Originally Posted by Boss-Hog
OK, I agree with all that, but are you saying the replacement refs' performance, regardless the reasons, is overblown?
The replacement refs were in a no win proposition to begin with. I heard on more than 1 media outlet use the dreaded s word when describing the officials. And I am sure listening to the disgust from announcers/commentators/players this season that the sentiment is wider spread. Growing up in a family where both parents were/are members of unions there is no lower life form than that (in those circles).
The players have no respect for these refs (for a number of reasons), without that you are going to fail regardless of how well you may/may not know the rules or how to manage the game/people. That's the same for any other situation. These guys accepted the assignments knowing the situation and I'm sure many knew of the venom they were likely to receive, I personally wouldn't have done it but that's just me and how I was raised about that sort of situation.
I personally think its overblown by people who have agendas (being former players and thus members of the NFLPA, media trying to drive ratings, etc). Its a shame that what happened in Seattle happened because I am sure a more cohesive unit would have gotten that call right but they can't get that cohesion when its only the second or third time that group have probably worked together.
Plus I believe there are those that even if it were ruled as an interception that would be on the radio lambasting the refs that it should have been a mutual possession call and thus Seattle got screwed to push an agenda to get the union refs back to work.
Sorry for high jacking this thread. Or if an admin wants to move this to the NFL officiating thread feel free to.