watchability of sports?
Yes it's great to have so many cool close-up angles and such, and obviously the game benefits when the correct call is made. But sometimes the correct call goes counteractive to the "spirit" of a rule or a play. Case in point - the Jets TD against the Pats. Yes there was some ball movement but was it really that big of a deal where as to take away a TD, give a touchback and affect the outcome of the game?
Why is it that can be reviewed and overturned yet an obvious Pass interference call/no-call cannot be challenged?
How about in baseball? I forget which game it was, I think the Nats game where the Catcher threw a snap pickoff to 1B, and the runner clearly beat the ball back but there was a split second where he was not in contact with the base as he was getting up and was tagged and subsequently out. Though technically a correct call, does it really enhance the spirit of the play?
Now yes there are situations where replay overturns and rectifies obvious miscalls and such. But the question I ask BBI is this: is there value to continuing to allow judgement calls from umps/refs to rule rather than every minute detail of a play as seen by super cameras?
Would leagues ever decide to not use those super close ups to avoid controversial calls and leave it to the officials?
Those controversial catches in the endzones might not be so controversial without replay looking at every detail. If it looks like a catch to the ref it's a catch and vice versa. Maybe that's why there didn't seem to be these issues years ago before HD cameras and replays came about.
No in-depth analysis of the entire rulebook, or super-slo-mo look to see the exact point when something might have happened. If it's obvious, plain as the nose on your face, then overturn it. If not, let it stand.
In the Yankee game the other night, a play at first resulted in an out on challenge when the ref was standing literally two feet away in the best possible angle to view it. The replay offered little new evidence, and not even the best angle. Somehow, they walked away thinking that they saw enough to overturn the call on the field, which was just ridiculous.
It'd be nice if they skip the announcements of penalties that are definitely be declining. Need to keep the game moving.
I don't know if it'll ever be ideal - but I'd much rather have it than not.
The TMO says the call is supported by evidence; the evidence overturns the call; or there is insufficient evidence (this moves the final decision to the field).
That said, I think both are hurting the league. HD makes the home viewing experience much more manageable than going to the game, and fans are frustrated with the inefficiencies of the replay system.
That said, I think both are hurting the league. HD makes the home viewing experience much more manageable than going to the game, and fans are frustrated with the inefficiencies of the replay system.
Minus a replay review, would anyone initially have had a problem with the Jets TD? I mean no one even saw anything until the replay.
Personally I'd like to see replay completely taken out of the game. Put it in the hands of the refs. If they get it wrong, so be it. They actually get an enormous amount of shit right, and would probably get better at their jobs if replay weren't a factor.
But I would eliminate using it to change calls made by officials.
Football is getting to the point where they are splitting hairs on a lot of rulings. It used to be that anything close was considered a TD. Now, they look to try and determine in the slightest of terms if a ball is babbled or a knee touches 1mm before the ball crosses the line. It has gotten ridiculous. Meanwhile, if a ref wants to call PI randomly or doesn't see intentional grounding between the tackles, it can't be reviewed.
Baseball's replay is getting to the point where umps don't give a shit what they call because if they are wrong, replay will fix it.
Hockey has to penalize teams for incorrect challenges because coaches were just throwing shit against a wall hoping it would stick.
I'm tired of watching 5 games every weekend where I watch the same catch repeated in all 5, and called practically 5 different ways.
These rules are a byproduct of years of controversy and complaints, I get that - but at some point the rule book needs an enema.
Football is getting to the point where they are splitting hairs on a lot of rulings. It used to be that anything close was considered a TD. Now, they look to try and determine in the slightest of terms if a ball is babbled or a knee touches 1mm before the ball crosses the line. It has gotten ridiculous. Meanwhile, if a ref wants to call PI randomly or doesn't see intentional grounding between the tackles, it can't be reviewed.
Baseball's replay is getting to the point where umps don't give a shit what they call because if they are wrong, replay will fix it.
Hockey has to penalize teams for incorrect challenges because coaches were just throwing shit against a wall hoping it would stick.
Live with it.
Otherwise, it's TD!!!!!... pause for replay.... pause for PAT.... commercial break for kickoff.
I would, however, throw away the nonsense rules of "is it a catch or not?"
Ball in hand and two feet down is a catch. Period. None of this "did he have control and perform a football action" BS.
Live with it.
This is easy to say until a blown call directly results in a loss in a really important game.
Replay is necessary.
But it also isn't a perfect system and still needs some tweaking.
regarding replay -- it's the right idea - but there do seem to be mind-boggling inconsistencies sometimes in the way they call things -- wish they could get their acts together