• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Instant replay

dukediggler

"Well known member"
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Messages
23,644
Reaction score
11,457
Seems to me that a lot of calls get overturned without that elusive "indisputable video evidence.". I think officials should apply a simple test to these situations: "Are people going to be arguing about this replay tomorrow?". If yes, then it's not indisputable and the play should stand as called.

While I'm ranting, there is no circumstance in the world where a 200 pound man will fall on top of a piece of inflated rubber and the rubber won't move a little bit. Just because the ball touches the ground it doesn't mean that the ground helped the catch. Again - INDISPUTABLE is the test. The fact that we are disputing it proves that the ruling should have been upheld.
 
instant replay sux. dump it. slows the game down and often the replay officials get the call wrong anyway.
 
If you're talking about the VT "catch" from last night, I think they absolutely got the call right. I thought it was pretty clear that it was not a catch.
 
any idiot can argue either side of a call. the fact that they are "disputing" it doesn't have any bearing on whether there is indisputable video evidence. anyone who spends time on a message board should know this well.
 
Meh. Disagree with dumping replay altogether. But it is getting ridiculous in many cases. Like calling a missed FG a make, or the ball moved a fraction so it's incomplete. Give me a break. In golf if you zoomed in close enough I bet the ball moves a lot when addressed. In baseball I bet the pitcher moves a fraction of an inch causing a balk if you zoom in close enough. In basketball I bet the pivot foot drags a centimeter causing a walk if you look close enough. The technicality is starting to take away from the game. And the new rules. Can't do this. Can't do that. Can't hit him here. Can't hit him there. I'm just ranting at this point.
 
I didn't realize the NBA had replay now. I was watching the Bulls/Hawks game last night and there was a tipped ball under pressure that was called the Hawks way. Bulls called a timeout and the refs ran over to the monitor. Replay showed technically the ball hit off a Hawks player, but also showed the reason for that was the player was obviously fouled. Happens all the time - contact causes a ball to go out of bounds and the ref doesn't want to call a foul so it stays with the original team.

It cornered the ref into having to reverse the call, and it won the game for the Bulls. Seemed really arbitrary.
 
The TD call for VT should not have been over-ruled. The video evidence was far from being indisputable.
 
I didn't realize the NBA had replay now. I was watching the Bulls/Hawks game last night and there was a tipped ball under pressure that was called the Hawks way. Bulls called a timeout and the refs ran over to the monitor. Replay showed technically the ball hit off a Hawks player, but also showed the reason for that was the player was obviously fouled. Happens all the time - contact causes a ball to go out of bounds and the ref doesn't want to call a foul so it stays with the original team.

It cornered the ref into having to reverse the call, and it won the game for the Bulls. Seemed really arbitrary.

same thing happened in the lakers-cets finals a couple of years ago. odom grabbed the rebound, rondo slapped his arm sending the ball flying, ball was awarded to the lakers. they reviewed it and overturned the call. i believe it was a ~2 point game in the final minute or two, so it was a huge swing. i don't remember which game it was and who ended up winning, mostly because things turned out okay from my perspective. :thumbsup:
 
catch.gif
 
Did anyone see the end of the Wisconsin vs. Michigan State game last night? linky

The scoreboard clock and the arena clock were off by a second or two and the refs went with the scoreboard clock which showed 0:00 before the tying shot was released. So the shot didn't count and the game was over.

I've never seen the clocks to be different but I think in that case (while there are obviously rules on which clock to use) they should have let the shot count and gone to a second OT.
 
rtq, the light on the backboard clearly went on before the shot left the guys hand. it was the proper call; the espn announcers were too dumb to notice that.
 
I'll admit I was only half-watching and in a bar with no audio, so I couldn't really tell what was happening. But I maintain I have no recollection of seeing an instance like this where the clocks were meaningfully different.
 
I'll admit I was only half-watching and in a bar with no audio, so I couldn't really tell what was happening. But I maintain I have no recollection of seeing an instance like this where the clocks were meaningfully different.

Yeah it was a bizarre situation but the refs did release a statement after explaining that the rules state they must go by the clock on the backboard, so that's what they did. And that clock definitely ran out before the shot.
 
Did anyone see the end of the Wisconsin vs. Michigan State game last night? linky

The scoreboard clock and the arena clock were off by a second or two and the refs went with the scoreboard clock which showed 0:00 before the tying shot was released. So the shot didn't count and the game was over.

I've never seen the clocks to be different but I think in that case (while there are obviously rules on which clock to use) they should have let the shot count and gone to a second OT.

26690709-ap_michigan_st_wisconsin_basketball.jpg
 
Not indisputable? You can absolutely see the tip of the ball hit the ground.

That's like the old "if you consider yourself a reasonable person, any doubt you have is reasonable and therefore you must find my client innocent" lawyer argument.
 
That's another point. It's not like he was catching the ball as he hit the ground. He caught it, then landed on the ground and the ball touched the ground. That doesn't mean it was incomplete. I agree it could have been called the other way on the field, BUT IT WASN'T. That's the problem - we are legitimately disputing it so clearly it's not indisputable.
 
Back
Top