Replay This: Ditch Instant Replay
In my ongoing attempt to deal with the critical issues of our day ...
After considering this for a long time, I've come to the conclusion that the NFL should do away with the instant replay for officials. You heard me.
In the Pittsburgh - Baltimore game of December 14, 2008, the game was decided on an official review and the overturning of a call made on the field. With less than a minute left in the game, Steelers receiver Santonio Holmes (Go Bucks!) caught what looked like a touchdown pass to give his team the lead. But while his feet were in the endzone and he clearly had caught the ball, when he came down the ball landed just short of the goal line. The two officials who were looking right down the goal line ruled that the ball should be marked on about the 6-inch line - short of a touchdown. The rule is that the ball has to cross the plane of the goal line. Two officials looking right at it ruled that it hadn't done so.
The play was reviewed automatically since there were under 2 minutes to play in the game. Now, the standard for overturning the call on the field is that there must be "indisputable video evidence" that leads to a different conclusion than what has been ruled in the game. Of course, the definition of "indisputable video evidence" is itself in dispute. The replays indicate that MAYBE the tip of the ball touched the plane of the goal line. But it certainly isn't indisputable. And if what you've got on video is a "maybe" weighed against the two officials who were looking directly at it, then it seems to me that the ruling on the field should stand.
To top it off, the referee's explanation of the ruling didn't even mention the ball crossing the plane of the goal line - which was the whole reason for review.
Pittsburgh was awarded the touchdown and thus won the game and might end up claiming home field advantage throughout the playoffs because they won. If the call hadn't gone their way, there was still time to either kick a field goal to tie the game or run a play to go for the win - and Pittsburgh's offensive line and running backs are solid so there's a good chance that play would have been a run into the endzone for that touchdown.
Instead, the game, and perhaps a decisive edge in the playoffs, both hang on a highly questionable use of the instant replay.
This follows two different calls earlier in the season in which the replay official misinterpreted the rule book while making a ruling about a call on the field.
And it comes in the midst of a trend toward NFL officials blowing their whistles to stop a play and then giving each other mystified looks wondering what call they should make until finally one of them makes a ruling just so there's something for the replay official to rule on.
I say to the NFL: Stop it! Review the officials yourselves and fire the ones who get calls wrong. Give your officials tests so that they know what the ding-dang rule book says in the first place. Instant replay has created officials who are tentative, uncertain and mediocre.
Sure, mistakes will occur on occasion. They appear to be happening with the same frequency with instant replay anyway. Let the players play and the officials officiate and hold them all to standards of excellence so that mistakes are minimized.
The game should be won or lost by the players. It should not be muddled, distorted, delayed, slowed down, or decided by the officials.
Call me crazy if you want to (I've been called worse!): Ditch the instant replay rule. We'll all be better off.
After considering this for a long time, I've come to the conclusion that the NFL should do away with the instant replay for officials. You heard me.
In the Pittsburgh - Baltimore game of December 14, 2008, the game was decided on an official review and the overturning of a call made on the field. With less than a minute left in the game, Steelers receiver Santonio Holmes (Go Bucks!) caught what looked like a touchdown pass to give his team the lead. But while his feet were in the endzone and he clearly had caught the ball, when he came down the ball landed just short of the goal line. The two officials who were looking right down the goal line ruled that the ball should be marked on about the 6-inch line - short of a touchdown. The rule is that the ball has to cross the plane of the goal line. Two officials looking right at it ruled that it hadn't done so.
The play was reviewed automatically since there were under 2 minutes to play in the game. Now, the standard for overturning the call on the field is that there must be "indisputable video evidence" that leads to a different conclusion than what has been ruled in the game. Of course, the definition of "indisputable video evidence" is itself in dispute. The replays indicate that MAYBE the tip of the ball touched the plane of the goal line. But it certainly isn't indisputable. And if what you've got on video is a "maybe" weighed against the two officials who were looking directly at it, then it seems to me that the ruling on the field should stand.
To top it off, the referee's explanation of the ruling didn't even mention the ball crossing the plane of the goal line - which was the whole reason for review.
Pittsburgh was awarded the touchdown and thus won the game and might end up claiming home field advantage throughout the playoffs because they won. If the call hadn't gone their way, there was still time to either kick a field goal to tie the game or run a play to go for the win - and Pittsburgh's offensive line and running backs are solid so there's a good chance that play would have been a run into the endzone for that touchdown.
Instead, the game, and perhaps a decisive edge in the playoffs, both hang on a highly questionable use of the instant replay.
This follows two different calls earlier in the season in which the replay official misinterpreted the rule book while making a ruling about a call on the field.
And it comes in the midst of a trend toward NFL officials blowing their whistles to stop a play and then giving each other mystified looks wondering what call they should make until finally one of them makes a ruling just so there's something for the replay official to rule on.
I say to the NFL: Stop it! Review the officials yourselves and fire the ones who get calls wrong. Give your officials tests so that they know what the ding-dang rule book says in the first place. Instant replay has created officials who are tentative, uncertain and mediocre.
Sure, mistakes will occur on occasion. They appear to be happening with the same frequency with instant replay anyway. Let the players play and the officials officiate and hold them all to standards of excellence so that mistakes are minimized.
The game should be won or lost by the players. It should not be muddled, distorted, delayed, slowed down, or decided by the officials.
Call me crazy if you want to (I've been called worse!): Ditch the instant replay rule. We'll all be better off.
Comments