Football Reviews.

[lighthouse]

Let's discuss this some. It seemed to me that every fumble, and/or close play, was "under review," more often in the bowl games. Most of the time there was an official right there, in position to make the call. A few calls were reversed, but most reviews upheld the decision on the field.

I don't think there will ever be a camera angle that will give us a better view of a play that would be better than the officials view who is just acouple of feet away. I guess I'm afraid we are in theprocess of taking away the human element of officiating, and moving to some form of mechanical officiating.Wwhat do you guys think.

[DenCat]

I think it has to do with officials are more apt to call it a fumble so it can be reviewed. If an official calls it down by contact, there can be no review(if I'm correct).I don't thinkit's right, butit does seem to be the waythe game is heading.

[matt57]

I can see what your saying. but, imo this is needed. look at how badly oklahoma got hosed against oregon WITH instant replay. i think the officials are great and the accuracy rating is probably higher than anyone would guess. but, with so much at stake in college football you have to make sure the right calls are made. i don't wanna take the human element out of it either. but, when a season can be made or broken on just one mistake, replay is a pretty good safety net.

also, i'm opposed to instant replay in any of the other sports. i just think there is so much going on in football with 22 players in motion @ one time.

[DenCat]

I didn't mean to insinuate I'm against instant replay. I am for it. I was trying to point out, IMO, officials are going to call more fumbles just so the play can be reviewed. If they call a player down by contact, the play cannot be reviewed further. At least, that is the way I understand the rule.

[GeorgiaBlue]

I have stated time and time again that instant replay is bad for the game.

Officials no longer are allowed to make the call they see - they have to make the call that can be reviewed. If they see the runner down - and then a half second later the ball pops out - they can't rule it down.

Instant replay makes officials look clueless - not better. It makes them hesitant and not confident.

Coaches make mistakes, players make mistakes - but why in the world are officials not allowed to make mistakes?

[lighthouse]

GeorgiaBlue wrote: I have stated time and time again that instant replay is bad for the game.

Officials no longer are allowed to make the call they see - they have to make the call that can be reviewed. If they see the runner down - and then a half second later the ball pops out - they can't rule it down.

Instant replay makes officials look clueless - not better. It makes them hesitant and not confident.

Coaches make mistakes, players make mistakes - but why in the world are officials not allowed to make mistakes?

That's my point exactly. When the game is played and coached by robots or computers, then use The same to officiate it. Until then, use live officials. Any coach of any team would take 95% or better any game.

[matt57]

you guys are thinking of NFL rules. in the NCAA every single play is reviewed.

[lighthouse]

I'm thinking of college rules. You're right, every play is reviewed but what's happening is when there's a turn-over, the officials allow the play to continueand don't make the call because they know it will be reviewed.

[sojourner]

lighthouse wrote: I'm thinking of college rules. You're right, every play is reviewed but what's happening is when there's a turn-over, the officials allow the play to continueand don't make the call because they know it will be reviewed.
Until Kentucky and the other non-powers get a fair shake on referee calls I say stay with instant replay.

[gerntz]

lighthouse wrote: Let's discuss this some. It seemed to me that every fumble, and/or close play, was "under review," more often in the bowl games. Most of the time there was an official right there, in position to make the call. A few calls were reversed, but most reviews upheld the decision on the field.

I don't think there will ever be a camera angle that will give us a better view of a play that would be better than the officials view who is just acouple of feet away. I guess I'm afraid we are in theprocess of taking away the human element of officiating, and moving to some form of mechanical officiating.Wwhat do you guys think.

I oppose replays because I like the human element & maintaining the flow of the game.

But just because an official is close doesn't mean he can see when the ball comes out vs. when the body touched the ground. They don't get catch/no catch calls right on the sideline on occasion when no other players are around & they can see the receivers hands. But so what?

[lighthouse]

gerntz wrote: lighthouse wrote: Let's discuss this some. It seemed to me that every fumble, and/or close play, was "under review," more often in the bowl games. Most of the time there was an official right there, in position to make the call. A few calls were reversed, but most reviews upheld the decision on the field.

I don't think there will ever be a camera angle that will give us a better view of a play that would be better than the officials view who is just acouple of feet away. I guess I'm afraid we are in theprocess of taking away the human element of officiating, and moving to some form of mechanical officiating.Wwhat do you guys think.

I oppose replays because I like the human element & maintaining the flow of the game.

But just because an official is close doesn't mean he can see when the ball comes out vs. when the body touched the ground. They don't get catch/no catch calls right on the sideline on occasion when no other players are around & they can see the receivers hands. But so what?

Good post! As long as humans are playing the game, let humans officiate it. There has never been a perfect game called at any level in any sport, and we've all had a good time being fans.

[Brian McCat]

I think that Instant Replay in college football is an excellent idea. It benefits teams like Kentucky, for various reasons.

Itcan virtually be a built-in time out that rests your players, especially teams that are thinner on talent.

It gives the officials a chance to get it right.

Last, teams that tradionally don't get the calls because a Tennessee or Florida SHOULD beat Kentucky in an official's mind. Instant replay can reverse a call that is slanted toward the traditionally "better" team.

[lighthouse]

Brian McCat wrote: I think that Instant Replay in college football is an excellent idea. It benefits teams like Kentucky, for various reasons.

Itcan virtually be a built-in time out that rests your players, especially teams that are thinner on talent.

It gives the officials a chance to get it right.

Last, teams that tradionally don't get the calls because a Tennessee or Florida SHOULD beat Kentucky in an official's mind. Instant replay can reverse a call that is slanted toward the traditionally "better" team.

Brian, I'm not disagreeing with you at all, but a built-in time out can also be a momentum changer. Because officials allow a fumble or interception to continue, the review time also gives the other team to get their defense set. Of course, it depends on whether your team fumbles or recovers. Also I've seen on this board that fans still believe UK gets the shaft even in the review booth.