Down by contact.

now we need pass interference as challengeable and we'll be set... quite possibly could have gone 8-8 if it was challengeable last year.

Amen. IMO the PI calls in the NFL need the most immediate attention. Pass interference is a totally subjective call and the consequences are huge and game altering (see 1st Dallas game 2004).

What you have to understand about the DBC rule FRPLG is that it's not caused by an early whistle it's a judgement call by the referee on when he want's the play stopped. In other word's he's given the ability to essentially control the outcome of a game by whom he award's the ball to anytime something happen's that he may not like he can stop the play and say down by contact. As well he can blow the whistle after a turnover and and stop the play and because he stopped the play can overturn the turnover, if they take away the ability to do that the only way to overturn a big play is if he actually blow's the whistle to soon which is a common misconception, because when you watch the replay's with full audio most of the time the ref's are pretty good at making sure the play is fully over before blowing the whistle, and even if they blow the whistle prematuraly if it's deemed that the ball came out before the whistle the recovery should stand, advancement of the ball should be disallowed but taking away turnovers can break a team and change the outcome of a game in a hurry, let them play let instant replay sort it out if need be.

I also wouldn't punish a team by taking away a time out when a particular replay is inconclusive, it's not the challenging team's fault if the camera angle is not sufficient, they could very well be right it's just not visible by replay. I would give each team 2 challenges and so long as you are right you can continue to challenge as many play's as you want, even during the final 2 minutes, I am very leary of that rule and why at the most crucial part of the game the NFL say's sorry no challenges we will take it from here? So long as you have a time out you should be able to challenge.
Not exactly sure what you are getting at with that first paragraph versus what I said???
What the owners are discussing is specifically tied to early whistles. DBC in a broad sense is reviewable as it is often difficult for referees to determine DBC in a large crowd of players. In these situations refs are genrally good at letting the play come to a complete end. What we are talking about here is early whistles that theoretically end a play BEFORE it should have been ended. Everyone knows the play was ended early but there is nothing to be done because the thought goes that once a whistle is blown the players stop playing and the play is irrevocably changed in an undeterminable fashion. The new rule would allow for a fumble to occur after a whistle and still be awarded to the recovering team. Sounds great but what happens when some players start ignoring the whistle and others dont? They'll be injuries. The whistle is there to stop everything immediatley for a reason. SO that everuone knows to lay off the full bore action. If officials could do a better job of not ending plays prematurely then there would be little need for a rule which could lead to increased injuries.

I doubt that, FRPLG. Even with the whistles you see guys struggling on the bottom of the pile for a ball. The refs have to come peel them off one at a time. When it's an obvious fumble (any time we've played Tiki Barber or Stephen Davis) then it should be returnable. I agree with Offiss when they come back and say they didn't have the correct shot to view a play, the team should NOT be charged a time out. I've seen so many bad calls unchallengable because of down by contact it made me sick!

I doubt that, FRPLG. Even with the whistles you see guys struggling on the bottom of the pile for a ball. The refs have to come peel them off one at a time. When it's an obvious fumble (any time we've played Tiki Barber or Stephen Davis) then it should be returnable. I agree with Offiss when they come back and say they didn't have the correct shot to view a play, the team should NOT be charged a time out. I've seen so many bad calls unchallengable because of down by contact it made me sick!thats a damn good idea..do not charg a team a to for "inconclusive evidence"

I doubt that, FRPLG. Even with the whistles you see guys struggling on the bottom of the pile for a ball. The refs have to come peel them off one at a time. When it's an obvious fumble (any time we've played Tiki Barber or Stephen Davis) then it should be returnable. I agree with Offiss when they come back and say they didn't have the correct shot to view a play, the team should NOT be charged a time out. I've seen so many bad calls unchallengable because of down by contact it made me sick!
What do you doubt? Does anyone read around here? My point is not neccesarily that the rule shouldn't be implemented but that a better fix would be to get better officals who don't suck donkey balls. Two people have now made arguments that have basically nothing to do with what I posted...jeez.

Sounds great but what happens when some players start ignoring the whistle and others dont? They'll be injuries. The whistle is there to stop everything immediatley for a reason. SO that everuone knows to lay off the full bore action. If officials could do a better job of not ending plays prematurely then there would be little need for a rule which could lead to increased injuries.

That's what I doubt.

The buzzer should be done away with. Bown by contact fumbles plus pass interference both should reviewable..

What do you doubt? Does anyone read around here? My point is not neccesarily that the rule shouldn't be implemented but that a better fix would be to get better officals who don't suck donkey balls. Two people have now made arguments that have basically nothing to do with what I posted...jeez.


Here's the problem down by contact is not caused by an early whistle which is what you keep stating, because the ruling would be a premature whistle or stoppage of play which is not what takes place, it's the ref making a bogus judgement call essentially saying he just decieded that the play was over and not allowing a replay, circumventing instant replay, down by contact is the most ridiculous rule imaginable, reason? What player is not down by contact? So if the ball is fumbled obviously the player wasen't down by contact, the biggest problem with this is I see time and again the ball comes out, there's a mad scramble with no whistle and the ref's deciede to call the play down by contact instead of allowing the outcome to stand for no particular reason other than take a play away from someone, as daseal stated when have you ever seen the ball come out and there's no mad scramble for it regardless of the whistle? Never! And how many pile up's have you seen where the play was blown dead but the ref's still don't know who has possession because they can't see to the bottom of the pile, shouldn't the ball go back to the offense under that circumstance because posession hasen't been determined before the whistle has blown? So there is no disadvantage to either team regardless if the whistle has been blown early or not both team's are going after that ball, so if the ball comes out before the player is down then it should be reviewable, the ref's almost never blow the whistle until the player is obviously down which mean's almost all fumbles happen before the whistle blow's, so even if a whistle blow's after a fumble and before a recovery the recovery should still stand, I agree with you that the ref's are horrible but there is a reason that a 50 or 60 year old man who's eyesite and reflexes are on the decline, along with a rule that circumvent's a replay that would get the call right exist, the NFL wants it that way, remind's me of the WWF!

Down by contact is stupid. Suppose to hold ball all the way through play.

I would like to see the NFL to go to the 15 yard penalty on pass interference calls. Like the do in college.

The downfall would be that CBs would mugg the WR if they thought they were getting beat. But still, its better than a fricken 45 yard penalty.