- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What really happens in the SEC replay booth
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:56 am
Posted on 11/14/09 at 2:56 am
2
Posted on 11/14/09 at 3:37 am to Ace Ventura
Good article. Thanks for posting.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 5:16 am to GeauxingforTigers
wtf is parchman?
Posted on 11/14/09 at 5:31 am to Hot Stuff
Parchman = The State prison in Mississippi 
Posted on 11/14/09 at 5:48 am to Ace Ventura
quote:
Redding defended the work of his replay official Saturday, Dan Dembinski, stressing that the replay rule calls for indisputable video evidence. "It's not like in a court of law where there is reasonable doubt," Redding said. "There can be no doubt at all for a replay official."
This is a ridiculous standard. No doubt at all? Beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard used in courts and is reserved for criminal trials. It is stupid to utilze a standard higher than that.
I think the NFL had similar problems with reluctance to overturn clearly wrong calls when they first went to instant replay. But they fixed it and their system seems to work for the most part. The SEC's system on the other hand gets it wrong much too often.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 6:02 am to Methuselah
quote:you are crazy. Determining whether or not a player is in bounds deserves MUCH scrutiny and certainty than some silly law case that may end in someone being put to death!
Beyond a reasonable doubt is the highest standard used in courts and is reserved for criminal trials. It is stupid to utilze a standard higher than that.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 6:08 am to Spirit of Dunson
quote:
Redding said. "There can be no doubt at all for a replay official."
I don't have any problem with that STANDARD. The problem was that, even in applying that standard, there was absolutely no doubt, no room for error on several calls made in that game.
My dad and them play golf with a retired SEC official who remains close with Gerald Hodges, the replay official at the Bama game. He said Hodges phoned him shortly after the game and said he MISSED the call on the Peterson interception.
One cannot MISS that Peterson call, conclusive video evidence was required to have been IGNORED. It was plain as day. Unmistakeable and not open for interpretation. That defines, "no doubt at all" n'est-ce pas?
Posted on 11/14/09 at 6:51 am to Methuselah
esp. when the doubt may be created in the mind of the official only. the refs on the field didn't even know PP caught the ball. that is probably what created the doubt. the SEC office itself said the job of the replay official is to DEFEND the ruling on the field and to DEFER to the officials on the field. DEFEND and DEFER sounds like they will not change field rulings except on certain types of plays that are obvious enough to get laughed at the next day. We didn't have a chance with this attitude. the refs on the field were blocked out and did NOT see the play. that's why they called no interception; they did not see it. in that case, the replay booth MUST MAKE THE CALL, not DEFEND and DEFER. we got screwed and the SEC and their officials need to prepare of these contingencies ie what happens when the refs simply do not see the play.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 7:27 am to LSU GrandDad
If the opponent had been South Carolina, for example, the call would have been made correctly.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 7:30 am to LSU GrandDad
I think what you're saying is the standard also sounds like it's screwed up. If the Ref didn't see clearly enough, it should be a much lower burden to overturn than in situations where the Ref saw with more degree of certainty.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 7:39 am to USMCTiger03
I don't know exactly what the "standard" is. The quote most often heard is "indisputable video evidence"! Why the refs on the field made the call they made should have no bearing at all on the replay officials decision.
To me it is pretty simple. Look at the video. If you can tell what the correct call is make it. Pretty simple.
There can never be a situation where the ref up stairs says I can tell it was an interception but because of ANYTHING on the field I won't call it an interception.
To me it is pretty simple. Look at the video. If you can tell what the correct call is make it. Pretty simple.
There can never be a situation where the ref up stairs says I can tell it was an interception but because of ANYTHING on the field I won't call it an interception.
Posted on 11/14/09 at 7:58 am to omegaman66
quote:EXACTLY. It shouldn't in any way be a pissing contest between the refs and the replay officials.
To me it is pretty simple. Look at the video. If you can tell what the correct call is make it. Pretty simple.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News