Louis...
last thing I want to do is make you scream...^&grin
but if you don't see the errors and discrepancies...
that an actual human decision (referee) can cause on a games outcome...
"the human element"...
then we see things totally different...
I'm not agreeing with your youth or eyesight theory either...
these are not 80-90 year old myopic men out there...
I would guess it's mandatory they have a vision test to pass before they can apply for the job...
the under review plays...
I have found myself wrong on 100's of occasions...
when they show an instant replay in slow motion...
yea...he trapped the ball...
yea...his foot was on the line...
yea...that was helmet to helmet...
if you think a 20 year old...
with perfect 20-20 is gonna solve this problem...
I disagree...
humans make mistakes...
even young ones with perfect vision...
and yes...
the 7 guys in striped uniforms...are humans...and yes...they effect the game...
Mike,
My comment wasn't aimed at you. You are absolutely correct that any human is going to make mistakes. I am not saying the refs aren't human and won't make mistakes. I am saying that the refs making mistakes is not something that should affect the outcome of a game if it doesn't have to. In baseball and the NHL, a central group of officials decides when a mistake has been made by the officials, and corrects them. In Tennis, an electric eye corrects the linesmen upon a player's challenge, with the linesman's ruling not taken into effect. It seems counterintuitive to me that the call made in the heat of the moment, without the benefit of numerous angles and slow and stop motion should be given precedence over a call that can be made by a group of officials with the benefits of technology. To me getting the call correct is far more important than not hurting the officials' feelings when they blow a call.
One thing though, concerning your octogenarian comment, I am not yet 50, and my eyesight is already starting to fade, and there is no way I could run and keep up 20-something year old athletes for an entire game. If undrafted ex-college players, whose physical abilities and eyesight are nearly on a par with the NFL athletes, were acting as full-time refs, who were held accountable in some way, as George suggested, I would have a lot more confidence they would get the calls correct, especially if replay was independently available to make the correct call. I hate the BS about the NFL apologizing. It cost my favorite team, the Giants, a trip to the NFC championship on my birthday (January 5th) about 10 or 11 years ago, when an idiot ref blew the call at the end of a playoff game in San Francisco. A second or third-down field goal snap (which would have won the game for the Giants) was muffed, but the holder got up and spiked the ball, and an eligible receiver was held, both reasons to stop the clock with around 3 seconds left. The refs said the holder wasn't allowed to spike the ball, and that the eligible receiver was ineligible, so no holding or pass interference, and ran out the clock.
The NFL sent an apology letter, but the Giants were still sitting home the next week while the 49ers got to play on. To me that is also BS. If the NFL admits a game deciding call was wrong, it should be like a sustained protest in baseball: play the game over from that point. Since the screw-ups are usually at the end of games, that would mean a few seconds, often a field goal try or a Hail Mary pass, being replayed, with the right outcome and greater confidence in the credibility of the NFL. Instead, they admit to their mistakes, but the wrong outcome prevails, making cynical people, myself included, wonder if the underpaid part-time ref had a reason ($$$$) for blowing the call.
. Not a season for the fan with heart problems. Jeesh. -- Al
