Instant Replay...

[Pitt79]

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/replay-lose-nuance-of-game/

I am in the minority, and I hate instant replay, wish it wasn't used. This guy writes a great article here, that sums up how I feel about it pretty damn good. I would even agree with his proposal, if you have to use replay, then no slow motion, just overturn calls that are obviously wrong at normal speed. His reasoning is perfect! Replay was intended to FIX MISTAKES, not crawl down endless rabbit holes.

 

[UPitt '89]

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/replay-lose-nuance-of-game/

I am in the minority, and I hate instant replay, wish it wasn't used. This guy writes a great article here, that sums up how I feel about it pretty damn good. I would even agree with his proposal, if you have to use replay, then no slow motion, just overturn calls that are obviously wrong at normal speed. His reasoning is perfect! Replay was intended to FIX MISTAKES, not crawl down endless rabbit holes.

The problem is frankly there are too many corrupt officials.

You can't eliminate that completely.... there will still be phantom holding calls and phantom pass interference calls.... but you can eliminate the blatant corruption and incompetence in calls that are wrong.

I'll live with the extra delays to make sure corrupt officials have less influence on the outcome of a sporting event.

If we could eliminate home plate umpires and their subjective strikezones with technology, I'm all for it.
If we could eliminate corrupt basketball refs who make phantom foul calls to appease the "name" program or the home team, I'm all for it.
If we could eliminate officials being paid by their conferences to officiate games in which the conference has a definite interest in the outcome of the game, I'm all for it.

Anything that helps to eliminate corrupting the outcome of games because of human error and/or human malfeasance... I'm all for it.

 

[TIGER-PAUL]

All is I know is something needs to be done with the ACC games. Awful in real time and slow mo.

 

[Swervin27]

Instant replays make me sick, now it's in baseball. I want it out, all of it. Refs/umps make mistakes, hold them accountable. They continue to F up, get better officials. My team loses a game on a bad call, i'll live. We all survived without instant replays for decades, somehow we managed..

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

I love instant replay - I really do. I think it is the best thing to happen to college football since the forward pass. I just wish they'd expand it further to include all calls.

 

[Pghfan]

I love instant replay - I really do. I think it is the best thing to happen to college football since the forward pass. I just wish they'd expand it further to include all calls.

They pretty much do that now.

 

[Pitt79]

The guy who wrote the article that I attached has it right. The original intent which was good, was simply to FIX MISTAKES! Not to then micromanage and microanalyze it to the microscopic level. That microscopic mentality is what is ruining sports. His idea to review plays in real time is really ''getting it right''.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

We'll agree to disagree. There are MANY other things far more corrosive to sports than instant replay.

 

[JSSTartan]

Thanks for posting this article @Pitt79 it certainly is thought provoking. +1

I've thought a lot about instant replay and know I'm in the minority as well here but here is my take. There is a human element to sports, which I like, appreciate and cherish. We are all humans and do make mistakes. By and large, making full-speed judgement calls on the field is a very tough job and referees do the best job they can--on the field. There are certainly anecdotal stories (Pitt has had MORE than it's fair share of calls go against us over the years that's for sure) where instant replay has not helped either because the replay officials got it wrong or because the matter was not review-able.

In the past, there was no replay and it would be very interesting to see whether some outcomes of some of the greatest games in history would have had a changed outcome. One of our fellow Lair members posted this morning that today is the anniversary of the Immaculate Reception. What a coincidence. Perhaps the ball during that play hit the ground fell harmlessly incomplete. History would change.

Getting the call right on the field is of primary importance to me. There are razor close calls that we're asking humans to make in a split second, so I will accept some human error (and move on) on that premise. I'm okay with minuscule issues not being caught by these humans. While they are worth complaining about, the law of averages should reign supreme.

I'd prefer that all FBS refs were full time employees of the FBS and trained more and better than spending more resources on the ability to see each and every angle and every blade of grass. Regardless of whether it is in real time or in instant replay, what we see is within the eye of the beholder. I know we can all think about close plays this year that went to replay and the play was either overturned or upheld against what we actually thought was the right call. Indisputable video evidence is also quite subjective...and at times, it's not so indisputable. I'd prefer if they're going to utilize some legal jargon, that they use 'beyond a reasonable doubt' to overturn calls on the field. The game is played on the field, at real time and in real speed, not in the video booth.

We're going to continue to utilize instant replay and I will accept it but I would be perfectly fine going back to the way things were pre-instant replay too.

Not sure whether this makes sense but they're my thoughts.

Happy Festivus!

 

[BuffetParrothead]

There's definitely a problem with the officiating for football,basketball, and baseball so instant replay is necessary.
Just a few weeks ago the nfl cited the Morrelli crew for poor performance, highlighted a number of mistakes and moved them from a big game to a lesser nfl game. Not sure why they weren't suspended.
Similar instances in college football, basketball, and mlb.
Just yesterday during the Akron Utah St game the announcers mentioned that the officials didn't hustle and weren't in position to make a call on a spot and just "guesstamated" the spot.
Is it possible that some of these guys are getting old with limited movement, eyesight or maybe just lazy.
I'm not sure why MLB doesn't have the umps use pitch track for balls and strikes. They could have a hand held device for balls and strikes and the umps can make all the other calls.
I also believe that calls like offensive holding in football are very subjective and could be called on almost every play. So if an official wanted to influence a game there's a huge opportunity. Maybe eliminate offensive holding and let the lines go at it?

 

[Pitt79]

One of our fellow Lair members posted this morning that today is the anniversary of the Immaculate Reception. What a coincidence. Perhaps the ball during that play hit the ground fell harmlessly incomplete. History would change.


Happy Festivus!

I always thought an interesting documentary would be to take some of the most famous plays in history, like the Immaculate reception, many of Lynn Swann's Super Bowl catches, The Catch, Bart Starr's Ice Bowl TD, Catch by Renfro of Oilers vs. Steelers in '79 AFCC game, etc. And whatever other famous play has always been deemed controversial and have modern refs review the tape, based on that day's rules and try to determine if the play was good or not. It would be amazing to learn what LEGENDARY HISTORICAL FOOTBALL LORE would have ben erased and called a play that never happened.

 

[Pitt79]

... the announcers mentioned that the officials didn't hustle and weren't in position to make a call on a spot and just "guesstamated" the spot.
Is it possible that some of these guys are getting old with limited movement, eyesight or maybe just lazy.

You think this is new? This has probably been happening since Jim Thorpe and Knute Rockne where going at it. Just that without TV and slow motion and cell phone cameras and Facebook, nobody knew about it or gave a crap.

 

[Swervin27]

I always thought an interesting documentary would be to take some of the most famous plays in history, like the Immaculate reception, many of Lynn Swann's Super Bowl catches, The Catch, Bart Starr's Ice Bowl TD, Catch by Renfro of Oilers vs. Steelers in '79 AFCC game, etc. And whatever other famous play has always been deemed controversial and have modern refs review the tape, based on that day's rules and try to determine if the play was good or not. It would be amazing to learn what LEGENDARY HISTORICAL FOOTBALL LORE would have ben erased and called a play that never happened.

Jordan pushed off on his shot against the Jazz, should have been called off.. The play is actually commonly referred to as his "push off" shot.. Judgement call and we all know, nba refs are calling that against MJ, the guy who made a career out of traveling. Think a few cameramen dropped the ball on the immaculate reception, only one angle you see until later in the play..

 

[Pitt79]

Jordan pushed off on his shot against the Jazz, should have been called off.. The play is actually commonly referred to as his "push off" shot.. Judgement call and we all know, nba refs are calling that against MJ, the guy who made a career out of traveling. Think a few cameramen dropped the ball on the immaculate reception, only one angle you see until later in the play..

You're probably right, but watch some of the catches Swann makes in Super Bowl X, falling out of bounds or to the ground, bobbling the ball, might of been overturned today. It would make for an interesting documentary.

 

[Pitt79]

Last Night's Pitt hoop game had one of those STUPID replay reviews that to me ruins basketball. Artis hit a 3 in crunch time to tie the score, then they play a few minutes and then go to break, come back from break and they had subtracted a point, said it was really a 2! I HATE THAT SHHT! What if that changed your strategy in the time you played with the extra point? Yes, I know it's JUST ONE POINT, but so what? It makes the sport odd to me, that you can have 65 points for 2-3 minutes, then go back to 64! I hate it. I'd rather NOT get it right. EVEN IF it was Pitt's opponent that had the point subtracted. Yup! I'd rather see OUR OPPONENT get an undeserved 3, than doing this! It will all even out in the end, so WTF is the big deal?

 

[UPitt '89]

Last Night's Pitt hoop game had one of those STUPID replay reviews that to me ruins basketball. Artis hit a 3 in crunch time to tie the score, then they play a few minutes and then go to break, come back from break and they had subtracted a point, said it was really a 2! I HATE THAT SHHT! What if that changed your strategy in the time you played with the extra point? Yes, I know it's JUST ONE POINT, but so what? It makes the sport odd to me, that you can have 65 points for 2-3 minutes, then go back to 64! I hate it. I'd rather NOT get it right. EVEN IF it was Pitt's opponent that had the point subtracted. Yup! I'd rather see OUR OPPONENT get an undeserved 3, than doing this! It will all even out in the end, so WTF is the big deal?

What's the point of having a 3-point line if it isn't going to be enforced? Artis made a 2-pointer. He shouldn't get credit for a 3-pointer just because he was "close enough".

I disagree with you 100% here. A) There was no extra delay, they waited for a commercial break. B) They got it right. Teams are putting way too much on the line in these games to have them potentially taken away from them by a bad call that is easy to fix.

And you're exaggerating the time. It was only 2 possessions later and less than a minute of clock time.

 

[Pitt79]

What's the point of having a 3-point line if it isn't going to be enforced? Artis made a 2-pointer. He shouldn't get credit for a 3-pointer just because he was "close enough".

I disagree with you 100% here. A) There was no extra delay, they waited for a commercial break. B) They got it right. Teams are putting way too much on the line in these games to have them potentially taken away from them by a bad call that is easy to fix.

And you're exaggerating the time. It was only 2 possessions later and less than a minute of clock time.

Totally disagree, in all honesty, you should be allowed to touch the line and it counts, like in soccer, makes the whole thing that much better! Review ruins sports, getting everything 100% perfect isn't worth it. and half the time they get things wrong anyways. The thing is, if in fact review only get's it right some of the time, we are wasting a lot of time, to not get it right.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

Totally disagree, in all honesty, you should be allowed to touch the line and it counts, like in soccer, makes the whole thing that much better!

Why does it make it better? That makes, quite literally, no sense at all. It is completely immaterial if the line is "in" or "out", as long as you tell everyone ahead of time which one it is.

 

[Pitt79]

Why does it make it better? That makes, quite literally, no sense at all. It is completely immaterial if the line is "in" or "out", as long as you tell everyone ahead of time which one it is.

Makes it easier to call 3 or 2, you don't have to do the ANAL microanalysis that way.