SoutheasternOhioPreps.com

I used to think that replay would be a good thing for football. After seeing replay in action, I wish it would go away. There are just too many instances in which it doesn't work. Even with slow motion, there are too many plays that just can't be decided definitively. For me, that means the system is just as "hit and miss" as the officials on the field. If that's the case, I think replay should be scratched.

The type of play that seems most affected by replay is the "catch/no catch". It's as if the player making the catch must have total control until he hands the ball to an official or it's ruled incomplete. For example, I saw a play last night in which the receiver seemed to make a catch in the endzone. He had control, then got one foot down and then his other foot hit out of bounds. All the while, he still had control. Then, a defender was able to rip the ball loose before both players hit the ground. The play was ruled incomplete. By rule, the player must have control while having one foot inbounds. That happened. After his other foot touched out of bounds, the play is over and should have been a catch, but wasn't. It just seems like the one play that gets the most attention is this type play. I think that replay has caused the player to maintain possession much longer than the actual rules insist.

I agree!

I saw that play and the announcers made the same comment. There was also a long run after a catch that that you couldn't see the player going out of bounds and he was ruled out of bounds. Many announcers are saying they can not see a reason to over turn a call and it gets over turned. The system is not perfect and at times it really slows down the game and stops momentum.

I AGREE, IT HAS IT'S FAULTS . BUT I'VE SEEN SO MANY PLAYS. THAT COULD HAVE NEVER BEEN CAUGHT BY THE NAKED EYE, AND BARELY WITH REPLAY. PLAYERS ARE VERY SLICK. SOMETIMES IT DOES NOT WORK, BUT FOR THE MOST PART I'M SOLD. HECK, ANY GAME CAN BE A GAME OF THE DAY NOW, ---------EXAMPLE. UL MONROE OVER ALABAMA. WHAT IF THAT CAME DOWN TO A SINGLE, DISPUTED PLAY, AND NO REPLAY.

The NFL game between the Browns and Ravens proved once again the replay system doesn't work. Sure, the officials got the call right but no thanks to replay; it's not a reviewable situation.

BlindWhiteHat wrote:The NFL game between the Browns and Ravens proved once again the replay system doesn't work. Sure, the officials got the call right but no thanks to replay; it's not a reviewable situation.

ESPN is saying that it will be a reviewable situation next year. I agree it was the refs who got the call right. Just wondered why it took so long to come up with the decision.

BWH, I also saw the play you are refering to and I don't think the player ever had complete control of the ball and that's why it was ruled incomplete.

As for the Browns field goal, I heard it explained on one of the NFL postgame shows that review wasn't used in that decision, but that one official had said it was good and one said it was no good. They said the official that was saying it was good was adamant in his standing that it was good and the other just wasn't as sure, so they decided to go with the official who said it was good.

I do agree with you though that replay needs to be reevaluated because it just isn't working. Take for example the OSU/Illinois game where the first TD for Illinois never should have happened because it was a fumble on the long run, but the official in the booth never stopped play to review it.

I think they need to make it more uniform. They replay plays that dont need it then when a play that should be replayed happens they dont do it.

i think its saving football because the refs are getting worse at the calls that need to be made


this protects the refs and the fans from getting to upset and turing off the game or leaving

I think replay makes it tougher on the officials on the field. They just seem to be more tentative with the current system knowing that replay MAY save them if they miss a call.

Rhiannon, the reason I think it took so long is the 2 officials under the goalpost disagreed. The one on the right who signalled "no good" seemed sure it was "no good" but based on his body language, I think the other official disagreed. What I think happened was this. I think the officials talked about it, then the referee went to check with replay. I'd say the replay official told him that it wasn't reviewable but you better call it a good kick or you will have refereed your last game.

I just think replay is hyped as such a great system but it has too many flaws. It gives the impression that it will "get the call right" and that's all people want. The problem is that I don't think replay gets the call right enough to make it worth the trouble. I say do away with it if the system can't get better.

GO BROWNS!

In my opinion, the only reason we have it is because there are now 27+ cameras in every stadium. This, coupled with enhanced replay technology, exposes the flaws in officiating like never before! Now that fans have access to this "hindsight" they are clammoring for correct calls!

I say, the game is coached by humans, played by humans, lets let it be officiated by humans!

p.s. In real time I mean!

Replay HAS to help eliminate the opportunity for officials to "fudge" for friends or money.

TheMalteseFalcon wrote:Replay HAS to help eliminate the opportunity for officials to "fudge" for friends or money.

That post is just idiotic. Some people need to get over all the conspiracy theories.

scrap it my goodness 6 and 7 man crews are there to call the game.