Instant Replay Has Ruined The NFL.

[el diablo]

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.

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".

[Fins4ever]

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.

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.    

[Fins4ever]

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!

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

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   

[Fins4ever]

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).

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.   

[MikeO]

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

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   

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!

[Pappy13]

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!

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?

[Spider-Dan]

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.

[Phishfan]

The NFL makes baseball look like NASCAR.

Sorry for you fans that don't see that.    

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.

[Pappy13]

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?

That is how the rule reads, is it not?

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.

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.

[Spider-Dan]

That is how the rule reads, is it 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.

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

[Pappy13]

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.

[Spider-Dan]

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.

[Pappy13]

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

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.

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.

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?

[Fins4ever]

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.