because we're all so competitive. Personally, I'd rather lose every call than have to sit out more than is absolutely necessary. And paying for referees doesn't make sense either.

Something I was thinking about was at the beginning of each week nominating a team captain. This person would hopefully be one of the people who is not frequently in the arguments or at least yelling over them. Not to name names, but someone like Barry immediately comes to mind. If the two players involved in the play from each team don't agree on the call when it happens, the two captains can each listen to what their team is saying then talk to the other captain to see if they can come up with a mutual agreement. If they cannot, we replay the down. No additional arguing.. we respect what the two captains say and move on with the game.

The other thing that may help is if people on the field stop calling penalties for people other than themselves. The example from last week: people were calling PI on Jesse when he was covering me. I think this just gets everyone's nerves wound up unnecessarily. Let the person involved in the play call their own.

Sam Matta said...

I like Erik’s idea of nominating captains each week to work out the details and make the call. This might eliminate some of the arguing and hurt feelings. We should at least give it a try.

I also agree that many of the arguments are elevated by players that are no where near the play. I love the competitiveness and passion of our players, but we all have to remember this is a gentleman’s game and that on our unlined field it is sometimes impossible to determine close calls. When it comes to inches, let’s just give the offensive player the benefit of the doubt. It will work in everyone’s favor. In two cases this past week, the arguing would have been eliminated (Jesse’s possible touchdown where we debated his cleat marks and Ryan’s possible touchdown where we debated his hips) if we would have just let the “tie go to the runner.”

This week I was guilty of calling Nick down when he still had all his flags. I thought I had the flag, heard the pop, and called him down. I was wrong but it certainly wasn’t intentional. There are many close calls behind the line of scrimmage, many more than we argue about. Though I can’t think of a solution in the sack/no sack calls, but I think, for the most part, the QB knows how close the calls are should just work it with the defensive player involved.

As far as kicking, I’ll go along with anything you decide.

Matt Day said...

I think we should have a mediator - kind of like Erik suggests.

The mediator would figure out who was best able to see the play, listen to those players, and make a quick call.

I think it makes most sense for Adam to do this but if he doesn't want to then we can change it up each week or whatever.

I do think that the arguing is a big deal and makes the game much less fun so we need to figure out how to stop it.

Matt Day said...

I'm also very against paying for refs. We can solve this problem without wasting $.

Mark Neubauer said...

While I agree in theory with the team captain solution, I don't see it as a feasible solution. Say 1 captain is covering the other captain on a deep route and there is a disputed sack behind the line. Neither of the 2 captains are in any place to make a call, they are totally dependent on getting the replay from their teammate. If we designate 2 captains to hash it out, a majority of the time I suspect that they will not be in correct position to make the call. Even worse, if 1 captain is involved in the disputed play and 1 isn't then the captain invloved is going to argue on their behalf and the person on the other team who was in position can't voice their opinion.

2. Often times we have an extra player on the sideline. While we would love to believe that the person on the sideline will always make the correct/honest call I think this is simply unrealistic. The person on the sideline votes with their team 95% of the time. Should they be honest, of course, but over the course of 3 hours and multiple close calls a day, by the end of the day people are voting with their team. It isn't pretty, but it is human nature. To think otherwise is living in a fantasy world. For example sake, lets flip the scenario from last week. Lets say Nick's team is down by one on the last play of the day. I am on the sidelines sitting out. Nick throws to Cain, who clearly stretches the ball over the goal line, however hip placement is debatable. At that point, I say he was behind the line because that is what I saw. Does anybody really believe that the call would not be argued, nor does anybody believe that the call shouldn't be argued. What I am trying to say is that if the roles were flipped, and the EXACT same play happened the other way, I think the offense would still say it was good, the defense would still say he was down prior to getting in to the end zone.

I personally don't like the use of refs, however my bigger concern is even if we start using them, that we still won't be satisfied with the result and will have gotten nowhere.

The tie go to the runner thing has proven not to work as well as what one team feels is a tie, the other team feels is excessive. On a potential sack/throw the defensive player feels that the flag was pulled well before the ball was thrown, the QB feels it was a tie. How do we proceed?

Matt Day said...

I think we have more impartial people than Mark thinks we do.

Mark Neubauer said...

my point is that I have never seen a player sitting out on the sideline make a tough call against his team at the end of the game. At 9:15 somebody may make a call against their team, but at 11:45 I just don't see a person making a tough call against their team. Case in point from last weekend, Curtis made the call that went with his team. Not saying it wasn't the correct call, however it was with his team. A few weeks ago we had a game in which Adam had a TD pass that was dropped that would have won the game. As I recall, of those who saw it, everybody on the defense who saw itsaid it was dropped, everybody on the offense said it was completed. If I remember correctly the result was a redo.

On sack calls, I know every time there I have been in an arguement this year, and there was a sideline person, if the sideline person was on my team they argued with me, if they were on the other team they argued against me.

The real root of the problem is that nobody the pass rusher, the QB, the linemen, the person on the side really know. The pass rusher pulls the flag and waits to make absolutley sure they have the flag before they call it. In the lag time before they call it, the pass goes off. In that scenario the pass rusher thinks they have it becuase they pull the flag before it was called, the qb thinks it is off because their arm was in motion. The person on the side I don't think has any better idea than the rusher or QB.

I think too many times, we have seen than the person on the side goes with their team unless there is absolutle overwhelming evidence (which we rarely have). IF there is not overwhelming evidence, they tend to error on the side of caution and go with their team. The person on the sideline is not neutral and does have a vested interest inthe outcome of the call.

The other problem is that only 1 team has a person on the sideline. Letting that person make the call would mean that if team red has an extra player, in 100% of close calls, team red gets to make the decision. There is no way that a system like that would work.

As much as I hate the arguing, I truly believe that the system we have in place actually is the best. I think I supprt 2 points

1. Penalities can only be called by the person who has the infraction against them. QB's can't call PI for their receivers. Only the receiver can.

2. We have to let each other talk. Say each person gets 15 seconds to make their case. At least then we will know the other teams case as we curreently start yelling, which exacerbates the arguement, and nobody is actaully communicating, they are just yelling.

Adam Leonard said...

Let me pour a bit more gasoline on the fire - one thing I don't think we should do is be counting how many times a call goes one way or the other. What I mean is I don't care if my team loses every argument if we're wrong and the call should go the other way.

Chris Treadaway said...

I am all for the team captain option. Two-level headed people can resolve issues better than five folks from each team yelling at each other.

In the event of a close call, get the two captains together and get them to ask specific people for their opinion... but keep everyone quiet until the two captains get together & talk it out.

Blog Archive