Options
Enough Already With The Challenges!
DirtyDog48
Posts: 298
in Sports Talk
It's been an interesting experiment, but it's time to dump this rule-change......no more challenges ever!
0
DirtyDog48
Posts: 298
DirtyDog48
Posts: 298
Comments
Refs aren't infallable....the challenges are a good thing.
<< <i>Why? Are you saying the refs always get these calls right? How many challenges turn out to be valid - almost half, I'd say. >>
Spoken like a true child of the gaming generation.....where is it written that referees, unlike players, should be infaillible? Errors are a part of the game, I say let 'em stand....just make a call and live or die with it.
<< <i>
<< <i>Why? Are you saying the refs always get these calls right? How many challenges turn out to be valid - almost half, I'd say. >>
Spoken like a true child of the gaming generation.....where is it written that referees, unlike players, should be infaillible? Errors are a part of the game, I say let 'em stand....just make a call and live or die with it. >>
Until a play goes against the giants then you'd be saying 'off with their heads!'
We have the technology to make better calls than the refs can by themselves, and I sure as hell want the right call being made (especially in the postseason).
<< <i>Spoken like a true child of the gaming generation.....where is it written that referees, unlike players, should be infaillible? Errors are a part of the game, I say let 'em stand....just make a call and live or die with it. >>
I agree with Ax. Why do errors have to be part of the game, anyway? This isn't 1960, it's 2006 - and I am sure everyone would agree that a game called correctly, with no errors or bad calls for either side, is the game that you want to see. This "human element" argument holds no water. How does having a bad call remain in place make for a better game?
Remember, the television cameras that are all over the stadium are going to expose the truth, and fans are going to see it at home or at the stadium. A bad call will not stay hidden, so might as well deal with them the right way.
<< <i>I agree with Ax. Why do errors have to be part of the game, anyway? >>
Because correcting them takes WAY TOO much time. It ruins the continuity of the game. My solution would be if a play has to reviewed let a ref in the booth do it quickly, why does the field ref have to go look at a mini tv for two minutes? Otherwise just get rid of the instant replays.
<< <i>
<< <i>I agree with Ax. Why do errors have to be part of the game, anyway? >>
Because correcting them takes WAY TOO much time. It ruins the continuity of the game. My solution would be if a play has to reviewed let a ref in the booth do it quickly, why does the field ref have to go look at a mini tv for two minutes? Otherwise just get rid of the instant replays. >>
And the incessant TV timeouts don't take away from the continuity? I'd think a majority of fans are in favor of getting as many plays possible called correctly.
<< <i>And the incessant TV timeouts don't take away from the continuity? I'd think a majority of fans are in favor of getting as many plays possible called correctly. >>
They do, but those aren't going away. Replays don't keep the refs from getting blamed anyway, so who cares about 3 extra plays.
<< <i>Because correcting them takes WAY TOO much time. It ruins the continuity of the game. >>
Sorry, I don't think that is reason enough to get rid of replays. I don't like it when the game slows down either, but I would rather they take the extra time and get the calls right. You have to allow the refs a minute or two to really watch all the replay angles, or else why bother?
<< <i>You have to allow the refs a minute or two to really watch all the replay angles, or else why bother? >>
So then why can't they do my suggestion of having them so reviews from the booth. They already decide if a replay is necessary from booth in the last two minutes. Why not have a ref up there who makes the call? You've just saved a minute from having the field ref run over to the camera put on his headphones and watch what the booth is already looking at.
<< <i>So then why can't they do my suggestion of having them so reviews from the booth. They already decide if a replay is necessary from booth in the last two minutes. Why not have a ref up there who makes the call? You've just saved a minute from having the field ref run over to the camera put on his headphones and watch what the booth is already looking at. >>
I don't really disagree with this - just as long as the coaches still have the ability to ask for a certain number of replays a game, just like they do now. There must be a reason when the rule was invented, that the on-field officials were more involved in the replay process, but I actually can see the booth official perhaps having a better view of the play than the official "under the hood".