but may not.
1) Fake injuries to slow down tempo offenses. Is it really that difficult a decision. Go down and you do not play again in that series. And if it is an injury timeout no substitution or team huddles. take care of the player, substitute only for him, and play ball.
2) Ball placement-- in this day of technology we still still use two poles and a chain; and refs placing the ball based on what? It would be simple to have a chip in the ball that would not change it except for the chip. All they would have to do is to determine when the ball carrier went down. TV viewers get the yellow line but on the field we get sorry refs. When baseball went to the frame on pitches all of a sudden umps quit calling strikes on balls a foot off the plate.
3) Reviews--If they cannot decide in a certain time period, play ball. And this call on the field stands part is garbage. It is clear in many cases the call was wrong but there is not so-called indisputable evidence to overrule it. How is that term defined anyway? If it is going for review anyway, let the review call it. Only if the review cannot make the decision does the call on the field stand.
4) Better refs--Yes, a broad category but twice--with Ole Miss and now Purdue-- bad calls probably cost us both game. When basket ball went to 3 refs several coaches said it would only increase the number of calls. I do not know if additional eyes is the answer but how often do we see a ref right on top of the play make one call, or none, to be overridden by some zebra half way across the field with a bad angle? If you do not have a good memory just think back to the MCB.
5) Player safety rules. Everyone wants players safe but the targeting rule in particular has to be altered.
The list could go on and but bad rules, bad refs, and the lack of the use of technology is making too many games decided by refs and bad rules rather than players.
You may want to add others--fire away. Or challenge these. JMO
1) Fake injuries to slow down tempo offenses. Is it really that difficult a decision. Go down and you do not play again in that series. And if it is an injury timeout no substitution or team huddles. take care of the player, substitute only for him, and play ball.
2) Ball placement-- in this day of technology we still still use two poles and a chain; and refs placing the ball based on what? It would be simple to have a chip in the ball that would not change it except for the chip. All they would have to do is to determine when the ball carrier went down. TV viewers get the yellow line but on the field we get sorry refs. When baseball went to the frame on pitches all of a sudden umps quit calling strikes on balls a foot off the plate.
3) Reviews--If they cannot decide in a certain time period, play ball. And this call on the field stands part is garbage. It is clear in many cases the call was wrong but there is not so-called indisputable evidence to overrule it. How is that term defined anyway? If it is going for review anyway, let the review call it. Only if the review cannot make the decision does the call on the field stand.
4) Better refs--Yes, a broad category but twice--with Ole Miss and now Purdue-- bad calls probably cost us both game. When basket ball went to 3 refs several coaches said it would only increase the number of calls. I do not know if additional eyes is the answer but how often do we see a ref right on top of the play make one call, or none, to be overridden by some zebra half way across the field with a bad angle? If you do not have a good memory just think back to the MCB.
5) Player safety rules. Everyone wants players safe but the targeting rule in particular has to be altered.
The list could go on and but bad rules, bad refs, and the lack of the use of technology is making too many games decided by refs and bad rules rather than players.
You may want to add others--fire away. Or challenge these. JMO
