Coaches Challenges

IMO the only league that has solved the challenge mess is MLB.

Clearly they don't overturn anything unless the replay, in a quick review is VERY obvious. If its not the play stands. Very quick and unobtrusive for the most part.

You get the sense that the reviewers watch the replay once and decide. Boom. I like it.

Yeah, but baseball is supposed to be a long, drawn-out affair, which is probably why they took it one step farther and stopped playing the game in 2042

(according to star trek)

Hahaha... yeah.

Everybody seems to harp on BB as taking too long to play.

Actually a football and a BB game are almost the same now. Just a shade under 3 hours.

The difference is that you are now bombarded non stop at the football stadium with music that precludes talk. In baseball you are forced to hear relative silence or actually talk to someone in between plays. Or play on your phone is more likely.

I often ask what is the rush anyway? Maybe we should just have leagues consisting of coin flips.

...I don't know if its related or not but MLB to me seems to place a lot more 'importance' on the officiating personalities than other pro sports...the arguments between managers and umps for example, you rarely if ever see that level of drama in other sports...so I'm wondering if your observation is based on the officiating crew having a high level of ego and they take that to this part of the game as well...replay, watch, decide, respond, boom over and done...

Either way I like that they have clearly decided that replays do not have to reviewed in slow mo several times before making a decision. I like that they decide the validity of the challenge based on a very quick slo mo review seemingly once. If its not OBVIOUS they side with the call on the field. I support that approac in all sports.

At least when there's a challenge in the CFL, it gives the fans at home time to make a sandwich, mow the lawn, pop out to the supermarket, read War and Peace, etc. before play continues.

What chapter are you on?

I'm leaning towards getting rid of challenges altogether in pro sports myself but the quicker they can do it, and yes baseball is quick it seems from what I've seen, and the fewest possible is good in my books.

Keep challenges, but find ways to make them better/more accurate and quicker.

Interesting observation.

no super-slow motion. If you can't tell by normal speed then it was too close to call and it should stand. The only time I would argue that super slow should be valid is on sideline with a foot going out, which they can generally pick up on fast anyways.

For me, it is less about the length of the challenges as opposed to the frequency / ability though. Nothing sucks the life out of the game like waiting after a big play to get excited or not than sitting on your hands to see if there is a challenge coming every time.

Two others, IMO, would be fumble/is-knee-down, and breaking the plane for TDs

not for me...those are kinda the exact ones that I don't agree with....breaking the plane aside. If you need to freeze frame to tell if he was down or note...let it ride. if you need to freeze frame a loose ball 14 times...let it ride. Foot out I get because only one ref really has a good view of that and unless he happens to be a few yards away he can't tell the fine line, but it is pretty easy to on replay.

IMO,

all judgement calls should be only in the refs hands.

only blatant errors should be reversible

video review when used should only take 20 seconds looking at each view once in real time.

And whom/how determines a blatant error? That is supposed to be the intent of instant replay...but it is not.

Anyone watch Nick Kypreos on Sportsnet talking with the panel about reviewing that penalty in last nights Lightning/Caps game? He was basically saying its a crapshoot, if you're going to review that then why not review all sorts of stuff that is borderline where there is no wording to review. He has a point and the CFL should be looking at this.

I'm not a big Kypreos fan but am moreso after watching himself defend himself on this, and he did an excellent job.

Here's what I'm talking about. NHL better get their act together on this because this looks "amateurish" as some say about CFL reffing and interpretions about rules and that.:

Is NHL Just Making Up Rules In The Conference Finals?

Sports these days can get a little bit confusing, even for fans who have spent thousands of hours watching and observing them over the course of decades. Rulebooks are hundreds of pages long, and they continue to evolve, as does the implementation of replay reviews. It can all be a bit much.

That being said, hockey fans who tuned in to Game 4 of the the Eastern Conference finals between the Capitals and Lightning on Thursday night likely saw something that they’ve never seen before.

It came in the middle of the second period, with the game tied at 2-2. Lightning defenseman Victor Hedman whacked T.J. Oshie in the skates as Oshie carried the puck through the Tampa Bay zone. Oshie didn’t fall initially, but after a second he did indeed go down, just as Lightning forward Yanni Gourde was reaching his stick in the area of Oshie’s skates.

Gourde was sent to the box for a two-minute minor penalty. The game headed to a commercial break. That was that. Or so we thought.

When the broadcast resumed, the officials were on the headsets and looking at a video monitor. What could they possibly have been doing?

Well, it turned out they were communicating with someone who informed them that it was actually Hedman’s stick that caused Oshie to go down, not Gourde’s stick. At this time, Gourde was sitting in the penalty box. He had been assessed a penalty.

After the conference, the officials retrieved Gourde from the box and told him he was a free man. They then tracked down Hedman and told him that he’d be spending his next two minutes in the sin bin. ...


The games don't have to be perfected, officiating wise, just entertaining.

As someone who used to watch all the games I can survive the odd blown call or two. But by all means if the refs want to review something let them, just don't leave it in the hands of coaches, who will exploit any advantage they can get. Their job is to win games, not entertain fans.

Agree but leagues need to establish what is reviewable before a season starts and what is not or else you're going to end up what happened in the NHL in this game with the Caps and Lightning. Also reminds me of people phoning into the PGA and said "hey that was agains't the rules what this player did" and then the PGA acts on a phone call from a fan. These sorts of things make a league or PGA look somewhat incompetent or bush.

The problem I have with challenges, fundamentally, if you leave something in that's not necessary or unsure of, you risk it hurting you. So it's better just to cut it.

Watched a game in Ottawa against Montreal that refs had flagged as interference .

It was clear from the opposite side of the stadium this call was terrible . It was reversed . A second time was a fumble which was reversed it was also a terrible ref call .

If there was a clear quality control system to fix these terrible calls which would deter the most loyal fan to continue supporting the team/league I would be all for it but in this game it saved a bad experience at the park .

What I hate is the fishing calls for penalties . This is the error that needs to be removed . It drives myself and other fans batty .

Let them challenge bad calls by refs whether fumbles , penalties called , catches or non catches etc ... but don't allow the fishing for a penalty call .