Lurie's for all plays being reviewable

[Melchior]

Making all plays reviewable

“I am firmly in favor of that. I think what we can do is still limit the number of challenges — if we don’t go to a centralized system — I just think coaches and teams will want to wait and use their challenges for big plays. And those could be pass interference calls, big plays, game-impacting plays. It’s frustrating when you find a play that could have changed the game and you can’t challenge it. We’ve got to address that and I think we will.”

Thoughts on a centralized replay system

“We’ve got to study that, if it’s possible to use a centralized system and take the on-field referees out of the decision-making. I think it has potential. I really do.”

[JuTMSY4]

Outside of stopping the game to make everything correct, I'm not sure what the answer is

The challenge system is stupid. There's a burden of proof - it shouldn't apply here. Then, there's referees who now respond by allowing plays, more often than not, to continue. They don't want to be caught blowing a play dead when it should have been let go.

And my biggest frustration this year has been "scoring play" replays. Did the ball cross the plane? If the refs call it a score on the field, then the review is automatic. Otherwise, a play that perhaps was a score, but not ruled as much, requires a challenge. That process makes no sense. You could apply the same to turnovers.

And any time you hear a play "isn't reviewable" that's just wholesale wrong. EVERY play should be reviewable.

[Melchior]

I actually don't think the logistics are that complicated. You would just have to take all decision making out of the on-field Refs' hands. If they think they see a penalty, toss the flag and tell the central station what the call is and who it's on. Central station does a quick review and then makes any corrections and sends the verdict back down.

I still think for a penalty, the call should have to be initiated by a ref on the field. Having someone off-site try to stop the refs from moving on so he can tell them about a penalty would be way too confusing.

[Sect 236]

And my biggest frustration this year has been "scoring play" replays. Did the ball cross the plane? If the refs call it a score on the field, then the review is automatic. Otherwise, a play that perhaps was a score, but not ruled as much, requires a challenge. That process makes no sense. You could apply the same to turnovers.

I don't know what they teach these refs, but if it's even REMOTELY close, I'm telling them to call it a TD or turnover.

There's literally nothing to lose. If they call it a TD/turnover and it's reviewed and upheld, right call. If it's overturned, it should't go against their "scoring" or whatever metrics they use to see who gets to ref playoff games or not.

The fact that coaches still have to use a challenge themselves is ludicrous with the rules set up the way they are.

[JuTMSY4]

I don't know what they teach these refs, but if it's even REMOTELY close, I'm telling them to call it a TD or turnover.

There's literally nothing to lose. If they call it a TD/turnover and it's reviewed and upheld, right call. If it's overturned, it should't go against their "scoring" or whatever metrics they use to see who gets to ref playoff games or not.

The fact that coaches still have to use a challenge themselves is ludicrous with the rules set up the way they are.

That's actually the fundamental problem. By letting them score, the burden rests on the non-scorer to prove it didn't happen. That's not right.