Should plays be challenged next year? What's your opinion?
I believe that it is absolutely necessary for reviews and challenges next year, if the league wants to continue to expand and grow as it has in recent years. Nearly all professional sports have instant replays, but why not the CFL? This year it is really beginning to show how needed an instant replay system is. I strongly believe that the CFL should adopt a review-challenge system similar to the NFL as it operates quite efficiently. However, the only downside is the way in which the CFL will implement this type of system with its limited economic funds. Even if it is a half-as*ed effort with not many cameras or camera angles due to economic problems, it is far better than the “referee conferences” that go on now.
Yeah, I totally agree with you esks123.
But, some angles can lie! If they can't have more than 7-8 angles as well as REVERSE angles then we would be doing a diservice to the Teams, players and FANS!
Remember on some of the NFL challenges. 4 views show one thing, but the fifth view shows something different. What is we only have 3 cameras on non TV games and a call gets overturned because that important forth view isn't there.
Unless it can be done properly, (Sigh, the only thing I agree with the NFL) like the NFL. Leave it alone...Don't do a half a$$ed job.
PS I voted no because I prefer the human element, and contrary to some, the mistakes have been minimal and less than last year.
[quote="Sportsmen"]But, some angles can lie! If they canI think its true somewhat, but what about the times in the playoffs that cost teams a trip to the Grey Cup, all that was needed was just another look at the play, that's what happened to the riders a few years ago. I'm still not convinced that the Refs are making better calls.
I think that even if there are only a minimum amount of camera angles, it can only help the refs in making there decision. For example, on the controversial call in the TOR/OTT game, the refs could have had a conference, discussed what they thought, THEN they could go to the video replay and use that to make a decision. If the angles and views provided dont show enough evidence to support the challenge, the refs could make thei own decision as they did during that specific game. So if you understand what im trying to convey, its that the refs could have their conference, watch the replay, then have another conference basing their decision on the replay, and if its inconclusive make their own decision. I don't know, I'm just trying to brainstorm now. Sportsmen- i respect your opinion on the human element and tried to incorporate it here.
I think back to the Jets- Seashawk game (6-7 years ago) where a bad angle ruled a touchdown and eliminated the Seattle team from playoffs. It wasn't untill a hand held local camera angle showd the ball never broke the plane of the goal line. Seattle was eliminated because of a bad replay angle.
I like the conferencing the officials are doing this year. They are talking and getting it right most times. I find if I can park my partisan following at the door and really look objectively, only 2-3 things stick out. And reviewing a lot of the postings that complain, there are a lot of disagreements and rebuttles among the posters themselves. (Example Ottawa Toronto...Some say it was a fumble, some say it wasn't.)
Unfortunately, we'll be arguing officiating until armaggaton.....We'll never be happy!
I've gotta agree with esks123 again today..... man, eskimo fans and rider fans on the same page...... what's the world coming to???
Although it'd be cooler if we could have all the angles, some would be better than none, and if there's nothing that they can see to overturn a call that's made on the field, well, then they can't. But it would at least provide a way to get more of the calls right. There's still always going to be the human element, if nothing else in where the cameras are pointing, plus it still comes down to the judgement of the referee.
They still have to televise all the games tho, or don't they?
I think in fairness to ALL teams, all games have to be televised. Each stadium would have to have the same number of cameras and angles. The reverse angle is crucial, and I'm not sure if all the stadiums have press boxes on both sides of the field. There may have to be some renovations take place during the off season to make this happen.
I guess I tend to either share the same opinion as other people or at least agree to disagree, i'm not that nasty or arrogant... and today I guess im agreeing with a riders fan!
Anyways, i don't know whether or not all the games would have to be televised or not, but even if they do i think there was only 5 or so games this year that weren't televised, so it wouldn't be too much of a problem.
Actually It's true that some angles can lie but the more angles the greater the chance of one lying. I would think that if they had 3 camera that did not agree they would go by the 2 that did agree, but who knows
If is this done right, YES!!!
I do not believe that the NFL uses the TV feeds. They have their own cameras. Lets say they did use the TV feeds, they would still have to have their own production system to capture the feeds, as it would be a challenge to the production team to both do a show and provide the technical back up.
Just look at any stadium that has a big screen, they use both their own porduction truck AND cameras, they do not use the TV feed.
No matter how many angles they have the replay MUST show INDISPUTABLE evidence that the play should be overturned. If no angle shows this then the play stands as the refs called it.
And I do want instant replay. I think some calls are improtant enoguh to the integrity of the game to get right.
So the TV guys just pretty much are taking from the same "basket" of angles, etc? I see.........
Who figures out the percentages on the polls, is it something the site calc's automatically? The geeky nerd type person in me noticed that 83% and 16% don't make 100%, unless there's some abstainers in there.........
For some reason the poll percentages round down no matter what.
There are always instances where camera angles dont prove squat ...hence the call does not get reversed or is upheld....but i think we can all agree on some calls if a jumbotron replay (usually 1 or 2 Camera angles) is sufficient enough to convince fans or teams the call was right or wrong....
Then would it be such a bad thing if only 2 of the 4 angles were conclusive....rather than having everyone scratching there heads screaming about the bloody officiating game after game
Denter You are right
Even 1 angle is enough if it shows what really happened. Like I have said before it will take away the excuse for the lose. It was the refs fault.
Geez, then there would be nothing to complain about.
I'm sure we'd all find something to complain about, it's not that hard to do.