- 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
It's time to admit that instant replay is a failed experiment
Posted on 11/16/22 at 11:54 am
Posted on 11/16/22 at 11:54 am
When they reintroduced instant replay to college football, it was supposed to make the sport cleaner by allowing bad calls to be corrected rather than allowing them to stand and affect the outcomes of games. Does anyone think that goal has been achieved? For every bad call replay does correct, it seems there are four more that they still end up getting wrong after stopping the game and staring at a little tv screen for ten minutes. What is replay actually accomplishing other than wasting everyone's time and lengthening games?
It's clear that the existence of replay has contributed to the progressive decline of officiating quality in the sport. Without replay, I would imagine refs were told to keep their flags in their pockets unless they were sure a foul had actually been committed. Now they are told, "If you think you see something call it, and if it's a bad call we'll just let replay fix it." The problem is that we are dealing with two different standards here: the initial call, for which the standard is, "Call it if you think you see it," and the replay standard, which is, "Irrefutable video evidence must exist to overturn the call on the field." So we get refs making borderline or bad calls with the idea that replay will fix them, but then we look at the replay and we can't see what's going on because someone was in the way or the camera angle wasn't right or the replay ref decides the video evidence may be 99.9% clear that the call was bad but that still doesn't meet the "irrefutable" standard, and the bad call is allowed to stand. What have we accomplished? What is the point?
I'm tired of seeing games interrupted 5+ times so I can watch a pack of yokels in stripey shirts stand around scratching their asses while one of them stares at a tiny TV. At this point I'm good with just accepting the calls on the field in the interest of moving things along. They're still fricking up calls that affect the outcomes of games, so why bother wasting all that time?
It's clear that the existence of replay has contributed to the progressive decline of officiating quality in the sport. Without replay, I would imagine refs were told to keep their flags in their pockets unless they were sure a foul had actually been committed. Now they are told, "If you think you see something call it, and if it's a bad call we'll just let replay fix it." The problem is that we are dealing with two different standards here: the initial call, for which the standard is, "Call it if you think you see it," and the replay standard, which is, "Irrefutable video evidence must exist to overturn the call on the field." So we get refs making borderline or bad calls with the idea that replay will fix them, but then we look at the replay and we can't see what's going on because someone was in the way or the camera angle wasn't right or the replay ref decides the video evidence may be 99.9% clear that the call was bad but that still doesn't meet the "irrefutable" standard, and the bad call is allowed to stand. What have we accomplished? What is the point?
I'm tired of seeing games interrupted 5+ times so I can watch a pack of yokels in stripey shirts stand around scratching their asses while one of them stares at a tiny TV. At this point I'm good with just accepting the calls on the field in the interest of moving things along. They're still fricking up calls that affect the outcomes of games, so why bother wasting all that time?
19
Posted on 11/16/22 at 11:58 am to TheTideMustRoll
I think it still does more good than harm
Posted on 11/16/22 at 12:02 pm to TheTideMustRoll
Does more good. Colorado's fifth down
Posted on 11/16/22 at 12:04 pm to TheTideMustRoll
Instant replay is fine. Corrupt officiating is not.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 12:05 pm to prplhze2000
To be fair, we were prevented from being fifth-downed in the Tennessee game by replay. 
Still, I think it wastes far more time than it actually spends accomplishing anything.
Still, I think it wastes far more time than it actually spends accomplishing anything.Posted on 11/16/22 at 12:05 pm to prplhze2000
replay is not overturning penalties
I do think they are reviewing some things that have no business being reviewed
maybe go the nfl route and have a challenge flag instead
but then again, the nfl can't get it right either
If I was a player on the bills or vikings I would be pissed the NFL made it go to overtime on a non catch and I will never get over the non pass int call on the rams that cost the Saints a Super Bowl
I do think they are reviewing some things that have no business being reviewed
maybe go the nfl route and have a challenge flag instead
but then again, the nfl can't get it right either
If I was a player on the bills or vikings I would be pissed the NFL made it go to overtime on a non catch and I will never get over the non pass int call on the rams that cost the Saints a Super Bowl
Posted on 11/16/22 at 12:08 pm to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
Now they are told, "If you think you see something call it, and if it's a bad call we'll just let replay fix it." The problem is that we are dealing with two different standards here: the initial call, for which the standard is, "Call it if you think you see it," and the replay standard, which is, "Irrefutable video evidence must exist to overturn the call on the field." So we get refs making borderline or bad calls with the idea that replay will fix them, but then we look at the replay and we can't see what's going on because someone was in the way or the camera angle wasn't right or the replay ref decides the video evidence may be 99.9% clear that the call was bad but that still doesn't meet the "irrefutable" standard, and the bad call is allowed to stand.
I agree with this 100%. It seems to happen a ton with pass/fumble calls.
That said, replay has gotten rid of some of the horrible calls that we used to see in the 80s and 90s.
The proliferation of sports gambling will only make replay more invasive on the games. Financial markets are build on trust, so sports books don’t want any appearance of a rigged outcome.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 12:29 pm to TheTideMustRoll
An Alabama fan complaint about replays??
It’s probably negatively affected Bama 1 in every 300 reviews.
It’s probably negatively affected Bama 1 in every 300 reviews.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 12:53 pm to TheTideMustRoll
Your mind is just gravitating towards the annoying/poor use of instant replay. There have been many, many occurrences where an obvious bad call on the field was overturned in 10 seconds on replay. It's still a net positive even though there is significant room for improvement from a timing standpoint
Posted on 11/16/22 at 1:00 pm to TheTideMustRoll
It's good 90% of the time. How they keep missing fumbles against Auburn I will never know. 3 years straight. Also, LSU was a full yard and a half short.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 1:03 pm to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
It's time to admit that instant replay is a failed experiment
time to admit you dont remember the good ole days of 5th downs, clock not running etc
now i do think it has gotten a little out of hand with going back and looking at each play 100 times and looking for 1/16" to effect the game.
personally just think they need to go to nfl rules. all scoring plays reviewed. all plays under 2 min reviewed. coaches get 2 challenges per game.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 1:04 pm to Billy Blanks
quote:
Also, LSU was a full yard and a half short.
LSU was short...but not by 1 1/2 yards.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 1:18 pm to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
What is replay actually accomplishing other than wasting everyone's time and lengthening games?
Advertisers love it, I promise you that.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 1:33 pm to TheTideMustRoll
Don't blame instant replay for officials being worse.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 1:34 pm to Billy Blanks
quote:
Also, LSU was a full yard and a half short.
Ridiculous. Player was inbetween the lines with the ball in front of him. He was probably 6 inches short but how do you prove that on a non-optimal video?
Posted on 11/16/22 at 1:43 pm to TheTideMustRoll
Dumbasses on message boards who don't know how to read a rulebook make officiating seem worse than it actually is.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 1:46 pm to lsu777
quote:
personally just think they need to go to nfl rules. all scoring plays reviewed. all plays under 2 min reviewed. coaches get 2 challenges per game.
This but allow coaches to challenge non-calls on pass interference, defensive holding, and OL downfield.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 2:08 pm to Jcorye1
I feel like we have the technology to embed some sort of RFID sensor suite in the ball synced up to the whistle so that we know the exact position of the ball when the play is blown dead.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 2:23 pm to TheTideMustRoll
I would trade all the proper corrections to eliminate the wasted time and disruption. This applies to all sports.
In football, you always had the momentary ‘no flags’ moment after a big play. Now, on top of that, you need to wait and watch replays to confirm the big play will stand. It’s just not as much fun, IMO.
In football, you always had the momentary ‘no flags’ moment after a big play. Now, on top of that, you need to wait and watch replays to confirm the big play will stand. It’s just not as much fun, IMO.
Posted on 11/16/22 at 2:25 pm to Jcorye1
quote:
He was probably 6 inches short but how do you prove that on a non-optimal video?
Didn't need "non optimal video." It was clear as day.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News