OK, I’ll admit it. Jon Gruden brings up a good point about challenging interference calls – or rather non calls.
His reasoning is a bit off in that he is talking about “important” playoff caliber games but the point is worthy of consideration non the less.
Currently only plays involving the ball (including whether or not a player is down) and possession can be challenged – not player contact. However, if a replay shows clear interference (especially when the play is in the end zone) and it was not called, should it be eligible for review. Yes, we get the benefit of instant reply, Tivo, and of games viewed on network TV, but ever body at the game usually get to see a reply on the stadium big screen. So if a receiver is clearly interfered with and no call is made, should the play be eligible for challenge and review?
Then, of course, the one of the follow up questions could be . . . “why limit it to just interference calls?”
What about hits on the QB and non roughing the passer calls, or blatant holding, or what if you disagree with the penalty and want it reversed? All of this runs the risk of snowballing out of control and ruining the game.
Is the bigger question to this “how do we even out officiating calls throughout the game and season?”
Is the answer better training?
A better and expanded use of the technology at hand?
Is the answer more of an officiating one? As in more officials or different placement of officials on the field?
What do you think?
Fumbled Returns 