- 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
NBA finals announcer just made a great point
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:38 pm
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:38 pm
When refs are reviewing a call, who gives a shite what the "call on the floor" or the "call on the field" was? The refs should just go with whatever they feel is right after watching the tape. If they are 51% or more sure of a call, they should go with that. This whole "indisputable evidence" crap is silly. It's a game, they're not convicting someone of murder.
9
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:43 pm to benhamin5555
Very good point by JVG…Who cares what the original call was? You have video replay, make the correct call
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:44 pm to benhamin5555
My guess is it's to try to create some accountability with the refs. If they know they can always just rely on the replay, why try to get the call right initially?
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:44 pm to massiveattack
I can't agree any more than I do on this matter.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:46 pm to kmcmah1
quote:
why try to get the call right initially?
To keep their job might be a good reason.
Just spit-balling here though
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:49 pm to benhamin5555
Replay doesn't offer a 360 degree camera angle. In the replay you're referring to, there were two angles and one absolutely showed nothing and the other showed a close call even if it leaned more towards Lebron not touching the ball.
The refs on the floor are the other angles. They made the call based on their vision which may have had the better vantage point than the available cameras.
That's why the cameras have to show conclusive evidence. It can't be a "maybe" because the call on the field may have had a clearer view of the play.
The refs on the floor are the other angles. They made the call based on their vision which may have had the better vantage point than the available cameras.
That's why the cameras have to show conclusive evidence. It can't be a "maybe" because the call on the field may have had a clearer view of the play.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:49 pm to benhamin5555
quote:
When refs are reviewing a call, who gives a shite what the "call on the floor" or the "call on the field" was? The refs should just go with whatever they feel is right after watching the tape. If they are 51% or more sure of a call, they should go with that. This whole "indisputable evidence" crap is silly. It's a game, they're not convicting someone of murder.
Agreed.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:50 pm to kmcmah1
quote:
My guess is it's to try to create some accountability with the refs. If they know they can always just rely on the replay, why try to get the call right initially?
My guess is they think it's the easiest way to avoid controversy in tight spots.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:51 pm to StringedInstruments
quote:
It can't be a "maybe" because the call on the field may have had a clearer view of the play.
There is no way a ref's eyes watching live action speed should be trusted on any close call when you have access to multiple slow-mo replays….Just should go by what the cameras show in the final 2 minutes
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:55 pm to benhamin5555
This is the first time in a long arse time I have agreed with Jeff Van Gundy about something. He's totally right. Who gives a frick what the call on the floor was, or if it was 100% indisputable. If they are more than sure of a certain call on the court, call it. The indisputable calls are garbage.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 9:57 pm to lsusportsman2
quote:
Who gives a frick what the call on the floor was
Why do people keep saying this shite?
Refs get better view on the court than cameras. So if it's 50/50 you go with what you trust more.
Obviously they'll get it wrong sometimes, but nothing wrong with the "conclusive" stipulation.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 10:02 pm to castorinho
quote:
Why do people keep saying this shite?
Refs get better view on the court than cameras. So if it's 50/50 you go with what you trust more.
Wrong. I'll take multiple angles of super slow-motion any day over the vision of 60 year old men on bang-bang plays
Posted on 6/8/14 at 10:03 pm to massiveattack
No shite. The premise is that the video isn't really helping and you're still unsure.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 10:05 pm to castorinho
But if you're more than 50% sure, why does it have to be inconclusive? Why not just go with the call that you're more sure of?
Posted on 6/8/14 at 10:08 pm to massiveattack
quote:
But if you're more than 50% sure, why does it have to be inconclusive? Why not just go with the call that you're more sure of?
The replays are often reviewed after some kind of challenge. Lebron called for the review of the play not the refs.
The refs may claim they're 90% sure their call was correct. Replay is 51% sure. For some reason, you think the refs aren't qualified to do their job and somehow one or two camera angles that aren't conclusive are more trustworthy than refs with a different view.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 10:12 pm to castorinho
quote:
Refs get better view on the court than cameras.
Not really. I trust hi-tech cameras more than I do 60 year old referees, especially referees in the NBA.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 10:47 pm to benhamin5555
I like the rules as is in this case. You should be 100% sure of the call you're making. Being 50% sure is not enough to change a call imo, because then you are just playing a guessing game.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 11:45 pm to benhamin5555
It's because the referees made a call, and unless the video disproves their original call, they can't change it.
Otherwise, they are just guessing.
You can't look at a replay and still be unsure and just "assume" or "guess".
You have to see it on the video. If you don't, you can't change what you originally saw.
Otherwise, they are just guessing.
You can't look at a replay and still be unsure and just "assume" or "guess".
You have to see it on the video. If you don't, you can't change what you originally saw.
Posted on 6/8/14 at 11:52 pm to benhamin5555
And that announcer is Jeff Van Gundy. Most of the stuff he says he isn't serious about. He just likes to stir up shite on air for fun and likes to propose changes that go against conventional wisdom.
This post was edited on 6/8/14 at 11:54 pm
Posted on 6/9/14 at 6:42 am to PrimeTime Money
Why are people acting as if there's no middle ground? If they have a better view live and they still think that's the right call after replay they should stick with it. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try to fix a bad call made in real time.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News