The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Even the most anal person should agree that spending significant time reviewing and analyzing play after play is counterproductive and disrupts and slows the game down to the point it becomes boring.

Not just once, not 5 times, but all game long do we see calls be questioned and verified by more and more reviews. The kicker is that often times the call on the field is correct and the review overturns a correct call. There is no more trust for calls on the field from the refs. Why have them?

All the commercials were bad enough, but this is absurd. A 60 minute game now typically takes 3 1/2 hours or more. Gesh!

I do not agree at all.  During the era when instant replay was not allowed, I can assure you that I never said, "Well, sure, they got the call wrong, but at least they did it fast!"

I am a huge proponent of instant replay and think it should be expanded upon in other sports, as well.

P.S.  When was the last time you watched a Dolphins game when there was an instant replay on a key call and you thought, "I don't care what the call is, let's just get this game moving!"  Because I've never thought anything remotely close to that.

 At least they did it fast? LOL I guess you miss the entire point.

Officiating has clearly declined in recent years, not got better despite all the replays, at least in my opinion. It was a much better game before all the technology took over and slowed the tempo of the sport and took the officiating away from the officials. I don't expect you to agree with any of my opinions, as I don't with almost all of yours.

Your PS is just silly and does not warrant a response.

That's ridiculous if you think instant replay has ruined football, just crazy talk. Lol

Football needs instant replay. It's a no brainer. Gotta have it. I got no problem if it takes a while, as long as they get the call right!

+1 for the support of instant replay here

Disagree with the OP, I think Instant Replay in its current version is well suited.

College instant replay is a 100X worse. Games go over 4 hours and 30 min all the time and its death to sit in the stands sometimes through all the silly delays!

The problem with instant replay as I see it is it's not being used like it was proposed. The proposal was that calls that were CLEARLY wrong should be overturned. If you can't look at it once or twice and say IT'S OBVIOUSLY WRONG, then the call on the field STANDS period. The problem is they have taken the calls to the absurd. Trying to determine the EXACT instant that the knee touched down and when the ball came out. You should NEVER do that. Was the call a fumble? Then unless IT'S CLEARLY WRONG, it's a fumble. Spending 3 or 4 minutes to determine maybe, perhaps, possibly, I think his knee may have been potentially down, is doing it ALL wrong. That's what happened today and it happened not once but TWICE. Those calls weren't CLEARLY wrong. They should NOT have been reversed in my opinion. They waisted 3 or 4 minutes just to make a JUDGEMENT call which was ALREADY done on the field initially. If it's going to be decided by a judgement call anyway, then leave it up to the refs on the field to make the call. The way it's being used now is BS. The replacement refs at least were using instant replay correctly. If it wasn't CLEARLY wrong then the call on the field stood.

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

What do you expect from Gene STEELERTore who clearly hates the Dolphins?

But it's not just Miami, it happens all over the league. Instant replay reviews have now been called into question which was NEVER the intent of instant replay. They shouldn't be trying to get EVERY CALL right. They should be trying to correct CLEARLY WRONG CALLS. That's what instant replay is for.

If the call was CLEARLY WRONG, then they never would have gotten it wrong in the first place.  Q.E.D.

That's the whole reason that instant replay was put into the NFL, because there were calls that were CLEARLY WRONG, but there was no way to change it. That's why instant replay was put into the game, to correct CLEARLY WRONG calls.

You're missing the point.  If it was SO OBVIOUS that the call should have went the other way, that's what they would have called in the first place!  Instant replay was not put in place for ridiculous blown calls (like the ones the replacements were making; e.g. a touchback called on a ball that never made within 5 yards of the end zone).  It was put in place to correct the close calls.  The officials can huddle together and fix the incredibly bad calls without need of replay, and they have done so for years.

Furthermore, your idea of what instant replay should be is already the exact policy of official review:  if there is not clear visual evidence that the call was wrong, the original call on the field stands.

The entire reason for the existence of instant replay is because of close calls that the officials messed up.  Sometimes they really messed them up.  Sometimes those calls had playoff implications.  But if you're in favor of messed-up close calls because they are faster than getting the call right, you're in the minority.

I'm not going to argue with you. Calls WERE being made that were CLEARLY wrong on replay. One look at a replay and it was OBVIOUS. Coaches and owners wanted a way to have those calls changed because they were CLEARLY wrong but there was NOTHING you could do about it. Prior to instant replay there was no way to fix it, you simply had to live with the fact that the ref called it wrong. That's why instant replay was wanted and that's what it was supposed to fix originally. That was 26 years ago. Today it's a completely different animal.

That's the policy, but I don't believe it's called that way. That's why I'm not missing the point. I don't give a shit about speeding up the game, it could take 4 hours for all I care, I just think they don't call it like the rule states. They look at it and if it's close they try to make a judgement call which way they think is right and then they decide whether to overturn it or not, but if it's that close they SHOULDN'T make a judgement call, that's already been done on the field, they should let the call on the field stand in that case. That doesn't happen a lot of times. In far too many cases they overturn it even when there's NOT clear visual evidence what the right call is even after replaying it. In the beginning the refs on the field were to be considered right if there was any question, ties go to the field you might say. Now the replay is the final say. Like both of those calls today in my opinion. Neither one was CLEAR, they could have gone either way, but the ref is so sure that he can tell from looking at the replay what the call SHOULD be that he overturns a call that was not CLEARLY wrong because they aren't trying to correct CLEARY wrong calls anymore, they are trying to get EVERY CALL RIGHT. That's a mistake in my opinion. Give the power back to the refs on the field and only overturn them when they are CLEARLY wrong.

They don't even explain it the same way that they use to. When they didn't reverse a call they used to simply say "after further review the call stands". Now they say "After further review the call is confirmed". Why did they make that change? Because a lot of casual fans don't understand the way the rule is written. It's not supposed to be overruled unless it's clear it's WRONG. But fans would see the replay and say the call was wrong even when it wasn't clearly wrong, just perhaps it was wrong. It was very close, but not CLEARLY wrong. Those calls wouldn't be overturned but fans wanted those calls overturned too because they felt it was the wrong call even if it was very close. After a while that's what the replay officials started doing and now they have even been told to change the terminology to make it seem like they got the call RIGHT when it's too close to call. We used to be satisfied with the call "standing" when it was close, now we have to get the call RIGHT.

and the lack of replay has ruined baseball

^^^^ So true. I don't even care about baseball but I saw the replay of the team the Yankees were playing where the Yankee guy tagged out the base runner WAY before he even touched the base but was ruled safe. That kind of stuff just ruins a game, IMO. I know baseball purists like to say, well, there will always be the human element in there that makes bad calls. I don't buy it. Just like in soccer.

Instant replay takes the opinions out of the equation and introduces facts.  In a day where people bet on games, and NBA officials are accused of rigging games, you MUST have instant replay.  Who cares if it takes 15 minutes longer, as long as the call is correct.

Pappy stands alone on this one.

I do have one question for him though. If you do not care about the length of the game, why did you ever use it as a complaining point in your original post? It seems to me you do have some sort of issue with the length of games, otherwise you would not even mention it. In fact, you made it your starting point of complaints and then switched to something else (the intent of instant replay).

^^ Pappy wasn't the original poster.

Wow. I'm still fuzzy headed this morning. Now it makes a bit more sense to me.

Still recovering from that Taco Tech beatdown?   ;)

But the call was not CLEARLY wrong when it was originally called, or the officials would have huddled together and fixed it.  Furthermore, every call that is overturned on replay today is CLEARLY wrong (by rule, clear visual evidence is required).  If you have evidence to the contrary, I'm listening.

It sounds like your real objection is that instant replay is not being enforced as the rules state it should be.  If so, provide examples.

That is nothing more than PR.  Are you really complaining about the way the referee explains the result?

edit: I didn't see the STL@MIA game and I hear that there were two questionable overturned calls that went against the Dolphins, which explains both the existence of this thread and the unusual positions being taken.

Hey,

I was the original poster and just threw the topic out there for debate, but yes, I do feel the games have no continuity and are too long. It is 1 or 2 plays and either a flag or a review. I do think it has hurt the game. The NFL has become so afraid of making a mistake, the game has suffered.

How did the NFL survive before all the technology? Uh, very well thank you. Were there bad calls during the Lombardi, Shula, Laundry eras. Yes. But heck, there are bad calls today, it just takes longer. lol

BTW, I expected to be in the minority, but not 20 to 1. lol

However, in those days the TV networks didn't have 50 cameras placed at virtually every angle, and you didn't have 24-hour sports networks (and the internet) obsessing over a blown call (particularly if it affected the outcome of a game).

I still remember the call that resulted in instant replay coming back: the Phantom Touchdown (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000066379/article/mnf-controversy-recalls-1998s-phantom-touchdown) by Testaverde against the Seahawks.  Even back then, ESPN showed it over and over:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v299/bremertonian/football/SeahawksVinnyNoTD.jpg)

There is simply no way that we could go back to a non-instant-replay NFL without DRASTICALLY cutting back on the number of cameras covering the game.  It would be a complete debacle.

I'm all for Instant replay,this isn't baseball (Where I also think it should implemented more,and Where my point in the Best officials thread about how much NFL officials have to cover versus Baseball hold true) Football officials have to make calls in the middle of multiple large people in scrums,and have to make lots of different calls,from a a distance...They can't always be in the perfect spot to see all the angles of what's happening...

To the original posters point,this year with checking with replay every turnover,and every touch down has slowed the game,but I feel By the end of the year,even that will be faster with all the regular officials back on the job....I still think it's a good thing...

A bad call costing a game in the NFL,Is HUGE versus the other sports.You have to get it right....16 games schedule,difference is in the playoffs,out of the playoffs...

Wrong guy. I wasn't the OP. Thanks to those that pointed that out already. :)

Is it your stance that officials on the field have NEVER made a CLEARLY wrong call? I disagree with this premise.

Is it your stance that every call that has been overturned was CLEARLY wrong? I disagree with this premise as well.

I don't have evidence I only have my opinion.

The fumble call in the Miami game works for me. Not the QB sack which was more a rules interpretation, but the one against the receiver. In my opinion there was not clear visual evidence that his knee was down prior to losing control of the football. It was very close and it's possible that it was, but the angles that I saw you couldn't really tell when the knee touched down as opposed to when the football started coming loose. It was too close to make a definative call. In my opinion that was not clear visual evidence it was a judgement call from the referee that reviewed the play. In my opinion he should have let that call stand since there wasn't clear visual evidence. He apparently disagreed with me.

I'm not complaining about it, I'm saying it's indicative of the way the NFL is using the replay system today. They want every call to be RIGHT which is a very lofty goal and admirable, but I'm not sure is theoretically possible at least not now and at least not during the course of the game. Maybe perhaps one day video replay will be so exact that it will be possible to determine the exact moment that a fumble occurs or the exact moment that a knee touches the ground, but I don't think we are to that point yet. Until that point I think the officials on the field shouldn't be second guessed unless there's good reason to do that. A judgement call is not good enough reason since the official on the field made a judgement call himself.

I stated my position prior to the STL@MIA game. I stated it on September 24th when the replacement refs were being discussed. http://www.thedolphinsmakemecry.com/forums/index.php?topic=20444.msg268081#msg268081

"I'm not so sure about that call either. It's very close, but I thought that the defensive back knocked the ball out of Fasano's hands well after he was on the ground with the ball secured. He didn't drop the ball as part of completing the catch, the defensive back knocked it out of his hands well after he hit the ground. I think that could be ruled a catch. Again they replayed it and didn't reverse it. I think the replay officials are doing an OUTSTANDING job. The whole purpose of instant replay was to overturn CLEARLY wrong calls. If it's not CLEAR the call was wrong then the call on the field should stand. That's how instant replay was originally drawn up. Now I know things have changed a little since then and it's more about the replay officials making whatever they THINK is the right call, but I don't think they should be doing that. I think they should be reviewing and if it's CLEARLY wrong they should overturn it, but if it's NOT conclusive evidence than they should let the call on the field stand. They seem to be doing that this year and I personally like it. That's the way it SHOULD be in my opinion."

Wasn't this an example of a play where the refs clearly got the call wrong? This is the type of play that I was referring to. This is what got instant replay back into the game after being taken out. I don't recall the plays that got it into the NFL in the first place. That was a while ago.

You're mistaken about the call. The refs determined that the ball was never CAUGHT, not that the knee was down prior to the ball coming out. If you want to argue that no one seems to understand when a ball is actually caught, then that's certainly reasonable!

Exactly. Officials, refs, and umpires are all human. They make mistakes. Sometimes the error in the review lies in the application of the rules themselves. Case in point: a play being whistled dead. Nothing matters after the play has been whistled "dead".

You are not wrong. Like I have said, technology, as well as it was intended has been horrible for the NFL. There must be a medium point in using reviews, but it just worse and worse. Next year, it would not surprise me to see every play reviewed. Thank you good for nothing Roger Goodell

No one can convince me that the game is not less exciting stopping every couple of minutes for a review. Between the penalties and reviews the game has become painfully slow. The NFL makes baseball look like NASCAR.

Sorry for you fans that don't see that.    

-----------------

The problem is after 5 minutes of looking at video and having their fingers up their ass, they still screw the call. Have you been watching any Fins games lately?

Even you Mike, was critical of the review calls in the game not only this week with the Rams game, but also with the Cards game. How the H can you say as long as they get it right??

Really?? LOL   

Exactly, thank you for proving my point. It is a game played by humans and I don't care if you put 10,000 cameras on the field and make a game last 12 hours, it will never be perfect.

In fact, the older refs in the 80's did a hellofalot better job than the current refs.

Football is a sport and meant to be entertainment. The stop and go with 4 hour games just ruins it for me.   

Nobody is gonna bat 1000%. Just because there is a missed call every now and then doesn't mean you give up on the entire replay process!

I stand corrected. I was at Hooters and the sound was for the Cowboys game so I did not hear the explanation of the call, I could only see them replaying it over and over and looking closely at the knee and the ball. I assumed when the play was reversed that the call was that the knee was down prior to ball coming out. So you are saying they ruled that he never caught the ball despite the fact that he had both feet down and made what I would call a football move? That's maybe even harder to accept than the non-fumble call. Either way I think it could have easily stood as a catch and a fumble like it was ruled on the field. Do you agree?

Pappy13, in the case of an ambiguous call that can go either way, are you really arguing that it should be up to the official that sees it at full speed, and that's the end of it?  Because there are a LOT of plays that can look that way at full speed (from the only angle the responsible official has), but become much more definitive in slow-mo when looking at all of the dozens of camera angles.

Since I (and most people I know) only care to see the last 25 laps of a NASCAR race if any of it at all (because of the boringness of the rest of it), I'm not sure this was a great example to use.

That is how the rule reads, is it not?

If it's DEFINITIVE and it was CLEARLY wrong then by all means overturn it, but you can't tell me that ALL replays are DEFINITIVE. Sometimes it's very close and hard to tell and could go either way. In that case there's absolutely NOTHING wrong with keeping the original call. I think that keeps the integrity of the refs on the field in tact as much as possible. They should be considered right unless shown to be clearly wrong. I believe that should be the intent of instant replay and I believe that was the original intent.

Perhaps if it were called that way, we wouldn't think the refs were so lousy. Perhaps not.

No, it is not.  A play that is ambiguous at full speed can be clearly and definitively overturned on replay, but that won't be possible if you get rid of replay.

In the overwhelming majority of these ambiguous cases, the call stands.  You're complaining about a non-event.

I never said anything about getting rid of instant replay. I like instant replay. I simply want them to call it like the rule states. The rule DOES state that it should ONLY be overturned if there is clear visual evidence that the call was wrong.

Don't try to change my argument to something you like so that you can disagree with it. I never said anything about a call that was ambiguous at full speed but definitive on replay NOT being overturned. I said that a call that was ambiguous on REPLAY should NOT overturn the call on the field and in some cases it does. Maybe it doesn't happen a lot but it DOES happen. I think it happened in the Miami game on Sunday.

So, in summary: you think the currently existing replay rules are absolutely fine.  Right?

Perhaps a thread titled "Instant Replay Has Ruined The NFL" is not quite the best place to make the point that you approve of the existing version of replay (as defined by rule) and just want the letter of the law to be enforced more strictly.

Yes, the rules are absolutely fine. I don't think they are being applied like they should be and that is causing problems with people not liking instant replay because now reviews are being called into question because you never know what the replay official is gonna rule. Sometimes things you think will be overruled are not, sometimes things that you think shouldn't be overruled are. This wouldn't be an issue if they ONLY overruled things that were CLEARLY wrong and let everything else stand.

Fair enough, but I thought I made my position pretty clear and as I already pointed out, I actually made the exact same argument a month ago when we were discussing the replacement refs. I thought this thread was a good place to reiterate my stance on it. It wasn't my intention to mislead you, perhaps you jumped to some conclusions that you shouldn't have?

I too think you made your point very clear and this thread is a good place to give your point of view.

Maybe the topic titled "is ruining the NFL" is a bit harsh, but my intention was to incite debate and it looks like it worked.

IMO, the use of replays was more accurate and more effective 5 yrs. ago than today. There is such a thing as analysis paralysis. It seems to me the refs are scared to death to make a mistake. Maybe reviews should be limited just like coaches challenges. Just saying.