NFL passes minor expansion of replay rules

Getty Images

As expected, NFL owners have made a change to the replay rules. As not expected, the NFL didn’t dramatically change the paradigm, with the list of reviewable plays scrapped in favor only of a list of non-reviewable plays.

Along the way, the owners expanded replay review, slightly, to include certain administrative matters. Items now subject to replay review that weren’t previously subject to replay review are as follows: (1) penalty enforcement; (2) proper down; (3) the spot of a foul; and (4) the status of the game clock.

The list of non-reviewable plays also has been revised to include the following situations: (1) the spot where an airborne ball crosses the sideline; (2) whether a player was blocked into a loose ball; (3) advance by a player after a valid or invalid fair catch signal; (4) whether a player created the impetus that put the ball into an end zone. The quarterback “spike” for the purposes of killing the clock, which previously was on the list of non-reviewable players, has been removed.

Apart from including these items within the formal replay-review system, the replay official and designated members of the league office may now consult with the on-field officials “to provide information on the correct application of playing rules, including appropriate assessment of penalty yardage, proper down, and status of the game clock.”

The new rule otherwise streamlines the replay rules, eliminating plenty of verbiage that arguably was unnecessary to the process of determining what could and couldn’t be reviewed. Also, the order of the relevant rule has been modified, with the list of non-reviewable plays now preceding the list of reviewable plays. (Previously, the reviewable plays came first.)

It’s hardly a major revision to the process. However, there’s one specific facet of the new rule that justifies further attention, in a separate post.

11 responses to “NFL passes minor expansion of replay rules

  1. …there’s one specific facet of the new rule that justifies further attention, in a separate post.

    Would that facet be penalty enforcement? Because, depending on how it’s interpreted, that could be pretty major.

  2. If this rule change was an NFL season it would be 7-9. It would be really nice if Jeff Fisher stopped being as mediocre at the competition committee as he is coaching an NFL franchise.

  3. “Also, the order of the relevant rule has been modified, with the list of non-reviewable plays now preceding the list of reviewable plays. (Previously, the reviewable plays came first.)”

    Isn’t that really just giving the appearance of doing something? Does whether the chicken or the egg came first have any impact on eating one?

  4. Why not make everything reviewable (for sake of getting it right)

    Same # of challenges per team (won’t drag out the game)

    Put an official upstairs with quick access to AT LEAST every angle that we have at home

    Revert the catch rule back to whatever it was when it worked for decades before that Calvin Johnson end zone catch/can of worms opened

    Put a guy in an authentic Darth Vader costume at every stadium and have him fly all over in a Jet-ski type hovercraft during commercial breaks to entertain the masses

    Aannnd I guess that’s all I got for now

  5. Teams would have some protection against a league fix if they didn’t lose a TO for a correct challenge.

  6. They need to review every pass interference because they can help or screw a team if a flag is thrown late in games. Especially since these refs have no idea what a PI is/isn’t in most games and will just toss a flag for brushing a guy’s shoulder pad.

    The NHL does this with close plays where the HQ in Toronto will review the tape and give an immediate result.

  7. It’s all hog wash until you allow review of the 2 most damaging plays in football…

    1) Defensive pass interference
    2) Personal fouls. (seems they always catch the second guy and the instigator gets off clean)

  8. While they are changing rules, they also need to get rid of that ridiculous “you can only dress 46 on game day” rule.

    Why have a 53-man roster when you have to leave people inactive? Was this a holdover from when the league was pinching pennies and couldn’t afford airfare for everyone?

    This would also cut down on injuries since teams would have more depth to replace injured players. Example, if you only activate 4 WRs on gameday and 2 get hurt, you’re forced to throw the injured players back in the game.

  9. The Ravens suggested this approach about only mention plays that can’t be reviewed.

  10. Wait, what?

    The list of non-reviewable plays also has been revised to include the following situations:
    (1) the spot where an airborne ball crosses the sideline;

    Okay…

    (2) whether a player was blocked into a loose ball;

    We’ve seen this one come up before, why make it nonreviewable?

    (3) advance by a player after a valid or invalid fair catch signal;

    I think this one has come up before, too…

    (4) whether a player created the impetus that put the ball into an end zone.

    All right…

    Overall, I’m confused. How does this help anything?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.