Proposal -- It's Way Past Time to Move Official Reviews to the Booth!
After the mess in East Landfill -- and I do not like to whine about refs except about how long reviews generally take -- I just don't understand why sports leagues assign official reviews to on-the-field refs when there is a much better option. On-the-field refs are stuck with a single small screen, glare (witness the sun screens or cloth covers they sometimes duck under), no rule book for quick consult, and is in the middle of the action (having to jog to the screen, sounds, hostile crowds, standing amongst teams, coaches, etc.) all of which can unconsciously influence review.
A ref in the booth can have multiple large hi-def screens to carefully examine the play from multiple angles at the same time, silence, and a bench book to take a quick look to clarify any rule issues or remind themselves of the applicable burden of proof (incontrovertible evidence the call was erroneous).
Over the years I've watched M games, depending on the stakes and what I have going on in my life, in my iPhone, on my Surface Pro (which has a very high def screen and is approximately the same size as the screen the on-the-field refs have), and in my man cave on my high def LED 52" screen.
Radical differences in experience and my ability to see what is going on. If I was tasked with review, it's a no brainer where I'd go if I wanted to do an adequate job, let alone my best work on which so many people rely and so much $$ has been spent to make the experience special.
As I've mentioned over the years in my intermittent posts, I'm an active trial attorney, and have been so for now thirty years. That means four years of college, three years of law school, regular continuing education (attending and presenting), and phlanx of books at the ready when I'm at work or in trial. Pretty sure I have a lot more training than the refs, but I don't go to trial without my reference books, notes, etc., at hand. And that's not enough. At the top of every single page of every single notepad page, and often on a post-it stuck to counsel table, are short reminders ("Smile", "Be Nice"), and maybe a word or two about the themes which I need to emphasize in some way throughout. Judges do it too-- I've seen judges' sticky notes with only a word or two on them. I've seen judges with their "bench books" which are essentially Cliff Notes to help them make correct in-court snap decisions. Judges have lots and lots of training too. Yet all too often I am required to remind really, really bright judges of the applicable burden of proof on a particular issue (they can differ depending on the circumstances).
If I was a ref, "incontrovertible evidence the call was erroneous" would be on my sticky to make sure I applied the right standard every single time, in-the-booth, with multiple high def screens.
This is not a spilled milk post because Sparty still might have ended up on top if the strip-sack TD had not been reversed. Still, there is a better way to conduct reviews and it's obvious. I accept that bad calls are part of the game, but if we're going to have review, give the refs a better chance to get it right.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:48 PM ^
I'm probably in the minority, but I wish college football would do away with replay reviews, or at least significantly impact their frequency - maybe limit them to only scoring plays and turnovers.
I would prefer to stick with the call on the field - for better or worse - and keep the game moving. Replay reviews kill the momentum for both players and fans, IMO.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:55 PM ^
I still like reviews from the goal of trying to get the call right. However I'd like a clock of say one minute where if you cannot determine the result in that timeframe then the call stands. We don't need reviews that feel like they go on forever.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:36 PM ^
I feel like replays were put in place to have more stops so they can stuff more commercials in to games.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:59 PM ^
Less automatic reviews, more challenges allowed IMO.
Let’s play keep moving on relatively unimportant plays that aren’t worth slowing the game down for, but makes sure the critically important plays are made correctly.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:00 PM ^
I'm aligned. If they're not going to use replay to get it right, why bother.
They should also publish a study every year on all reviews by bucket (confirmed, stands, over-turned) and with metrics on % that were correct. Prove it works 98% of the time, fine. But this game alone was debatably barely over 50%.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:03 PM ^
Well the NFL has gone to booth reviews as the op says in his post. This actually minimizes stoppages. Rarely are there “review timeouts”, instead it’s like a supervisor ref reviewing almost everything and stopping play only if there is a need. For example they watch the replay along with the rest of us sitting at home. If the replay obviously confirms the call, nothing happens, if it is refutes the call, the call is changed immediately most often, or stops play if they need more time to review. I think it works pretty well.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:22 PM ^
I think if it takes longer than a minute to decide, it needs to be deemed inconclusive and the play should stand. I would prefer someone in the booth with a 30 second timer to speed it up even further. I like fixing obvious calls, but the reviews are much too frequent and take way too long.
I agree with the WTKA Roundtable that it's time for professional refs - it has been time for many years. It's needs to be a full time job where they practice throughout the week, receive constant training, and are accountable to their mistakes. This needs to happen soon. There have been a lot of terrible calls this year in college football, and it harms the overall product.
November 4th, 2021 at 5:16 PM ^
"I agree with the WTKA Roundtable that it's time for professional refs - it has been time for many years"
With the gigantic gobs of money flowing around in college football, it's inexcusable that they still rely on insurance salesmen and the like to ref these games.
November 4th, 2021 at 7:45 PM ^
I believe replay is more or less indispensable at this point because the on-field refs are both (1) extremely limited in what they can see on the fly in real time vs the well-positioned high definition cameras and (2) now fully trained to fall back on video review to fix their various screw ups. So, the only good answer to game-changing bad calls is to have really high quality replay officials. Can it be done? Sure it can.
November 4th, 2021 at 9:43 PM ^
Reviews were put in place to reverse obvious missed calls. Now they aren't even sticking to the written rules when they reinterpret plays, and the same refs who lack judgment on the original plays are looking at it again.
I'm convinced that officials in the Big 10, if not beyond, have an anti-Harbaugh bias. I don't think they're intentionally/obviously screwing Michigan, but it comes out in any call that they can find reason to call against Michigan. Someone charted this awhile back, and Michigan doesn't even get a home field officiating advantage like other teams tend to.
This shit isn't the only reason Michigan loses, but it just pops up in every big rivalry game.
November 4th, 2021 at 11:55 PM ^
With how much cheating goes on in college recruiting, I have to believe there is a significant amount of under the table money flowing into refs hands to influence games as well. The teams that pay the most to get the best players are not going to let something like refs stand in the way of their goals.
I’m sure the NCAA would be shocked and appalled to hear such a thing even suggested which tells me it’s happening.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:48 PM ^
I'm probably in the minority, but I wish college football would do away with replay reviews, or at least significantly impact their frequency - maybe limit them to only scoring plays and turnovers.
I would prefer to stick with the call on the field - for better or worse - and keep the game moving. Replay reviews kill the momentum for both players and fans, IMO.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:03 PM ^
Respectfully disagree. I want the call right. If it takes 15 minutes out of my Saturday viewing to make it that way, so be it. I'll just look at it as another commercial break. (Hey, it's less annoying than those Liberty Insurance ads.)
November 4th, 2021 at 3:43 PM ^
Disagree for the fact that you get 15 minute stops and they immediately go to commercial. If they can't figure it out within a minute or so, the call on the field should stand. There is no reason to "review" every play. If the refs on the field are so bad that every play needs reviewed, then they are terrible and that's a different discussion. This reminds me of the MLB. I guy clearly gets to the base before the throw, but he loses contact with it for a millisecond and is called out after the booth zooms in by a thousand and looks at it for 10 minutes. That is stupid. The same with fumbles and spots. If they can't figured it out without staring at it for 10 minutes and zooming in with a camera that can see Mars, the call on the field should stand. Its ridiculous at this point.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:49 PM ^
Pretty sure the on-field officials don’t make the calls on reviews. Those are made by replay officials who are ‘on-site’ but not on the field.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:04 PM ^
Wouldn’t you love to know who the officials were that reviewed and overturned the fumble TD?
November 4th, 2021 at 11:23 PM ^
I’m gonna say the last game was Spartan Bob. He can’t work the clock anymore so he snuck into the replay booth.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:10 PM ^
if you take a tour of the big house, you'll see the replay booth. the door to that booth has more security than any other. it says in giant caution letters "BIG TEN REPLAY BOOTH" or something like that.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:28 PM ^
I thought the giant caution letters read "KEVIN WARREN'S SON'S BOOTH" .
November 5th, 2021 at 11:04 AM ^
Actually it says "FUCK MICHIGAN BOOTH!"
November 4th, 2021 at 2:50 PM ^
It already is
November 4th, 2021 at 2:50 PM ^
There is a technical advisor in the press box who is the one that stops plays and does reviews.
https://bigten.org/news/2004/7/29/Big_Ten_Conference_Football_Replay.aspx
November 4th, 2021 at 8:27 PM ^
Is that still current? The link is dated May 2004. Also, if there is a dedicated person in the booth doing the review then why does the ref stare at the tiny screen on the field?
November 4th, 2021 at 2:50 PM ^
I would like them to show the view that provided indisputable evidence to overturn the calls when they change them. They do this in the VAR reviews for soccer like below.
I'm not saying it wasn't a TD, but was anyone else looking for the pylon view down the goal line on Walker's fumble going into the endzone? For some reason they never showed one on that play, but they showed it on other plays later in the game?
November 4th, 2021 at 2:57 PM ^
Can't wait for that offside rule to get fixed.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:05 PM ^
Just curious: what's wrong with the offside rule?
November 4th, 2021 at 5:02 PM ^
The offside rule should not exist.
It is a reason Americans can't get that interested in soccer.
In every other sport, the entire point is to get a player with the ball behind the defense.
In soccer, that's illegal.
November 4th, 2021 at 6:08 PM ^
Doesn’t hockey have an offsides rule? Can’t an offensive player (in hockey or soccer) have a breakaway that gets him behind all of the defenders?
November 4th, 2021 at 7:58 PM ^
A player in hockey can be behind the defense when the puck is passed, they just can't cross the blue line with both skates before the puck enters the offensive zone.
November 4th, 2021 at 7:26 PM ^
The rule now is that you only have to have an overgrown fingernail further downfield than the most downfield body part of the last defender to be offside. It’s insane. There are sooooo many offside now for a lot of stupid reasons but could easily include that your stride was offset from the defender and your leg was further forward than the opponent’s at the exact moment the ball was kicked.
it used to be you actually had to have daylight between you and the last defender (i.e. fully behind the defender) to be offside.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:07 PM ^
I’d like to see this technology with spotting the ball. So often games are decided by inches yet during the course of a game the refs and their inaccurate spots are losing yards. Don’t even get me started about them trying to identify where a punt or kickoff flies over the sideline. Would it be so hard to put some tech in the ball that can show us it’s location??
November 4th, 2021 at 2:51 PM ^
I believe when review first came to the Big Ten it was a booth review and ref was just on a head set.
I completely agree 2 people in a booth with large screen TV's, the ref can have an ear bud to put in during reviews so he doesn't have to run to the side of the field. Most reviews would happen quickly with hardly no delay to the game. I would rather they review every play but do it quickly most times there would be no delay as ref is only involved if the booth needs more time. What I can't stand is the endless time it takes for most reviews even if it is clear.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:52 PM ^
Conferences are now making fucktons of money, and the idea of "second career" refs is no longer necessary.
Hire full-time refs like the pros do.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:10 PM ^
NFL referees are also part time.
November 4th, 2021 at 6:34 PM ^
won't it still be the same refs? but just pay them a lot more money? or do you think more qualified people will suddenly become refs if full time? it's possible, but i would only expect moderate improvement at best.
November 5th, 2021 at 8:39 AM ^
Agreed. And replay booth should have three officials, and they should have to all three agree to overturn a call, or it stands. And show the evidence when a call is overturned.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:55 PM ^
I'm ok with a rule that would require all video replay reviews in which they overturned a call on the field due to incontrovertible evidence to go to Toronto (ala NHL video review) where the only thing they had to review was whether the local video review correctly applied the standard.
Also, why can't UM get a fair game in EL?
November 4th, 2021 at 4:46 PM ^
LOVE this idea. I am SICK of calls being overturned when they are clearly NOT incontrovertible. To overturn a call should require a second opinion.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:55 PM ^
I would favor some sort of offsite replay review room that would be staffed by a couple of expert-professional replay reviewers who would do all the reviews for conference games as they occur. While this may lead to an occasional delay due to simultaneous review needs, it would hopefully lead to more expert and consistent reviews. There would need to be certain guidelines, such as no replay referee having attended a BIG university, etc.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:15 PM ^
The B1G has a centralized 'command center' for replay reviews in Chicago. But this is the last word I've found about it - and it's from 2016! So I know the B1G has booth reviews and people watching in Chicago, but the guys in Chicago must be eating too many pizzas during wind gusts to worry about overturning bad decisions...
November 4th, 2021 at 4:49 PM ^
Appreciate your comments and link.
November 4th, 2021 at 2:58 PM ^
I mean unfortunately this all a long winded way of saying need more elaborate methods because apparently some humans are too stupid to understand what 100% conclusive means.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:03 PM ^
im lost on one thing... i think theyre good because we've now seen just how many bad calls there truly are... or at least difficult calls that are called incorrectly.
But in the beginning of it - there was a timed reply - 60 seconds or 90 seconds... these replays go on forever and to me, if you cant figure it out in x seconds, it should stop. Somewhere along the way, they dropped that rule. But early on, I recall (i think in the NFL) that the screen went black at a certain point.
Its such a time suck on games... and with overtime rules now, we're gona see 9000...
November 4th, 2021 at 3:49 PM ^
I guarantee that if this rule is ever enforced, the screen will go black two seconds before the replay indisputably proving that the ball was out of Olave's hands before he crossed the goal line for the winning TD. "Sorry, but there's nothing we could do. Our sixty seconds were up before they showed it to us."
November 4th, 2021 at 6:30 PM ^
Yep. Replay is in place to correct calls. If you're going to the time and trouble of trying to review calls, then putting an clock on it runs a very serious risk of, at least some of the time, nullifying the value of the whole process.
I get the frustration with waiting for reviews, but capping the time for review probably just means a few minutes in a average game of 3.5 to 4 hours.
Getting the on field ref out of the review process would probably save almost as much time as he wouldn't need to go to a monitor...
November 4th, 2021 at 7:34 PM ^
I disagree. If there are views to look at, and it's clear, make the call. Calls like last week's should not be turned over. It's a happy medium for those that hate it and those that want the perfect call
November 4th, 2021 at 3:10 PM ^
The better solution would be the replay official gets only a certain amount of looks at it and if needs anymore it is inconclusive period. If you can't tell after 2-3 looks the play is clearly not conclusive.
November 4th, 2021 at 3:20 PM ^
While we are at it, officials don’t get paid if they are shown to have less than a certain amount of accuracy. Teams can send in their errors. Holds all to a standard regardless of personal allegiance. If a certain number of games are rated low, they are gone.
Accountability
November 4th, 2021 at 3:23 PM ^
Why does it seem to take longer for basketball reviews? There have been non-ending reviews where they try to determine if a player's fingernail grazed the ball as it went out of bounds. A time limit is warranted in both sports.