The replay system that is currently being used in the NFL, MLB, NBA, and even the NHL, is under constant scrutiny by the media, fans, and even owners and players of the sporting leagues. The main question is whether or not the replay system constitutes as a fair or balanced review process of a human call or play. Does the usage of the replay system affect games and control too much of the outcome, to the point that it becomes cringe-worthy and notably unwatchable because of the delays and sometimes lack of knowledge from the staff using the system?
NFL Instant Replay has changed the way the game is played and the outcome of many games has been decided by the review of video evidence. Seeing the evolution of the game, where before you had …show more content…
Perhaps the video evidence shows one side while the person reviewing the play sees it another way.
Stats tend to show that games are called more correctly now with the system in place, but there are fall backs as well.
A quote from one of the early advocates against the replay system stated, “One predictable complaint was that the process made the game longer and slowed tempo.”(The History of Instant Replay in the NFL ("History of Instant Replay in the NFL | Bleacher Report," n.d.) Therein lies the main problem, the slowing of the game and the lack of tempo it creates.
The first most glaring issue with instant replay is; does the evidence truly support the call or does it overturn the initial call? Past evidence shows that referees still make mistakes even when reviewing a play on the replay monitor, causing some situations where the call is reversed and the game is altered, leaving the losing team and the league office to investigate the incident further. ("Look Back at Replay in the NFL | Krossover," n.d.) This has caused a rift between the league, teams, and fans, which may never come to agreement based solely on the fact that the replay system is still …show more content…
In the past, games were called, won and lost, based completely on the visual evidence and word of the referees.
It was a human interaction with consequences and faults, which is what makes all of us human, and made the sporting event “real”. Now games are controlled by machines, where the outcome can be decided by the evidence of a camera. Leaving fans, players, and teams wondering what might have been if the call was left alone. ("Upon further review: Instant replay takes away from immediacy of sport - NBC Sports | NBC Sports," n.d.)
When we look back on the evolution of instant replay, we can see the many games and lives it has changed based on the outcome of entire seasons of sporting events. Perhaps a team might not have won without a call being reversed, or maybe a team could have maintained momentum and completed a comeback had the instant replay not taken the “air” out of the tempo. The inclusion of a time-clock is one step in the right direction in creating a cohesive and “perfect” replay system that maintains the integrity of the game, while decreasing human error and making it so the outcome is more precise and valid. In the end, replay is here to stay, and we all need to adjust, the same way the system needs to adjust and allow for the flow of the game to
NFL Instant Replay has changed the way the game is played and the outcome of many games has been decided by the review of video evidence. Seeing the evolution of the game, where before you had …show more content…
Perhaps the video evidence shows one side while the person reviewing the play sees it another way.
Stats tend to show that games are called more correctly now with the system in place, but there are fall backs as well.
A quote from one of the early advocates against the replay system stated, “One predictable complaint was that the process made the game longer and slowed tempo.”(The History of Instant Replay in the NFL ("History of Instant Replay in the NFL | Bleacher Report," n.d.) Therein lies the main problem, the slowing of the game and the lack of tempo it creates.
The first most glaring issue with instant replay is; does the evidence truly support the call or does it overturn the initial call? Past evidence shows that referees still make mistakes even when reviewing a play on the replay monitor, causing some situations where the call is reversed and the game is altered, leaving the losing team and the league office to investigate the incident further. ("Look Back at Replay in the NFL | Krossover," n.d.) This has caused a rift between the league, teams, and fans, which may never come to agreement based solely on the fact that the replay system is still …show more content…
In the past, games were called, won and lost, based completely on the visual evidence and word of the referees.
It was a human interaction with consequences and faults, which is what makes all of us human, and made the sporting event “real”. Now games are controlled by machines, where the outcome can be decided by the evidence of a camera. Leaving fans, players, and teams wondering what might have been if the call was left alone. ("Upon further review: Instant replay takes away from immediacy of sport - NBC Sports | NBC Sports," n.d.)
When we look back on the evolution of instant replay, we can see the many games and lives it has changed based on the outcome of entire seasons of sporting events. Perhaps a team might not have won without a call being reversed, or maybe a team could have maintained momentum and completed a comeback had the instant replay not taken the “air” out of the tempo. The inclusion of a time-clock is one step in the right direction in creating a cohesive and “perfect” replay system that maintains the integrity of the game, while decreasing human error and making it so the outcome is more precise and valid. In the end, replay is here to stay, and we all need to adjust, the same way the system needs to adjust and allow for the flow of the game to