djvh@drutx.UUCP (VanHandelDJ) (12/29/84)
I think it would be a good idea to use the replays for officiating. Coaches could appeal a judgement call a set number of times per game, just like they now use time-outs. An official could be stationed in a booth away from the playing area; he'd make the final decision. I really do think that this would keep the delays down, and only using the replays a small number of times per game would make the delays worthwhile as only the most highly disputed calls would be affected by the replays.
2141smh@aluxe.UUCP (henning) (01/01/85)
**** **** From the keys of Steve Henning, AT&T Bell Labs, Reading, PA aluxe!2141smh > I think it would be a good idea to use the replays for officiating. > Coaches could appeal a judgement call a set number of times per game, > just like they now use time-outs. An official could be stationed in a > booth away from the playing area; he'd make the final decision. ... Sports is a game and not a science. Granted, it is a well paying and heavily wagered game, but it is played by rules which say that human judgement as well as human skill will declare the results. To try to make a computer game out of it seems silly. Imagine, "game canceled on account of technical difficulty" or "cameraman's timeout". If you want to make good use of cameras, put them in the doctor's offices or on the highways with police officers watching. Let's keep big brother out of the stadiums. If the leagues want to use replays to determine the employment status of referees, umpires, judges, etc. that is fine, but not to replace them.