Is instant replay overused? (1 Viewer)

[dschuler]

There have been a lot of complaints of the actual quality of the NFL games this season. This is due to the lack of speed with the gameplay.

-Too many penalties.

-Too many challenges.

Why are challenges potentially negative for the game? Well, it slows the game down tremendously. This results in more commercials, more stoppages, more momentum swing stops, and more defenses catching their breaths due to replay stoppage. I don't need to wait for minutes to see a play completely called perfectly fine on the field. Get on with the game, I'm already tired of seeing Peyton humming more insurance commercials. My auto insurance doesn't expire for almost a year anyways. Just my two cents.

 

[Dizzy]

Get rid of it.

Just look at Percy Harvin's TD run earlier this season... stepped out of bounds... obvious to all watching on TV. Bad enough the ref right there looking at the play missed it, but all the technicians in the NASA-caliper replay center in NYC missed it to? It doesn't work. Still have these horrendously bad calls even with the technology.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I might have agreed a year ago when every simple challenge took forrrrreevvvverrrrr, but they move pretty quickly now and don't bother me at all. If anything, I wish some penalties were challengeable as that's the last major loophole in replay.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

I think we'd all hate instant replay a lot less if they'd just simplify the rules pertaining to what is and isn't a catch. A great play that's clearly a catch gets slowed down and watched by the frame, and the slightest twitch of a finger or jostle of the ball after both feet are down negates a catch. Nevermind the plays where the player hits the ground, rolls, then drops the ball and he didn't "control the ball through the process of the catch" or whatever. I remember when it seemed instant replay was primarily used to get a second look at a WR's feet. Whether he had control or not seemed to be more of an easily recognizable thing that wasn't focused on in the replay as much.

 

[dschuler]

I might have agreed a year ago when every simple challenge took forrrrreevvvverrrrr, but they move pretty quickly now and don't bother me at all. If anything, I wish some penalties were challengeable as that's the last major loophole in replay.

Not all of them do move quick though, that's the problem. And a lot of them that don't move quick are too close to have indisputable evidence anyways, so the whole thing is a waste of time. Catches, are really annoying to me. They overanalyze them way too much, looking for the tiniest shift in the laces to determine if a WR had positive control of the football. Or, did he actually make a football move? Hmmm, let's spend the next two minutes deciding that, another two minutes trying to figure out where to spot the ball, another minute to announce the call and get everyone set again. It's not always the actual challenge that takes a lot of time, but everything else that goes along with it does make the challenges drag out way too long.

 

[dschuler]

I think we'd all hate instant replay a lot less if they'd just simplify the rules pertaining to what is and isn't a catch. A great play that's clearly a catch gets slowed down and watched by the frame, and the slightest twitch of a finger or jostle of the ball after both feet are down negates a catch. Nevermind the plays where the player hits the ground, rolls, then drops the ball and he didn't "control the ball through the process of the catch" or whatever. I remember when it seemed instant replay was primarily used to get a second look at a WR's feet. Whether he had control or not seemed to be more of an easily recognizable thing that wasn't focused on in the replay as much.

Guess we were thinking the same thing

 

[football_genus]

I think you almost have to have replay. Given the tempo of the game, viewers are going to see a replay of just about every play, and anything questionable will be seen from many angles and in slow motion. Why not take a few minutes to get it right on very significant close plays?

Without replay, there would be 2-3 blown calls every game that would be obvious to all the viewers. Not good for the game.

That said, it must be possible to streamline the process further.

 

[General Tso]

Get rid of it entirely, and change some of the rules to make the game easier to referee with the naked eye. For instance - no more two feet inbounds. Go to one like college.

If you're going to have replay, limit it to turnovers only. Do we really need to have a first and goal from the one rushing TD reviewed from 19 different angle to see if the really ball broke the plane? It sucks the juice right out of the game.

 

[dschuler]

Get rid of it entirely, and change some of the rules to make the game easier to referee with the naked eye. For instance - no more two feet inbounds. Go to one like college.

If you're going to have replay, limit it to turnovers only. Do we really need to have a first and goal from the one rushing TD reviewed from 19 different angle to see if the really ball broke the plane? It sucks the juice right out of the game.

Good point, agree to both. One foot in bounds would increase the scoring, which the NFL wants without having to add so many ridiculous defense PI penalties. I also hate the goal line challenges, unless it's fourth down. 1st and goal from the one should be a TD unless your Dallas and decide to throw every time with a great O-line and beast at RB, but that's another discussion.

 

[meatwad1]

It is fine, nothing wrong with it. Not perfect, but works most of the time, every time.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I might have agreed a year ago when every simple challenge took forrrrreevvvverrrrr, but they move pretty quickly now and don't bother me at all. If anything, I wish some penalties were challengeable as that's the last major loophole in replay.

Not all of them do move quick though, that's the problem. And a lot of them that don't move quick are too close to have indisputable evidence anyways, so the whole thing is a waste of time. Catches, are really annoying to me. They overanalyze them way too much, looking for the tiniest shift in the laces to determine if a WR had positive control of the football. Or, did he actually make a football move? Hmmm, let's spend the next two minutes deciding that, another two minutes trying to figure out where to spot the ball, another minute to announce the call and get everyone set again. It's not always the actual challenge that takes a lot of time, but everything else that goes along with it does make the challenges drag out way too long.

Not sure we're watching the same game. That's the way it used to be. Anything that required re-spotting the ball or adjusting the clock took forever. Not the case anymore.

 

[Leonidas]

I'm not sure how it can be over-used when we already saw a not-reviewed "touchdown" play where the guy clearly stepped out of bounds in the first couple weeks of the season.

Instant reply is there to get it right.

Agreed with the catches though. That whole thing about controlling it through the process and judging every tiny move the ball games on the way seems generally unnecessary and drawn out. Also, just ask Calvin Johnson and the Lions about that 'controlling through the process of the catch" thing or however it is phrased.

 

[Insein]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

 

[dschuler]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

How is that different than what we have now?

 

[Todem]

Replay has runined the human emotion and element of the game, analyzing catches in super slow mo is not how the game is played on the field and not how a human being sees a play.

Its a joke. Its destroyed the game. I dont care what anyone thinks...and this BS " we want to get it right".

The game is played on the field not in a replay booth.

Replay using just the coaches challenge and in the last 2 minutes was fine. What they are doing now is a complete joke and again has really taken the thrill of a big play out of the game. Every TD, every turnover, its out of hand.

Horrid.

 

[Todem]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

Agree but the whole what is and is not a catch is out of hand. I have seen numerous great catches in real time taken away because when you slow it down to super slow mo oh...there is a slight bobble, blah blah blah. If the human eye can't see it.....then so be it.

Humans play the game right?

 

[Chaka]

We all hate commercials but I would rather they get the calls correct then see teams get robbed of victories.

Arguments about momentum or resting defenses are stupid.

 

[ElSlappo]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

I couldn't agree more with the bolded above. This should be a top priority of the NFL. They should establish an independent arm responsible for hiring, training, grading, suspending/fining, and more importantly firing incompetent refs. There needs to be accountability for blown calls and a lack of command - for example Jeff Triplette has absolutely no business being a NFL referee. His games are ALWAYS poorly managed and officiated, and he appears at all times to be a bumbling fool.

 

[Pots]

Please word your thread title similarly with the question presented in the thread.

The way someone would want to answer each question is the OPPOSITE from each other.

I came in wanting to vote 'No' as in it's NOT overused, but clearly that would be the opposite of the actual question you presented.

 

[dschuler]

The Bears Packers review just took 3:09 from the snap to uphold a non touchdown. So it does take minutes still to review plays, not seconds.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

The Bears Packers review just took 3:09 from the snap to uphold a non touchdown. So it does take minutes still to review plays, not seconds.

Excited for the halftime show? Because that's all it delayed.

 

[Pots]

The Bears Packers review just took 3:09 from the snap to uphold a non touchdown. So it does take minutes still to review plays, not seconds.

It was also a very close play that benefited from a review even if the call stood.

 

[Chaka]

The Bears Packers review just took 3:09 from the snap to uphold a non touchdown. So it does take minutes still to review plays, not seconds.

and it was worth it. I wish they could have reviewed many of the terrible penalties being called in that game. This officiating crew has been terrible, some of the worst I have ever seen.

 

[Leonidas]

The Bears Packers review just took 3:09 from the snap to uphold a non touchdown. So it does take minutes still to review plays, not seconds.

and it was worth it. I wish they could have reviewed many of the terrible penalties being called in that game. This officiating crew has been terrible, some of the worst I have ever seen.

Just another case of an officiating crew being bought by one of the teams. Green Bay CLEARLY owned the officials today. Period. There is no other possibility.

it's a ####### disgrace and THAT is what will make people stop watching.

 

[Chaka]

The Bears Packers review just took 3:09 from the snap to uphold a non touchdown. So it does take minutes still to review plays, not seconds.

and it was worth it. I wish they could have reviewed many of the terrible penalties being called in that game. This officiating crew has been terrible, some of the worst I have ever seen.

Just another case of an officiating crew being bought by one of the teams. Green Bay CLEARLY owned the officials today. Period. There is no other possibility.it's a ####### disgrace and THAT is what will make people stop watching.

Not true at all GB got two or three terrible calls against them in the 1st quarter, including the B.S. unnecessary roughness on a Cutler scramble.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

How is that different than what we have now?

You mean full-time professional refs vs. the six-figure earning lawyers who do this on weekends and in their spare time for kicks that we have now?

You don't see the difference?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

How is that different than what we have now?

Is that a serious question? The current refs do it part-time as a second job, and cannot be reprimanded for poor performance during the season. Did you miss that whole lockout thing?

 

[Gawain]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

How is that different than what we have now?

Is that a serious question? The current refs do it part-time as a second job, and cannot be reprimanded for poor performance during the season. Did you miss that whole lockout thing?

For those who believe the refs were "bought," the current system is much more resistant to corruption than a bunch of guys who make less money a year, have less to lose outside of the league if accused of corruption and have reputation in another profession to worry about. I also don't think that the NFL refs are worse than the other leagues that have full-time officials.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

How is that different than what we have now?

Is that a serious question? The current refs do it part-time as a second job, and cannot be reprimanded for poor performance during the season. Did you miss that whole lockout thing?

For those who believe the refs were "bought," the current system is much more resistant to corruption than a bunch of guys who make less money a year, have less to lose outside of the league if accused of corruption and have reputation in another profession to worry about. I also don't think that the NFL refs are worse than the other leagues that have full-time officials.

I get the point about hiring guys that are already wealthy to make it easier to resist bribes.

But you make it a desirable job that pays well, and you won't have that problem either. Won't be worth the risk.

I couldn't agree less with your last point. I think the NFL clearly has the worst officiating of any major sport. You can't watch a single game without any fan complaining about the horrific officiating, and it seems to effect the outcome of the game far too often compared to other sports.

 

[Gawain]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

How is that different than what we have now?

Is that a serious question? The current refs do it part-time as a second job, and cannot be reprimanded for poor performance during the season. Did you miss that whole lockout thing?

For those who believe the refs were "bought," the current system is much more resistant to corruption than a bunch of guys who make less money a year, have less to lose outside of the league if accused of corruption and have reputation in another profession to worry about. I also don't think that the NFL refs are worse than the other leagues that have full-time officials.

I get the point about hiring guys that are already wealthy to make it easier to resist bribes.

But you make it a desirable job that pays well, and you won't have that problem either. Won't be worth the risk.

I couldn't agree less with your last point. I think the NFL clearly has the worst officiating of any major sport. You can't watch a single game without any fan complaining about the horrific officiating, and it seems to effect the outcome of the game far too often compared to other sports.

In baseball, you see managers ejected because they disagree with the officiating. In basketball, you see coaches T'd up for arguing with the refs. When was the last time you saw a football coach pick up a 15 yard penalty for disagreeing with the officials? (Jayrod's high school game doesn't count.)

 

[ConnSKINS26]

My only problem with it is that the refs use it as a crutch sometimes. Instead of making the right call on the field, they'll opt to make no call and let the replay booth override them (on scoring plays and to's) or let a coach challenge it.

Otherwise, replay is definitely helpful. Even with all the minutia debating what is and isn't a catch, we get obvious calls that were missed right. What we really need are full time referees that are graded on performance and continually train throughout the year for each situation.

How is that different than what we have now?

Is that a serious question? The current refs do it part-time as a second job, and cannot be reprimanded for poor performance during the season. Did you miss that whole lockout thing?

For those who believe the refs were "bought," the current system is much more resistant to corruption than a bunch of guys who make less money a year, have less to lose outside of the league if accused of corruption and have reputation in another profession to worry about. I also don't think that the NFL refs are worse than the other leagues that have full-time officials.

I get the point about hiring guys that are already wealthy to make it easier to resist bribes.

But you make it a desirable job that pays well, and you won't have that problem either. Won't be worth the risk.

I couldn't agree less with your last point. I think the NFL clearly has the worst officiating of any major sport. You can't watch a single game without any fan complaining about the horrific officiating, and it seems to effect the outcome of the game far too often compared to other sports.

In baseball, you see managers ejected because they disagree with the officiating. In basketball, you see coaches T'd up for arguing with the refs. When was the last time you saw a football coach pick up a 15 yard penalty for disagreeing with the officials? (Jayrod's high school game doesn't count.)

I don't think I'm going to use the fact that NFL coaches are resigned to the terrible refs, and know arguing with one won't get them anywhere, as a point in favor of the NFL's officiating.

 

[ghostguy123]

How bout when they replay it rather than take 45 seconds explaining everything they can just say either a catch or not, TD or not, fumble or not. And move the F on.

No need to explain how the ball carriers wrist was at a 37 degree angle but his left knee blocked the view of his right knee but his forhead touched the ground but he was not touched so the ground is allowed to cause the fumble and blah blah bhlah........!!!!

Just say it was a fumble and lets go!! I am fine with them reveiwing to get it right, but that crap is no necessary

 

[Insein]

How bout when they replay it rather than take 45 seconds explaining everything they can just say either a catch or not, TD or not, fumble or not. And move the F on.

No need to explain how the ball carriers wrist was at a 37 degree angle but his left knee blocked the view of his right knee but his forhead touched the ground but he was not touched so the ground is allowed to cause the fumble and blah blah bhlah........!!!!

Just say it was a fumble and lets go!! I am fine with them reveiwing to get it right, but that crap is no necessary

Very few go into detail. Most do exactly what you are asking for.

 

[Godsbrother]

Get rid of it.

Just look at Percy Harvin's TD run earlier this season... stepped out of bounds... obvious to all watching on TV. Bad enough the ref right there looking at the play missed it, but all the technicians in the NASA-caliper replay center in NYC missed it to? It doesn't work. Still have these horrendously bad calls even with the technology.

I know I am going to sound like an old fart but the game watching experience was better without it.

 

[Godsbrother]

Replay has runined the human emotion and element of the game, analyzing catches in super slow mo is not how the game is played on the field and not how a human being sees a play.

Its a joke. Its destroyed the game. I dont care what anyone thinks...and this BS " we want to get it right".

The game is played on the field not in a replay booth.

Replay using just the coaches challenge and in the last 2 minutes was fine. What they are doing now is a complete joke and again has really taken the thrill of a big play out of the game. Every TD, every turnover, its out of hand.

Horrid.

I agree with this post but never like rules that change in the last 2 minutes.

 

[Insein]

Get rid of it.

Just look at Percy Harvin's TD run earlier this season... stepped out of bounds... obvious to all watching on TV. Bad enough the ref right there looking at the play missed it, but all the technicians in the NASA-caliper replay center in NYC missed it to? It doesn't work. Still have these horrendously bad calls even with the technology.

I know I am going to sound like an old fart but the game watching experience was better without it.

I think the commercials are more responsible than the replays. We get a PAT, then commercial, then kickoff, then commercial and then finally after about 10 minutes of inactivity, the other team takes the field.And worst is when that all happens right before a 2 min warning. So all of the above but add, run 1 play, commercial.

 

[chinawildman]

You'd think that technology has advanced to the point where they can make a ball that can determine "control" by the amount of pressure applied to it or something...

 

[Insein]

You'd think that technology has advanced to the point where they can make a ball that can determine "control" by the amount of pressure applied to it or something...

They still use two sticks tied together by a 10 yard chain to measure. So don't hold your breath.

 

[Leonidas]

You'd think that technology has advanced to the point where they can make a ball that can determine "control" by the amount of pressure applied to it or something...

They still use two sticks tied together by a 10 yard chain to measure. So don't hold your breath.

That's what I'd use. It's going to be the same length every time, it's not overly expensive, is extremely unlikely to break during use, requires no batteries, won't get a virus...

 

[Insein]

You'd think that technology has advanced to the point where they can make a ball that can determine "control" by the amount of pressure applied to it or something...

They still use two sticks tied together by a 10 yard chain to measure. So don't hold your breath.

That's what I'd use. It's going to be the same length every time, it's not overly expensive, is extremely unlikely to break during use, requires no batteries, won't get a virus...

But its still held on the field by human beings who get run over routinely by the players. Its not an exact science when it comes down to inches.

 

[Hooper31]

I agree with Belichick. There should be expanded replay. Let the coaches challenge any play, penalties included. Just limit like it currently is (only two per game) and lets make the game better. The games won't be any longer and we can start to fix the enormous mistakes that happen on personal fouls and pass interference.