Sarlacc83
Active member
volsunghawk":2lkyzjy9 said:RolandDeschain":2lkyzjy9 said:I don't mind tightly called games anywhere near as much as most people around here seem to, as long as it's called tightly against both teams. (Somewhat fair, in other words.)
The problem I have with tightly called games is because the more calls there are (i.e., the "tighter" the officials call the game), the less "fair" it can be expected to be. There are SO MANY rules in the NFL, and so damn many of them involve some element of subjectivity (e.g., why is what happened on Play 1 a hold and what happened on Play 7 not a hold?).
And so the more calls these folks make (many of which aren't reviewable), the more we're asking them to take the game into their hands and interpret what happened subjectively in a split-second, rather than letting the action on the field be the primary dictator. And doing so invites mistakes, gaffes, the appearance of influence, etc. Better to only throw flags when you've got something truly egregious that even the most hardcore homer wouldn't argue.
This exactly. This is the reason so many of us hated Super Bowl XL*. Because the refs called a tight game and destroyed any flow and purpose to what was on the field. There's always a hold and there's probably any number of slightly late hits when someone didn't hear the whistle. Moreover, it seems like when refs look for the ticky-tack fouls, they usually miss the big ones.