Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Official Lions studs and duds
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 639234" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p>There is no going back to the era before reviews but there has to be a limit on what can be reviewed: For example, the ability to review any passing play to see if a holding penalty occurred that wasn’t called would be impractical. No one is calling for that but the point is we have to accept some human error. Also "more important" nationally broadcast games, as opposed to a noon game between division cellar dwellers, have more cameras available to review. So we also have to accept some "unfairness". And that’s OK because over the course of a season bad or absent calls should generally even out. </p><p></p><p>I think defining a catch so it is more in line with common sense and the tradition of the game would have a bigger impact on the game than tinkering with reviews but I do have a couple of suggestions regarding the review procedure since both can be accomplished. I would suggest two changes to the review process: (1) Disallow slow motion replays for the official doing the review. The game doesn’t happen in slow motion and of course the officials on the field don’t have the benefit of it. IMO the object of reviewing plays should be to eliminate obviously incorrect calls. If it doesn’t look like a call should be reversed in real time after looking at it multiple times from different angles, it’s not <em>obviously</em> incorrect. (2) Put a time limit – perhaps one minute - on the reviewing official. If he can’t decide after looking at 10 or more replays, the play should stand. (The only exception would be technical problems that delay replays.) It would mitigate the problem of the officials being indecisive that Mondio is talking about and it would speed up the game. Putting these changes in effect may persuade the leauge to allow more kinds of plays – or number of plays - to be reviewed because of the time limit.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 639234, member: 4300"] There is no going back to the era before reviews but there has to be a limit on what can be reviewed: For example, the ability to review any passing play to see if a holding penalty occurred that wasn’t called would be impractical. No one is calling for that but the point is we have to accept some human error. Also "more important" nationally broadcast games, as opposed to a noon game between division cellar dwellers, have more cameras available to review. So we also have to accept some "unfairness". And that’s OK because over the course of a season bad or absent calls should generally even out. I think defining a catch so it is more in line with common sense and the tradition of the game would have a bigger impact on the game than tinkering with reviews but I do have a couple of suggestions regarding the review procedure since both can be accomplished. I would suggest two changes to the review process: (1) Disallow slow motion replays for the official doing the review. The game doesn’t happen in slow motion and of course the officials on the field don’t have the benefit of it. IMO the object of reviewing plays should be to eliminate obviously incorrect calls. If it doesn’t look like a call should be reversed in real time after looking at it multiple times from different angles, it’s not [I]obviously[/I] incorrect. (2) Put a time limit – perhaps one minute - on the reviewing official. If he can’t decide after looking at 10 or more replays, the play should stand. (The only exception would be technical problems that delay replays.) It would mitigate the problem of the officials being indecisive that Mondio is talking about and it would speed up the game. Putting these changes in effect may persuade the leauge to allow more kinds of plays – or number of plays - to be reviewed because of the time limit. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
Emur
SudsMcBucky
Krabs
Packer Fan in SD
Latest posts
2024 3rd round #88 MarShawn Lloyd RB
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
11 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Packers Hire New Defensive Coordinator: Jeff Hafley, formerly Head Coach, Boston College
Latest: Heyjoe4
33 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Breaking Down the NFC North, 2024
Latest: Krabs
Today at 6:41 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
I had This Nightmare
Latest: Calebs Revenge
Today at 6:32 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Kentucky Derby Day!
Latest: weeds
Today at 5:54 AM
All Other Sports
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Official Lions studs and duds
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top