Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Reaser wrote:Someone else recently posted the replay system is a "coin flip", which I think is a good way to put it. It can be clear as day and it's still 50/50 with NFL rules, officials and with the people in charge of the replay system.

Before computers, I had a baseball card game (like an APBA knockoff) where you lay out all the defensive positions on this gigantic grid, and the batter would hit the ball to a specific grid coordinate, and then the defensive players would run to that coordinate, etc. Anyway, it took 3 hours to play one game of baseball, but the best part of the game was at any point you could "argue with the umpire" over a call...you would roll the dice, and no matter what happened or what the call was in regards to, there was a chance that with a good dice roll you could have the ump change the call. I think if you combine the time consumption of this baseball card game along with the dice rolling umpire overturn, you get an accurate reflection of today's NFL.

In regards to the specific Cotchery play, when I saw it happen I thought "wow, this is the worst possible play for the NFL". I thought it was a catch, but when the initial ruling is incomplete and there is a point where the ball hits the ground and moves, I expected the refs to go with the original incomplete ruling. I think if Cotchery catches the ball cleanly, this is a non-issue. I also think that this was the correct usage of instant replay..."indisputable video evidence" and so forth.

Bryan wrote:I think if you combine the time consumption of this baseball card game along with the dice rolling umpire overturn, you get an accurate reflection of today's NFL.

Sounds about right.

Cotchery had a terrible game. Exactly on "catches the ball cleanly, this is a non-issue."

Bryan wrote:In regards to the specific Cotchery play, when I saw it happen I thought "wow, this is the worst possible play for the NFL". I thought it was a catch, but when the initial ruling is incomplete and there is a point where the ball hits the ground and moves, I expected the refs to go with the original incomplete ruling.

That's just about exactly what I thought. If you just asked me if he caught the ball, I would've said yes. But given the continual redefinitions of "what constitutes a catch," there was certainly room for debate. And since the original was incomplete, I don't think there was enough in the replay to justify changing it. I'd say the same thing if the original call had been that he caught the ball, too.

Sometimes, in any sport, the calls are just so close that you could make them either way with equal justification, and I think that was one of those times.

Reaser wrote:

JohnH19 wrote:It'll never happen but we can always dream.

Replay has been a detriment

I agree.

Since it's here to stay, I actually think replays in the CFL run much smoother than the NFL, and don't think it's really even close. You see it like that, too, John?

It does run somewhat more smoothly but the CFL took it too far when they made PI and non-PI calls reviewable. Where will it end???

John Grasso wrote:

JohnH19 wrote:It'll never happen but we can always dream.

Replay has been a detriment to every sport that has adopted it. The NHL had it kind of right when it was only used to review questionable goals/non-goals. Now they're reviewing missed offside calls and goalie interference through coach's challenges. It's an absolute mess.

Replay seems to work well in tennis. It also doesn't take a lot of time.

I have to agree.