• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Get Rid of All Video Replay...in All Sports. Period

dncc

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
3,295
Reaction score
1,566
Let me preface this by stating that I was a monster Houston Oiler fan in my youth. And Mike Renfro's non-catch in one of the playoff games against the Pittsburgh Steelers, I believe, lead to the eventual adoption of instant replay in the NFL. There was a six year difference between the two events (1980 was the non-catch and 1986 was when they adopted instant replay). So it's been around for 35 season or so in the NFL. Other leagues have adopted the practice as well.

I don't watch as much sports as I used to on the television but every time I do, I am always put off by these long reviews of judgment calls. Today, I was watching Arsenal v. Brighton in English premier action. An off-sides call cost Arsenal a point on the table. They're currently 3 points behind Tottenham for fourth place. As I understand it, the top four teams in each league make it into the UEFA so this call could end up costing Arsenal in that respect. This is the best view I can find of it. Martinelli scored seconds after this image was captured.
1649557571930.png

Martinelli was judged to be off sides. For those who don't know, the ball cannot be struck by another player when he has a team mate "behind" the defense. Essentially, you can't have a guy hang out by the opponent's goal all game and just pass him the ball from midfield. The rule makes sense. Clearly this is a borderline call that could have gone either way. The game was stopped for a few minutes while someone pored over every frame of a review and they came up with their decision. Brighton was clearly the better team today. The two goals they scored were quality strikes that starched the goal tender. Arsenal's single goal was a deflection off a Brighton player that caused the ball to sail over the goalie's head. The game wasn't that close really. However, the best teams do not always win and the result of today's match should have been a 2-2 draw at full time.

This micro-detailed review seems to be becoming the norm rather than the exception. It leads to a lesser experience for those watching the game, it breaks the momentum of a team that has the goals/points/runs dis-allowed. I think they should just get rid of all video reviews and go back to letting the referees on the field decide the action.
 

noonereal

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Messages
47,446
Reaction score
19,765
I disagree. Especially in soccer.
Much more review and better officiating is desperately needed.
 

Grand Mal

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
49,043
Reaction score
30,791
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Let me preface this by stating that I was a monster Houston Oiler fan in my youth. And Mike Renfro's non-catch in one of the playoff games against the Pittsburgh Steelers, I believe, lead to the eventual adoption of instant replay in the NFL. There was a six year difference between the two events (1980 was the non-catch and 1986 was when they adopted instant replay). So it's been around for 35 season or so in the NFL. Other leagues have adopted the practice as well.

I don't watch as much sports as I used to on the television but every time I do, I am always put off by these long reviews of judgment calls. Today, I was watching Arsenal v. Brighton in English premier action. An off-sides call cost Arsenal a point on the table. They're currently 3 points behind Tottenham for fourth place. As I understand it, the top four teams in each league make it into the UEFA so this call could end up costing Arsenal in that respect. This is the best view I can find of it. Martinelli scored seconds after this image was captured.
View attachment 67384794

Martinelli was judged to be off sides. For those who don't know, the ball cannot be struck by another player when he has a team mate "behind" the defense. Essentially, you can't have a guy hang out by the opponent's goal all game and just pass him the ball from midfield. The rule makes sense. Clearly this is a borderline call that could have gone either way. The game was stopped for a few minutes while someone pored over every frame of a review and they came up with their decision. Brighton was clearly the better team today. The two goals they scored were quality strikes that starched the goal tender. Arsenal's single goal was a deflection off a Brighton player that caused the ball to sail over the goalie's head. The game wasn't that close really. However, the best teams do not always win and the result of today's match should have been a 2-2 draw at full time.

This micro-detailed review seems to be becoming the norm rather than the exception. It leads to a lesser experience for those watching the game, it breaks the momentum of a team that has the goals/points/runs dis-allowed. I think they should just get rid of all video reviews and go back to letting the referees on the field decide the action.
The game is on the field of play. Only the people on the field should be involved in It's outcome. Of course the refs, umps, whatever should make every call as they see it.
And any broadcasters that insist on highlighting mistakes ought to lose the right to broadcast that sport.
But the dollar hasn't been heard from yet...
 

Grand Mal

Russian warship, go f*** yourself!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
49,043
Reaction score
30,791
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
I disagree. Especially in soccer.
Much more review and better officiating is desperately needed.
Let the game be decided on the field. And don't allow broadcasts of second-guesses of referee mistakes.
 

Crovax

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
19,392
Reaction score
11,414
Location
South Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The game is on the field of play. Only the people on the field should be involved in It's outcome. Of course the refs, umps, whatever should make every call as they see it.
And any broadcasters that insist on highlighting mistakes ought to lose the right to broadcast that sport.
But the dollar hasn't been heard from yet...

Broadcasters should just ignore bad calls?
 

Fishking

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
42,718
Reaction score
15,923
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Let me preface this by stating that I was a monster Houston Oiler fan in my youth. And Mike Renfro's non-catch in one of the playoff games against the Pittsburgh Steelers, I believe, lead to the eventual adoption of instant replay in the NFL. There was a six year difference between the two events (1980 was the non-catch and 1986 was when they adopted instant replay). So it's been around for 35 season or so in the NFL. Other leagues have adopted the practice as well.

I don't watch as much sports as I used to on the television but every time I do, I am always put off by these long reviews of judgment calls. Today, I was watching Arsenal v. Brighton in English premier action. An off-sides call cost Arsenal a point on the table. They're currently 3 points behind Tottenham for fourth place. As I understand it, the top four teams in each league make it into the UEFA so this call could end up costing Arsenal in that respect. This is the best view I can find of it. Martinelli scored seconds after this image was captured.​

Martinelli was judged to be off sides. For those who don't know, the ball cannot be struck by another player when he has a team mate "behind" the defense. Essentially, you can't have a guy hang out by the opponent's goal all game and just pass him the ball from midfield. The rule makes sense. Clearly this is a borderline call that could have gone either way. The game was stopped for a few minutes while someone pored over every frame of a review and they came up with their decision. Brighton was clearly the better team today. The two goals they scored were quality strikes that starched the goal tender. Arsenal's single goal was a deflection off a Brighton player that caused the ball to sail over the goalie's head. The game wasn't that close really. However, the best teams do not always win and the result of today's match should have been a 2-2 draw at full time.

This micro-detailed review seems to be becoming the norm rather than the exception. It leads to a lesser experience for those watching the game, it breaks the momentum of a team that has the goals/points/runs dis-allowed. I think they should just get rid of all video reviews and go back to letting the referees on the field decide the action.
I disagree. Replay reviews are limited (at least in American football), and therefore don't disrupt the game much and you lose a time out if you lose the replay call. I'm very against a team losing because a ref made a bad call.
 

Airyaman

New Druid
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 4, 2018
Messages
21,204
Reaction score
19,011
Location
AL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Modern technology should not be disregarded. I've used modern tech 100s of times to make my job and life easer. Sports should be the same.
 

dncc

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
3,295
Reaction score
1,566
People want things before they don’t want them.
Agreed. I was a huge fan of replay but now I think we just leave it up to the refs and live with the results. If it was good enough for Pete Rose, Dick Butkus, Elvin Hayes, David Beckham, Jimmy Connors, Chris Everett, Mia Hamm, etc...its good enough for today's players.
 

dncc

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
3,295
Reaction score
1,566
The game is on the field of play. Only the people on the field should be involved in It's outcome. Of course the refs, umps, whatever should make every call as they see it.
And any broadcasters that insist on highlighting mistakes ought to lose the right to broadcast that sport.
But the dollar hasn't been heard from yet...
I disagree that highlighting a mistake is cause for punishment. To err is human. To identify the error inspires a change in technique by the umps next time.
 

Linc

NIMBY
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
59,209
Reaction score
18,816
Location
IL—16
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Agreed. I was a huge fan of replay but now I think we just leave it up to the refs and live with the results. If it was good enough for Pete Rose, Dick Butkus, Elvin Hayes, David Beckham, Jimmy Connors, Chris Everett, Mia Hamm, etc...its good enough for today's players.
We were begging for this stuff in the 70s. Now that we have it, we’re still not satisfied. They blew it on the DPI of LAR against NO, imho. No backbone with the Super Bowl on the line.

So far, the umps seem to be at least trying with better K zones in mlb. They need the ear beepers without you knowing they have them. We’ll see on the new rules coming next year.

I’m still against female refs in the nba, especially in the playoffs. They eat their whistle, are intimidated, and just plain don’t belong on this hard court with these players.
 

Linc

NIMBY
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
59,209
Reaction score
18,816
Location
IL—16
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Agreed. I was a huge fan of replay but now I think we just leave it up to the refs and live with the results. If it was good enough for Pete Rose, Dick Butkus, Elvin Hayes, David Beckham, Jimmy Connors, Chris Everett, Mia Hamm, etc...its good enough for today's players.
It wasn’t good enough for a lot of those players. That’s the point. Get it right, no matter.
 

dncc

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
3,295
Reaction score
1,566
It wasn’t good enough for a lot of those players. That’s the point. Get it right, no matter.
Sure it was.

Nobody looks at any of the past championships (most notably the 85 world series) and thinks the Cardinals are the "rightful" champions or the 80 Oilers and think they were going to win it all if the catch was allowed?
 

Linc

NIMBY
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
59,209
Reaction score
18,816
Location
IL—16
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Sure it was.

Nobody looks at any of the past championships (most notably the 85 world series) and thinks the Cardinals are the "rightful" champions or the 80 Oilers and think they were going to win it all if the catch was allowed?
Those nobodies don’t include those players. It’s with us whether we like it or not.
 

dncc

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
3,295
Reaction score
1,566
Those nobodies don’t include those players. It’s with us whether we like it or not.
Any quotes from these players stating that they would have won the series if a single blown call would have been corrected?
 

MamboDervish

Looking Forward
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2020
Messages
11,907
Reaction score
12,045
Location
The Big Apple
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Let me preface this by stating that I was a monster Houston Oiler fan in my youth. And Mike Renfro's non-catch in one of the playoff games against the Pittsburgh Steelers, I believe, lead to the eventual adoption of instant replay in the NFL. There was a six year difference between the two events (1980 was the non-catch and 1986 was when they adopted instant replay). So it's been around for 35 season or so in the NFL. Other leagues have adopted the practice as well.

I don't watch as much sports as I used to on the television but every time I do, I am always put off by these long reviews of judgment calls. Today, I was watching Arsenal v. Brighton in English premier action. An off-sides call cost Arsenal a point on the table. They're currently 3 points behind Tottenham for fourth place. As I understand it, the top four teams in each league make it into the UEFA so this call could end up costing Arsenal in that respect. This is the best view I can find of it. Martinelli scored seconds after this image was captured.​

Martinelli was judged to be off sides. For those who don't know, the ball cannot be struck by another player when he has a team mate "behind" the defense. Essentially, you can't have a guy hang out by the opponent's goal all game and just pass him the ball from midfield. The rule makes sense. Clearly this is a borderline call that could have gone either way. The game was stopped for a few minutes while someone pored over every frame of a review and they came up with their decision. Brighton was clearly the better team today. The two goals they scored were quality strikes that starched the goal tender. Arsenal's single goal was a deflection off a Brighton player that caused the ball to sail over the goalie's head. The game wasn't that close really. However, the best teams do not always win and the result of today's match should have been a 2-2 draw at full time.

This micro-detailed review seems to be becoming the norm rather than the exception. It leads to a lesser experience for those watching the game, it breaks the momentum of a team that has the goals/points/runs dis-allowed. I think they should just get rid of all video reviews and go back to letting the referees on the field decide the action.
I disagree. I appreciate the efforts sports have made over the decades to get the call right, and subsequent efforts to refine the accuracy even further. Any aid in replacing the subjectivity of officiating, with the objectivity of a more refined review, is something I welcome. Even the training of referees and umpires could not be adequate without the use of replay. It's the feedback loop that not only improves the accuracy of the scoring of any game, but monitors the time when refs must be retired, because they've gotten to the point where they miss too many calls. IMO, whatever little time is spent in replay review is time well spent.
 

dncc

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2020
Messages
3,295
Reaction score
1,566
I disagree. I appreciate the efforts sports have made over the decades to get the call right, and subsequent efforts to refine the accuracy even further. Any aid in replacing the subjectivity of officiating, with the objectivity of a more refined review, is something I welcome. Even the training of referees and umpires could not be adequate without the use of replay. It's the feedback loop that not only improves the accuracy of the scoring of any game, but monitors the time when refs must be retired, because they've gotten to the point where they miss too many calls. IMO, whatever little time is spent in replay review is time well spent.
Well argued.

I disagree though.

Tony Dungy--Hall of Famer, Championship head coach and owner of multiple super bowl rings said one night on Sunday Night Football "I don't know what a catch is". Other commentary on the subject is listed here.


A catch used to be whatever the refs on the field said it was....and the players pretty much understood (in my view anyway) that it will balance out over time.

He continues in this tweet....
1649580312758.png

Anyway...again, well argued. I just disagree.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
94,021
Reaction score
56,834
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Well argued.

I disagree though.

Tony Dungy--Hall of Famer, Championship head coach and owner of multiple super bowl rings said one night on Sunday Night Football "I don't know what a catch is". Other commentary on the subject is listed here.


A catch used to be whatever the refs on the field said it was....and the players pretty much understood (in my view anyway) that it will balance out over time.

He continues in this tweet....
View attachment 67384817

Anyway...again, well argued. I just disagree.

I disagree. It was a catch (completed pass) because the receiver had possession and control when he hit the ground - you can clearly see his knees are on the ground with possession and control of the ball. The subsequent lunge (forward movement after the catch) caused the ball to break the plane of the end zone (aka touchdown). Essentially, that (reversed?) call indicates that the ground can cause a fumble.
 

Logician Man

Eat a Peach
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2018
Messages
37,899
Reaction score
20,994
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Too late for no reviews. Too much money involved, especially these days, when more and more states are legalizing online/off track betting. If the calls that are reviewable by rule aren't reviewed, gamblers will stop trusting the credibility/integrity of officiating, and some will cease and/or reduce the amount of money wagered ( which is a massive amount), which ultimately affects places like FOXBET, MGM Grand, Fan Duel, Points Bet, TVG, and tax revenue that goes to states. May as well get used to it, as infuriating and tedious as some of those long reviews take. There is no going back now.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
94,021
Reaction score
56,834
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I disagree. I appreciate the efforts sports have made over the decades to get the call right, and subsequent efforts to refine the accuracy even further. Any aid in replacing the subjectivity of officiating, with the objectivity of a more refined review, is something I welcome. Even the training of referees and umpires could not be adequate without the use of replay. It's the feedback loop that not only improves the accuracy of the scoring of any game, but monitors the time when refs must be retired, because they've gotten to the point where they miss too many calls. IMO, whatever little time is spent in replay review is time well spent.

I generally agree, but that does not address a missed call. The replay rule allows a ‘bad call’ (actually made during play) to be reviewed, but not the (more common?) missed call. College football recently added that capability for ‘targeting’ - a targeting foul never called on the field can (yet not must) be added by later review.

Obviously, reviewing every play would slow the game down too much, but if a given number of reviews (challenges per team) could be requested they should not be limited to only ‘bad calls’ made - they should allow ‘missed calls’ to be (retroactively) corrected.
 

noonereal

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Messages
47,446
Reaction score
19,765
Let the game be decided on the field. And don't allow broadcasts of second-guesses of referee mistakes.

Lol, you think allowing off sides goals is letting it be decided on the field?

What can I do but laugh.

Letting it be decided on the field is the goal of VR. Hello!
 

CaughtInThe

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 4, 2017
Messages
87,415
Reaction score
73,983
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
one of the worst feeling an athlete can have is to win a game but get the L because a ref ****ed up.
 

MamboDervish

Looking Forward
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 24, 2020
Messages
11,907
Reaction score
12,045
Location
The Big Apple
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I generally agree, but that does not address a missed call. The replay rule allows a ‘bad call’ (actually made during play) to be reviewed, but not the (more common?) missed call. College football recently added that capability for ‘targeting’ - a targeting foul never called on the field can (yet not must) be added by later review.

Obviously, reviewing every play would slow the game down too much, but if a given number of reviews (challenges per team) could be requested they should not be limited to only ‘bad calls’ made - they should allow ‘missed calls’ to be (retroactively) corrected.
. . . . . in an ideal world. Which is one I've yet to live in. I can only foresee what you're hoping for in a world using electronic "foul recognition" software - a time when AI is monitoring the game, and can flag the desk referee for review. Perhaps in our future, but not any time soon, I would think.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
94,021
Reaction score
56,834
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
. . . . . in an ideal world. Which is one I've yet to live in. I can only foresee what you're hoping for in a world using electronic "foul recognition" software - a time when AI is monitoring the game, and can flag the desk referee for review. Perhaps in our future, but not any time soon, I would think.

Nope, I’m just advocating for each team‘s representatives to be able to make (limited) challenges to not only calls (alleged rule violations) made, but (missed) calls which should have been made. I’m not advocating for all calls (or missed calls) to be automagically reviewed, because that would be much too time consuming.
 
Top Bottom