I am officially tired of instant replay

I realize there are moments when instant replay is helping to make correct calls. But I feel like refs have begun to rely on it way too much. Take the end of the VT-Wake game just now.

With 6 seconds left, the refs decided to review the out of bounds call. That decision unfairly gave Wake an extra timeout that it didn't have. Worse, there was a clear uncalled foul after which Cody-McIntyre actually knocked the ball out of bounds. So what are they to do? It was pretty apparent that the refs didn't call the foul on the contact and what they "saw" was a play in moment where the ball should have remained with Wake.

Only problem was, the decided to review it and then saw both the uncalled foul and the last touch by Wake. So what are they to do? You can't call a foul in retrospect. But it was also clearly out on Wake. They ended giving it back to Wake anyway... seemingly reaching the same conclusion via instant replay that they did in real time. Only it was very awkward and controversial to just give the ball back to Wake the way they did when it was clearly off Cody-McIntyre.

So what the heck was the point of the review? They boxed themselves into a corner. Had Wake won, it would have been a heck of a controversy. Just stupid.

I'm with you on this one. Wayyyyyyyyy too much use of the replay. IMO it should only come into play IF the clock "continues to run". Not to correct normal reaction time by the timekeeper.

Just because the announcers said Wake touched the ball last doesn't mean they did. It appeared so, I admit. I say that the refs couldn't see enough proof that Cody-McIntire touched the ball. I don't think the refs took into account anything other than the out-of-bounds call. They may be wrong at times, but to say they did other than interpret the play as the rule allowed is to question their integrity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Indoor66

I'm with you on this one. Wayyyyyyyyy too much use of the replay. IMO it should only come into play IF the clock "continues to run". Not to correct normal reaction time by the timekeeper.

---

Its the same with college football and NFL. I'm with you 100%. This basically breeds lazy officiating.

I listened to the Wake broadcast on my way home from work. The Wake announcers said there was an uncalled foul on VT and that the ball went out off Codi Miller-McIntyre.

If there is going to be replay, then the refs should have the right to call a common foul on the first play.

Having fumed through about fifteen minutes of the St. John game before truth and Justise (and his teammates) prevailed, I am on the side of more replay, or none at all.

I don't mind these replays because they're limited to the end of the game and college basketball is one of the few sports that doesn't have too much of a problem with overly long games (issues with tv networks giving them too small of a window is a separate issue). If there's that much of an issue with an extra "timeout," you could easily disallow players gathering at the bench or even force them to gather on the non bench side of the court. The foul thing is tough, I'll admit, but I would think that having replay still results in more correct calls than not having it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rthomas

Its the same with college football and NFL. I'm with you 100%. This basically breeds lazy officiating.

---

I can't recall exactly the incident, but I believe the NFL refs sometimes call it a score or turnover if they aren't sure so there will be a guaranteed replay review.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killerleft

Just because the announcers said Wake touched the ball last doesn't mean they did. It appeared so, I admit. I say that the refs couldn't see enough proof that Cody-McIntire touched the ball. I don't think the refs took into account anything other than the out-of-bounds call. They may be wrong at times, but to say they did other than interpret the play as the rule allowed is to question their integrity.

---

In this case it was absolutely clear that Cody-McIntyre touched it last.

I am not against replay altogether. I just think it's overused. This was an example. They could have huddled for a second and reached the correct conclusion. No replay needed.

I do agree with the idea of having players stay away from the coach and not giving a free timeout. It just seems unfair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Rosenrosen

I do agree with the idea of having players stay away from the coach and not giving a free timeout. It just seems unfair.

---

Unfair or not, it didn't help one damn bit. Three missed shots in 6 seconds, including two that were basically tip-ins. Enjoy your off-season, Deacons; can't say you didn't get gifted some chances.

To the original post...yeah, that was a cluster of an ending. My take away was that the refs took the easy way out. They blew multiple calls and chose the path of least resistance. Probably the smart thing to do, but it shouldn't have been done in the first place.

I worry about the drama, or lack thereof. My team lost to Oklahoma on Saturday at the buzzer, fans/players went nuts, Senior Day, etc. But oh wait! Let's watch the replay 10 or 11 times... NOPE! Not a buzzer beater. 0.2 seconds left... Let's put that back on the clock... Let's get everyone off the court and force the losing team to pass the ball in, for a shot that wouldn't count anyway, because you can't catch-and-shoot with that little time left. Fantastic experience for the players on both sides.


I mean, would they have gone to replay after Laettner's shot over UK in '92? It would have been dramatic for all of the wrong reasons.

I watch premier league soccer and I hear the same argument from a different angle. The naysayers say keep the game pure. It is what it is.
That's until a missed call goes against you!
I love technology. If in doubt check it!

I think the single biggest improvement for College Basketball instant replay is to take the reviewing out of the hands of the actual referees. It makes no sense to have the refs huddle up, talk about what they want to review, ask some guy to lug out a TV screen from behind the scorer's table, make sure the TV's working, cue up the replay, watch it 8 or 9 times, and then make a call. 99% of the time, the viewers at home know what the result of the replay is going to be before the refs even start this laborious dance.

Just do it the way College Football does it and have a dedicated replay official sitting somewhere. Maybe in the TV truck? They'd have instant access to every possible angle of the call. Radio to the ref what the call is, and we're done. It would save time, and more importantly, get the calls right. Instant replay is a net positive, in my opinion. I still prefer the current scenario that takes forever to the old world where demonstrably incorrect calls went unchanged. It just needs to be executed better, and this one seems like a no-brainer.

Refs are getting paid by the hour?

This has more to do with my viewing experience, and less to do with actual game-flow/quality, but while we're at it, what's the deal with all the player close-ups? I mean the excessive ones. At one point during Duke's last game, the cameras paused on Winslow's face for around 5 seconds, and he was on the bench and completely unrelated to the game at that moment. I kid you not, his face took up the entire width of my television. I don't mind the 'He just made a bucket, now let's show him getting back on defense' camera shot. I just find the long, drawn out, random close-up shots to be invasive. There is absolutely no telling what I would get caught doing in those instances.

I just wish there was a way to watch the game without all the unnecessary, over-cooked production.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firstpost

... At one point during Duke's last game, the cameras paused on Winslow's face for around 5 seconds, and he was on the bench and completely unrelated to the game at that moment. I kid you not, his face took up the entire width of my television...
I just wish there was a way to watch the game without all the unnecessary, over-cooked production.

---

I've been known to comment on how handsome Justise is, but, all kidding aside, there's something to be said for telegenic players and Winslow is certainly one of those players. The production booth seems to be, as you pointed out, trying to catch a player doing something embarrassing or controversial.

During the hole game last Saturday night, how did everybody like ESPN using the over-the-basket camera to focus on Tyus Jones as he writhes in pain on the floor, after the Duke managers shielded his face with towels from the side?
Despicable, invasive, rude as hell and unkind.