This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!
    Dismiss Notice

NCAA - slowly ruining football (rules changes - merged)

Discussion in 'College Football' started by Ohio Steeler, May 31, 2006.

  1. Ohio Steeler

    Ohio Steeler Lets go Bucks and Steelers

    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2463718

     
  2. ant80

    ant80 Think less, feel more.

    I am not sure i agree with the rationale of the coaches challenge. The officials are paid to provide rulings. There must be some sort of a better communications between the review team upstairs and the coaches in the field, to avoid the disaster that was the scUM-Nebraska game. However, what if there are two plays in the game where the rulings on field that could've gone either way? The coach throws the flag on the first play, and is ruled incorrect, and on the second play, there is no review, but replays show evidence in favor of the coach? My point is, if there is reasonable doubt that the ruling was correct, the referees must automatically review it. That is the sole purpose of the review system.
     
  3. BuckeyeNation27

    BuckeyeNation27 Goal Goal USA! Staff Member

    I hate the NFL review system. Every single fumble or catch near the sidelines is challenged by one side or the other. It's ridiculous.
     
  4. ant80

    ant80 Think less, feel more.

    I don't follow the NFL much, but if that is the way it is, I am not for it, but that doesn't affect what I'm trying to say though. Do away with the coach's challenge altogether. Let the referees make a decition on the field whether to review it or not.

    I am a big cricket fan, and that's what they do in cricket nowadays. In close decitions, the umpire signals for the review committee to review the play, or the ball, as it is called. Incorporate that into football. That would solve a lot of things. I definitely don't like this system, where the onus is on the coaches to challenge the referee's decition.
     
  5. strohs

    strohs Go Bucks!

    So is the automatic review still in place also? Or is the only possibility for a review if the coach throws his flag?
     
  6. seems to me it is a correction for the coaches calling a to so the booth can get a second/third/fourth look at the play. allowing one replay per coach isnt going to ruin the game. seems reasonable to me.
     
  7. sandgk

    sandgk Watson, Crick & A Twist

    Very reasonable - But will it stop Lllloyd from whining?
     
  8. BuckeyeNation27

    BuckeyeNation27 Goal Goal USA! Staff Member

    Until you have what happened to pittsburgh against the colts on your hands. one coach will be going for a game tying drive and something will happen. the coach will call for a review because it's his last resort (a last resort that he shouldn't have) and the ref will fuck it up.

    it also changes the way refs call plays. before reviews, refs had balls and made the call based on what he saw. if it was the wrong call....oh well, you got screwed and you have to deal with it. a QB doesn't complete 100% of his passes, and a ref doesn't get 100% of his calls right.
    now with replay, the ref will make the call that the ball really was fumbled because it can be reviewed, but it can't be reviewed if it's the other way around. so lets say he calls that the ball is fumbled knowing that if he's wrong the replay will overturn it....except there is no clear view showing if there was a fumble or not.

    it has a bigger effect than you're giving it credit for.
     
  9. ant80

    ant80 Think less, feel more.

    Good point BN27.

    Also, let's for the moment assume that most coaches instincts are correct whether the play was ruled correct or not. Let's say 80% of the time, when the coaches challenge, the ruling is overturned. Suppose the coach gets it wrong once early in the game, and loses the challenge flag. Later in the game, if there is another questionable call, the coach is screwed. Also with the coaches challenge, there might be more incentive for the reviewers upstairs to wait for the coach to challenge it, rather than challenge it themselves.

    It is the referee's job to get the decition right every time. Of course, it is impossible for them to do so, and that is why technology exists, to increase the possibility of the correct decition. The referees should take a pro-active job, and signal for the review themselves. In fact, they should be allowed to defer ruling until after the review, to account for the point brought out by BN27.
     
  10. jwinslow

    jwinslow A MAN OF BETRAYED JUSTICE Staff Member Tourney Pick'em Champ

    they do not need a coach's challenge.

    What they need is to grow some balls and stop the clock when there is a questionable play... after seeing the replay a few times, if it's obvious it was not as questionable, then get the game running again swiftly.
     
  11. The only reason I see for needing the coaches review is b/c there have been plays that have not been reviewed, b/c teams have came up to the line fast enough and got the play off b4 the replay booth had enough time to view it. Alot of coaches have actually had to waste timeouts b/c of this, so why not give them a challenge, as long as they can do it with in the time of the timeout time, it really isnt that big of a deal, b/c the coach would of taken the timeout anyway.

    As for the bball rule change, I like the change of the timeout call, but when are they allowed to call timeout, if they have both feet on the court and falling out, or just one foot.

    I am still pissed they havent extended the 3 point line and put the little arc to avoid players being underneath the basket trying to get charges and actually getting them.
     
  12. if i had a dollar for everything that changed a sport, id be a rich man. metal woods in golf, then ti drivers, dimples on balls, two piece balls. the forward pass, the evolution of the "hold" the three point line, the lane, the timeline, change from leather to composite balls. on and on. for better or worse id say its better. just my thoughts though.
     
  13. martinss01

    martinss01 blissfully stupid

    add me to the "no thanks" camp. the current system is fine as is. no good will ever come of coaches having the right to challenge. that imo is what made the college system so much better than the pro's. heres to needless and uneducated challenges twice per game.

    :cheers:
     
  14. There is a reason why this has to be put in. The replay booth is just not quick enough sometimes, and a player can got to the coach and say I did fumble that ball and the coach tells the qb to just go up to the line in 5 seconds and snap the ball. Then there is no chance for the team to get a replay. Also there have been technical difficulties where the pager system has failed and they were not able to replay.
     
  15. jlb1705

    jlb1705 hipster doofus Staff Member Bookie

    The problem isn't necessarily that it changes the way officials make calls in itself. Teams and the game will adjust to that eventually. The problem is that officials will begin to rely on replays and challenges enough that they will create more situations than before where replay seems necessary, because they will not make calls with as much authority.

    I don't see why there was a need for a challenge system. The replay system was supposed to based on DVR technology, yet the booth official takes forever to initiate it. I have never seen an instance in a game where I saw a questionable call where I didn't have enough time to rewind on my very own DVR and take a second look at it before the other team lined up for their next play. If all else fails, he has the buzzer - he could signal the referee on the field. I think the real problem is that the booth officials were too timid to do anything because they wanted to keep play stoppages to a minimum so proponents of replay could show critics what little impact it has on the flow of the game. Now, instead of doing things right, they've created a much more disruptive and intrusive system than the initial system ever possibly could have been.
     

Share This Page