Instant Replay / VAR - No Slow Mo, only game speed?

[kugrz98]

I was at the Ohio Sate vs. Clemson game and there was the huge play on a non-catch fumble call. I've since watched the replay, and both in person and watching the game, in real-time, I thought it wasn't a catch. However with the benefit of slowing things down, I thought it was a catch, and fumble.

What should replay be used for? Clear and obvious mistakes to the naked eye in real-time, or super slow mo with six different camera angles?

My wife texted me after the play that there was some discussion by Chris Fowler, Kirk Herbstreit and their official in the booth that perhaps replay should be done in real-time.

I know in soccer it's becoming a huge controversy with the introduction of replay, VAR. Calls are being made within mere inches for offsides, and slows down the flow of the game. Then when you think that a call should be clearly made one way or another, they leave a "gray" area, for "clear and obvious" mistakes, which the application of using that statement has not been "clear and obvious" to most.

What's the solution? 10-20 clock in game speed only, with slow-mo, otherwise the call on the field "stands"? Or do you like how it's currently operated?

 

[GrayOnGray]

Do away with replay all together.

 

[SDCoug]

Do away with replay all together.

Agree. Get rid of it or set a 30 second time limit (or quicker). Anything egregious could be overturned and if it can’t be figured it out immediately then let the call on the field stand.

 

[kougkurt]

If you are going to have replay, take all the time you need; use super slo mo
If you are going to use replay, get the call right or don’t use it at all.

 

[couginphx]

I'm in favor of the spirit of replay, which is to correct obvious errors, I don't like the 5 minute, lets look at 14 different angles and go frame by frame on very close calls. This goes for all sports.

I like the idea of they get 30 seconds or to see 3 replay angles once each, if its not clear and conclusive quick, then lets not waste time.

I like the idea of giving coaches free reign to challenge, but keeping it limited to two per game. Want to challenge a hold call, go for it. Don't like that roughing the QB call, throw your flag. Maybe instead of losing the timeout, you challenge and it gets upheld it becomes a 10 yard penalty. I'd also make very clear to coaches, particularly for subjective calls, we have 30 seconds to review this, if we don't think it is conclusive in that time, then it stands and we move on.

 

[couginphx]

I'd add at the professional level at least, they need to hire full time officials and have them training all week, also some younger guys in semi-athletic shape as well. I'm 41, my vision is a little more blurry, my brain reacts a tick slower, etc. than in my 30's. Heck I'd love to see WSU add a "Athletic Official Major" to people who would want to pursue it, teach them rules of multiple sports, how to look at individual plays, work with a crew, get a job in one of these leagues, spirit and intent of rules, etc. I think you could see a lot of college age kids who want to stay involved with athletics pursue this.

 

[metprof]

I'd like Woody's input before I comment.

 

[Suudy]

I'd add at the professional level at least, they need to hire full time officials and have them training all week, also some younger guys in semi-athletic shape as well. I'm 41, my vision is a little more blurry, my brain reacts a tick slower, etc. than in my 30's. Heck I'd love to see WSU add a "Athletic Official Major" to people who would want to pursue it, teach them rules of multiple sports, how to look at individual plays, work with a crew, get a job in one of these leagues, spirit and intent of rules, etc. I think you could see a lot of college age kids who want to stay involved with athletics pursue this.

This. At the college level, at least FBS, the officials should be full-time employees with rigorous off season training (book and film study, on-field practice, etc), as well as strict requirements to gain access and remain qualified. For the billions of dollars at stake every season, frankly I'm shocked this isn't already the case. It seems the NFL cares enough about the quality of their officials to provide this kind of framework, I can't image the opposition to this. Make them NCAA employees, rather than conference employees, and eliminate the perceived bias for non-league games. It's a lot harder to claim one is homered if the official works games other than SEC or P12 games week-in and week-out.

And the suggestion of an officiating major is a good one. There are tons of opportunities for real-life officiating experience at any university, both from the youth level, through local junior and senior high schools, intramurals, summer AAU/Legion/Little League, etc. Combine the on-field experience with having the students work through book and film training (for multiple sports) and even the day-to-day stuff such as assigning, pay, dealing with conduct reports, etc. The way it works now is kind of like apprenticeships with some pretty poor training and supervision. I think this could significantly help improve at least the initial quality of officials.

 

[Fab5Coug]

I've always wondered why the officials on the field get the benefit of the doubt. We've got a dozen different camera angles and can go frame by frame, yet we give the benefit of the doubt to the guy on the field, watching 5 different things at once, obstructed by a bunch of 300 pound guys running 100 mph. Why the need for "clear and indisputable" evidence. It's not a murder trial. Why not just let the replay official watch the replay, and say, "yup, that looks like a fumble" without even knowing what the official on the field ruled. I have to think they waste a ton of time trying to make absolutely sure the call on the field was wrong, when they could just watch the replay a couple times, and make their best call.

 

[Observer11]

This. At the college level, at least FBS, the officials should be full-time employees with rigorous off season training (book and film study, on-field practice, etc), as well as strict requirements to gain access and remain qualified. For the billions of dollars at stake every season, frankly I'm shocked this isn't already the case. It seems the NFL cares enough about the quality of their officials to provide this kind of framework, I can't image the opposition to this. Make them NCAA employees, rather than conference employees, and eliminate the perceived bias for non-league games. It's a lot harder to claim one is homered if the official works games other than SEC or P12 games week-in and week-out.

And the suggestion of an officiating major is a good one. There are tons of opportunities for real-life officiating experience at any university, both from the youth level, through local junior and senior high schools, intramurals, summer AAU/Legion/Little League, etc. Combine the on-field experience with having the students work through book and film training (for multiple sports) and even the day-to-day stuff such as assigning, pay, dealing with conduct reports, etc. The way it works now is kind of like apprenticeships with some pretty poor training and supervision. I think this could significantly help improve at least the initial quality of officials.

The Pac 12 really should let its referees work their Grid Kids schedule. Not fair to make them choose.

 

[OrangeGravy]

I've always wondered why the officials on the field get the benefit of the doubt. We've got a dozen different camera angles and can go frame by frame, yet we give the benefit of the doubt to the guy on the field, watching 5 different things at once, obstructed by a bunch of 300 pound guys running 100 mph. Why the need for "clear and indisputable" evidence. It's not a murder trial. Why not just let the replay official watch the replay, and say, "yup, that looks like a fumble" without even knowing what the official on the field ruled. I have to think they waste a ton of time trying to make absolutely sure the call on the field was wrong, when they could just watch the replay a couple times, and make their best call.

I like the idea of the replay official going into the review with NO bias to start with. Officials I'm sure by nature don't want to overturn their own guys if they don't have to. It would also be nice if they were a completely separate entity from what ever league they work. Nothing good comes from them being employees of league they're supposed to be impartially doing games for.