If there was ever an official photo of this whole replacement ref debacle, this is it:
Adam Rifkin stashed this in Football
Stashed in: Your doing it wrong.
NFL says: wrong call, but we won't overturn the W
http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/NFL-upholds-Seahawks-disputed-win-over-Packers-3892805.php
FLAGRANT FOUL. TWO FREE THROWS!!
SIX POINTS TO GRYFFINDOR!!
I'm looking for good articles explaining what the failed negotiations are actually trying to resolve. So far I can tell from an ESPN article they are arguing over the equivalent of $3m/year. Has anyone stashed any good articles on the negotiations?
As someone who has referred for football (at a youth level) I feel bad for these guys; they're doing their best, but the slightest rule changes from where they come from (Arena and other leagues) and the NFL make a world of difference; they are trying to get 10,000 hours of NFL refeereing experience in 6 or 7 weeks. In many ways, being a referee is more difficult than being a player as you have many more individuals to watch, track, and analyze in split-second decisions if they are violating the rules. Basically like being the QB, which is one of the hardest mental positions on the field.
Here's some information about the referees' backgrounds:
"Rhone-Dunn, the back judge who had the best view of the play and initially signaled interception, is the most experienced member of the crew. Formerly a Big 12 official, he worked the Sugar Bowl back in 2007 and arena games since then. Easley, the side judge who overruled Rhone-Dunn, is a banker from California, who has officiated high school and junior college games, both football and basketball. Elliott, the head referee who should have gotten his crew together and asked them what they saw before signaling for a touchdown, is a real estate agent in Texas who has worked high school, college, and indoor football."
Wow. His background makes him seem qualified to be a ref.
It must be very hard to call games.
11:23 AM Sep 25 2012