i hate replay

[Cowtown]

oh come on. ask 100 coaches and 100 coaches will say that every possession matters. what credible rationale is there that calls should only be reviewable in the last two minutes? it is just more meathead nonsense. if a call is reviewable under two minutes it should be reviewable all game. what if it changes a possession in the first half and TT makes a 3? does that not matter to the outcome of the game? you have to do better than this.

Because then the games will take 6 hours to play, fer chrissake. Apparently I was giving a little too much credit.

 

[orangehomer]

He's right. I want the calls called correctly. I hear the same nonsense about baseball and football. We all know from instant reply what the call should be. Get it right.

wait so do you want the calls made correctly or do you just want them made correctly in the last two minutes?

 

[Cowtown]

Can anything that happens in a nano second really be clear?

Well, the hand is most certainly quicker than the eye. Always was, always will be.

 

[Cowtown]

wait so do you want the calls made correctly or do you just want them made correctly in the last two minutes?

To heck with it all. Let's play the games with no refs. Playground rules. Last man standing wins. You must have loved Georgetown.

 

[orangehomer]

Because then the games will take 6 hours to play, fer chrissake. Apparently I was giving a little too much credit.

i wasnt replying to you, i was replying to the pro-replay people when i am obviously poking holes in their arguments. i hate replay in basketball, for one of the reasons you are stating, and also for the other reasone i am bringing up.

 

[Cowtown]

i wasnt replying to you, i was replying to the pro-replay people when i am obviously poking holes in their arguments. i hate replay in basketball, for one of the reasons you are stating, and also for the other reasone i am bringing up.

Fair enough. Carry on.

 

[samspann1]

Few things I'd like to see re. officiating:

1. Referees are made available for post-game press conferences/questions, at which replays are shown, and explanations given for calls/no-calls;
2. Referees are fined, against their game checks, for each missed call or overturned call.

Obviously, this will never happen, but it would be interesting.

 

[Cowtown]

Few things I'd like to see re. officiating:

1. Referees are made available for post-game press conferences/questions, at which replays are shown, and explanations given for calls/no-calls;
2. Referees are fined, against their game checks, for each missed call or overturned call.

Obviously, this will never happen, but it would be interesting.

Then you'd have to pay me $10,000/game. But anyway, who would get to ask the questions?

 

[dasher]

wait so do you want the calls made correctly or do you just want them made correctly in the last two minutes?

poking holes? lol I want all the calls correctly called. However, I know the refs are so bad that the game would take all day. So I am willing to compromise that at the most crucial part of the game, the end, the correct call must be made. Imagine a call that every watching on tv knows is incorrect deciding the game and nothing is done about it. Ridiculous and moronic. We have the tech to make it right.

 

[HakAttack]

Another one here that was utterly disgusted with how the refs used replay during this Final Four. I’ll add another wrinkle to this discussion.

If you’re going to use replay, be consistent with how you use it to rule the outcome. The first call before the end of the game it was inconclusive whether or not Tech touched the ball last out of bounds. The call was Tech’s ball, so because it was not indisputable evidence, the call stood.

In the OT, the out of bounds call is EVEN MORE inconclusive than the previous replay out of bounds call. Pretty simple, right? If you’re following the rule then unless it’s INDISPUTABLE evidence that the call is wrong, then the call stands. I don’t know how anyone watching both replays can say for certain that the second one CLEARLY without a doubt showed that Tech touched it last.

It’s insane. It’s inconsistent and as others have said, it’s icky.

Make the call. Check the monitor during the last two minutes of the game and unless it’s an egregious wrong call, like the guy for the Tigers who pitched a perfect game, only to have the runner ruled safe when he was out by five feet, keep the call as it stands.

 

[HakAttack]

poking holes? lol I want all the calls correctly called. However, I know the refs are so bad that the game would take all day. So I am willing to compromise that at the most crucial part of the game, the end, the correct call must be made. Imagine a call that every watching on tv knows is incorrect deciding the game and nothing is done about it. Ridiculous and moronic. We have the tech to make it right.

But that scenario did not take place tonight. One call was upheld. The other wasn’t. In neither case did we know for sure watching at home that the call that was made was incorrect.

 

[samspann1]

Then you'd have to pay me $10,000/game. But anyway, who would get to ask the questions?

Members of the media, I suppose.

Why would you need such a hefty game check?

 

[rrlbees]

But that scenario did not take place tonight. One call was upheld. The other wasn’t. In neither case did we know for sure watching at home that the call that was made was incorrect.

Both ended up correctly.

 

[HakAttack]

Both ended up correctly.

How can you possibly say that? The second call was even less conclusive given replay than the first!!

 

[orangehomer]

poking holes? lol I want all the calls correctly called. However, I know the refs are so bad that the game would take all day. So I am willing to compromise that at the most crucial part of the game, the end, the correct call must be made. Imagine a call that every watching on tv knows is incorrect deciding the game and nothing is done about it. Ridiculous and moronic. We have the tech to make it right.

ok so you are agreeing with me that having replay for only a set period is stupid, if all that matters is getting the calls right than replay should apply to the entire game. if that is what we are saying. but you also dont seem to care that the actual calls that influence the outcome of a game such as fouls are not reviewable. i'm trying to chase the logic here but it is pretty thin.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

Problem that I have with the call is that 999 times out of 1000 when a player knocks a ball out of a players hand and out of bounds it’s always called in favor of the offense. This was the 1 time in 1000 that the refs decided to rule the other way. In reality the offensive player’s hand is usually the last to graze the ball, if you review it with a microscope. Should we start to always call it in favor of the defense going forward?

 

[samspann1]

How can you possibly say that? The second call was even less conclusive given replay than the first!!

Probably rooting to UVa, that's how.

 

[HakAttack]

The folks who were in favor of how replay was used during the Final Four must have been big fans of QuesTec back in the day.

 

[Cusefan95]

if it is so important why don't they review every out of bounds call? basketball is a possessions game, why do only the possessions in the last two minutes warrant reviews?

I’m not a huge fan of replay...but your line of objection here is flat out stupid.

Everything has costs and benefits. In a perfect world, we could get every call right in real time, with no impact on game length. But we don’t live in a perfect world. So we can use replay to get calls right (theoretically)...but it increases game length. Only using it in the final two minutes is an attempt to get as many calls right as possible, while minimizing the impact on game length (and maximizing the impact on the game since the calls are high leverage).

Anyone arguing the point you’re making is arguing that we can’t make it perfect, so we shouldn’t do anything to improve accuracy. Horrible, stupid, useless objection. The perfect is the enemy of the good.

Replay is bad for a lot of reasons in basketball - you’re hanging your hat on a non-reason here.

 

[Cowtown]

Members of the media, I suppose.

Why would you need such a hefty game check?

To put up with all the BS coming from people who have never reffed a game, nor even seen the inside of a rule book. Call it hazard pay.

edit: and honestly samspann1, you're okay by me, but "members of the media?" Announcers say some of the stupidest things I've ever heard. And most of them are just plain wrong on rules and interpretations. Even Bilas kicks one now and again, although he's right way more often than he's wrong.

 

[rrlbees]

Probably rooting to UVa, that's how.

I had TT in a parlay and would have won our bracket challenge here. I just think some of you are real overboard with this ref stuff and ignore things that benefitted TT. It was a well called game.

 

[samspann1]

To put up with all the BS coming from people who have never reffed a game, nor even seen the inside of a rule book. Call it hazard pay.

Hey, should be pretty easy to justify calls with the ability to cite the rule book and slo-mo replay available.

 

[20Plus]

if it is so important why don't they review every out of bounds call? basketball is a possessions game, why do only the possessions in the last two minutes warrant reviews?

The possession argument is correct but you but I think the room view of that play was correct as well and they got the call right which is the point. No one can say where’s the right spot to draw the line on what to review and what not it’s not perfect but it would’ve been worse if they could review it.

That’s why I vote for coaches having challenges It is the best because so now the coach can decide to answer your argument about possessions earlier in the game.

 

[Cowtown]

Hey, should be pretty easy to justify calls with the ability to cite the rule book and slo-mo replay available.

How about this: if I get dinged for every call that was "wrong," then do I get a bump for everyone that was right?

edit: keep in mind there's about 400 call/no call decisions on average in a game.

 

[orangehomer]

I’m not a huge fan of replay...but your line of objection here is flat out stupid.

Everything has costs and benefits. In a perfect world, we could get every call right in real time, with no impact on game length. But we don’t live in a perfect world. So we can use replay to get calls right (theoretically)...but it increases game length. Only using it in the final two minutes is an attempt to get as many calls right as possible, while minimizing the impact on game length (and maximizing the impact on the game since the calls are high leverage).

Anyone arguing the point you’re making is arguing that we can’t make it perfect, so we shouldn’t do anything to improve accuracy. Horrible, stupid, useless objection. The perfect is the enemy of the good.

Replay is bad for a lot of reasons in basketball - you’re hanging your hat on a non-reason here.

so where did you come up with the 2 minutes? why not 4 minutes, or 1 minute? the last two minutes is the only part of the game important enough to warrant replay? we can't review a possession call with 2:02 left but we can with 1:58 left? my point is that we either want replay or we don't, putting some arbitrary time limit on it is offensive to the college fan (which guess what the numbers are bad). this idea that only the last two minutes matter is asinine.