dcm@busch.UUCP (Craig Miller) (12/26/84)
[] (This discussion probably has taken place before here on the net. If so, sorry, but I missed it.) Basically, the question is: should sports officials be allowed to watch the replays in order to make the most `fair' (or right) decisions? This weekend, I saw the St. Louis Blues play the Buffalo Sabres (I think the game was on Sat, Dec 22, but I can't be sure), and saw two times where the replays could have helped the officials. Both times the dispute was whether or not the puck was in the net. The first time, the ensuing ruckus (for lack of a better word) *completely* turned the game around. The second time wasn't as bad, even though to me it was more disputable, but the damage had already been done on the first (anyone who saw the game and disagrees with my feelings on the calls, please reply by mail to me - let's keep that stuff off of the net). In my opinion, if the ref could have watched the replays, he could have made the right calls. Instead, the calls were made on judgement (after only seeing the plays once), and, as was shown in the replay on the first call, the wrong call was made (at least on the first one - the replay showed the puck *clearly* in the net). Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying the officials blew it or anything - the play was just too hard to call, due to the speed of the puck, etc... I imagine most anyone would have called it the same way in the same circumstances. Any discussion at all? My feeling (obviously) is that the replays should be used if at all possible. Of course, this brings lots of other problems. Delay of the game, when to use it, etc... But I feel these things could be worked out, and the number of games decided on the officials' judgement could be cut down immensely. -- Craig Miller ..!ihnp4!we53!busch!dcm The Anheuser Busch Companies; St. Louis, Mo. "Unix(tm): it's not just a job, it's fun."
edtking@uw-june (Ewan David Tempero) (12/27/84)
Of course this applies to all sports. My feeling is that if the replays are easily available ( ie a big screen or maybe a personal monitor for sports like tennis ) then they should use it. How many times do you see the players watching the replays? If they can do it why can't the officials? However these replays are determined by the media so the officials would be at the mercy of what the media choose to show. I know I've wanted to see something again but it wasn't replayed. I can't see the media allowing themselves to be under that controls of the officials. Also there is the possibility that the officials will start to rely on the replays which would ( at least ) slow the games down. Ewan Tempero ...!uw-beaver!uw-june!edtking edtking@washington
clauzon@watarts.UUCP (Cecilia Lauzon) (12/27/84)
<Posted for Carlo Sgro> There is one main problem with replays that cannot be overcome: the fact that some camera angles that are used are misleading. My experience is that, when you have good camera angles and good cameramen, you almost always get good, non-misleading replays. Unfortunately, most television telecasts do not have this. I find a *great* difference between the quality of telecast done by Hockey Night in Canada and those done by others (even CTV's coverage of international hockey). I never have any problem following the puck or using replays on HNIC but the Sabres' games that we get here are something else! Several times, I've seen pseudo-goals in a Sabres game that cannot be definitively called simply because of the camera angles (of course, to the announcers, if it's a Sabres' pseudo-goal, it's in :-)). If this type of quality is characteristic of a money-making telecast, imagine what quality would result from the 'official's replay' angles. I really don't think that it is practical. - Carlo Sgro (formerly of oscvax)
dcm@busch.UUCP (Craig Miller) (12/28/84)
In 2088@uw-june, edtking@uw-june (Ewan David Tempero) says: > How > many times do you see the players watching the replays? If they > can do it why can't the officials? But, sometimes the players can't! Which game was it this last baseball season where a camera man was tossed out of the game for showing a replay to a player? Apparently the umpire didn't like the players seeing his call again. (of course, this may be a rule... I'm not sure...) > However these replays are determined by the media so the officials > would be at the mercy of what the media choose to show. I know True. This may be the big problem. Bad angles, especially those which show the play the way the media wants, is a big problem. > I've wanted to see something again but it wasn't replayed. I can't > see the media allowing themselves to be under that controls of the > officials. Or the officials being under the control of the media... > Also there is the possibility that the officials will start to > rely on the replays which would ( at least ) slow the games > down. In my opinion the delay would be worth it (to a certain extent, of course...). I would think the biggest argument for replays would be that the outcome of sports events should rely on actions by the players, not calls by the officials. Seems to be going more the other way lately, however. Maybe it's about time someone comes up with a way to use replays to make the best calls. There has to be an answer... -- Craig Miller ..!ihnp4!we53!busch!dcm The Anheuser-Busch Companies; St. Louis, Mo. "Head for the mountains... Busssch"
dcm@busch.UUCP (Craig Miller) (12/28/84)
In 8189@watarts.UUCP, clauzon@watarts.UUCP (Cecilia Lauzon posting for Carlo Sgro) writes: > There is one main problem with replays that cannot be overcome: the fact > that some camera angles that are used are misleading. My experience is that, > when you have good camera angles and good cameramen, you almost always get > good, non-misleading replays. Unfortunately, most television telecasts do > not have this. True. This seems to be the biggest fault in using replays. The quality of the replays (especially in an extremely fast sport such as hockey) would greatly affect what each person thinks they see. Maybe if each sport had 'official' views of the action, and there had to be a camera on that view at all times. But, the media wouldn't like that one bit, would they? Maybe the officials' cameras need to be separate from the media cameras... ??? > the puck or using replays on HNIC but the Sabres' games that we get here > are something else! Several times, I've seen pseudo-goals in a Sabres game > that cannot be definitively called simply because of the camera angles > (of course, to the announcers, if it's a Sabres' pseudo-goal, it's in :-)). Yep, different camera angles can show different outcomes alot of the time... But good camera angles almost always show the real play. Too bad we don't see enough really good camera angles. Yeah, I've experienced biased announcers also. When I lived near Boston for a while, I couldn't believe the level of bias that the announcers there had for the Bruins (the Bruins could do no wrong!). I was kinda baffled, but I figured out that the reason I was so surprised is that the announcer I'm used to listening to is Dan Kelly. For those of you who've heard Dan Kelly, you know what I mean. He's does a pretty good job of been impartial, even when he's doing Blues' games. Not to mention he's probably the best hockey play-by-play person in the country. Anyway, there seems to be some definite flaws in the replay idea. Anyone know if any professional sports leagues are working on this now? Anyone know for sure if any of them are seriously interested in it? I'd like to hear about it... -- Craig Miller ..!ihnp4!we53!busch!dcm The Anheuser-Busch Companies; St. Louis, Mo. "Head for the mountains... Busssch"
newman@bgsuvax.UUCP (Tim Newman) (12/28/84)
It is my opinion that replays should never be used in sport. The officials are paid to be on the spot and make (or not make) the calls. Camera angles can be misleading, as was mentioned earlier on the net, and this means that their is no substitute for judgment. The problems with camera angles and camera placement can only mean that more bias will be injected into the games. The officials are trained to be in the best position to make the call and most often they do. Replays would only slow down the game. Replays are also problematic because of the issue about when they should or would be used. Obviously, every time some coach cries about an infraction not being caught it would be impossible to view the replay. Remem- ber that the many angles which would have to be viewed to obtain an objective decision would really slow the game a lot. With the necessity for possible multiple viewings, this could only serve to make the games drag. Hockey in particular is such a great sport because of the almost constant action. Let's learn to accept the judgment, albeit oftimes poor, of the officials. Tim Newman
edtking@uw-june (Ewan David Tempero) (12/30/84)
>>Me.... >> How >> many times do you see the players watching the replays? If they >> can do it why can't the officials? > Craig Miller..... > But, sometimes the players can't! Which game was it this > last baseball season where a camera man was tossed out of > the game for showing a replay to a player? Apparently > the umpire didn't like the players seeing his call again. > (of course, this may be a rule... I'm not sure...) I'm thinking of the stadiums that have big screens showing the game. I don't know what the situation is in this country but cricket games in stadiums with big screens usually have the televised game on the screen. If its the same here then the umpires haven't any choice about who sees what. Ewan Tempero "Oh no, not again" ...!uw-beaver!uw-june!edtking edtking@washington
bruce@godot.UUCP (Bruce Nemnich) (01/04/85)
I caught the game which prompted this discussion while home for the holidays. For those of you who missed it: with Buffalo leading 1-0, St. Louis apparently scored. The goal judge didn't see it, but the replay clearly showed it was in. In the subsequent argument, the Blues were given a bench minor and their coach was ejected. The Sabres scored on the power-play, so it was 2-0 rather than 1-1. Buffalo won 3-2. I wouldn't mind seeing a minor official added whose job was to observe the available replays. His role should probably be that of rendering opinion only at the request of the referee, when the referee is in doubt. Coaches and players could not demand the videoman be consulted, or things could get very slow. But it could actually speed things up in situations like the above. Talk all you want about bad camera angles, but let's face it, a hockey goal judge has a terrible angle to begin with. -- --Bruce Nemnich, Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge, MA ihnp4!godot!bruce, bjn@mit-mc.arpa ... soon to be bruce@tm.arpa