Instant Replay for the Finals?

[Bobref]

Just now, scarab527 said:

In this case it is justified imo. When you have people screeching for replays in blowouts in August don't say I didn't warn you lol. 

In all seriousness, at the very least, you'll have people that want replays for all playoff games. And if you allow for the finals I don't see the argument in not allowing for the entire tournament. 

Yet, we have the Mercy Rule in all playoff games, except the Finals. So, there is precedent for treating the Finals differently, the availability of technology aside.

[scarab527]

Just now, Bobref said:

Yet, we have the Mercy Rule in all playoff games, except the Finals. So, there is precedent for treating the Finals differently, the availability of technology aside.

And I would argue that the Finals should have the running clock as well. But you're right in regards to precedent. Still, after implementation, the first time a semistate game is decided by a questionable call prepare for an absolute uproar. 

[Bobref]

10 minutes ago, scarab527 said:

And I would argue that the Finals should have the running clock as well. But you're right in regards to precedent. Still, after implementation, the first time a semistate game is decided by a questionable call prepare for an absolute uproar. 

Like we don’t have that now. 😂

[scarab527]

38 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Like we don’t have that now. 😂

Touché haha 

[tango]

57 minutes ago, Bobref said:

Yet, we have the Mercy Rule in all playoff games, except the Finals. So, there is precedent for treating the Finals differently, the availability of technology aside.

That probably has more to do with the IHSAA not wanting to have an inordinate amount of time between the end of a running clock game and the start of the next game.  Logistically it would be impossible to start a game early.

[kdets89]

I just don't understand the hesitation.

Assume that the added capability of replay, properly utilized, is a net benefit to the championship game.  Is that a wild assumption?  The work of implementation is agreeing to what "properly utilized" means.  The cost of implementation would be just the tech to utilize the existing camera angles, and maybe another game official in the booth.

Even if the net benefit to the championship games turns out to be small, it would have no effect on the rest of the tournament.  It's only if the net benefit is determined to be large would there be a push to deploy it in the earlier rounds.

As for the "slippery slope", we're already over the edge.  Nearly every coach already has access to in-game replay on the sidelines.  That's proven to be such a valuable coaching tool that it's not going away.  The only change will be to make it cheaper, faster and more reliable.  That we don't allow officials to use it during the game is ridiculous.

[dazed and confused]

let the crowd decide... show those camera angle replays on the big screen and theyll let you know !!!

next 

[Bobref]

2 hours ago, kdets89 said:

As for the "slippery slope", we're already over the edge.  Nearly every coach already has access to in-game replay on the sidelines.  That's proven to be such a valuable coaching tool that it's not going away.  The only change will be to make it cheaper, faster and more reliable.  That we don't allow officials to use it during the game is ridiculous.

You make very good points.

[Yuccaguy]

2 hours ago, kdets89 said:

I just don't understand the hesitation.

Assume that the added capability of replay, properly utilized, is a net benefit to the championship game.  Is that a wild assumption?  The work of implementation is agreeing to what "properly utilized" means.  The cost of implementation would be just the tech to utilize the existing camera angles, and maybe another game official in the booth.

Even if the net benefit to the championship games turns out to be small, it would have no effect on the rest of the tournament.  It's only if the net benefit is determined to be large would there be a push to deploy it in the earlier rounds.

As for the "slippery slope", we're already over the edge.  Nearly every coach already has access to in-game replay on the sidelines.  That's proven to be such a valuable coaching tool that it's not going away.  The only change will be to make it cheaper, faster and more reliable.  That we don't allow officials to use it during the game is ridiculous.

Are your ready to PAY for a "replay official" that's on-site (and rules intelligent enough to convey the correct administrations?).... 

If that is the case for the brevity of the IHSAA...I am retiring tomorrow and becoming a replay official.  

[kdets89]

32 minutes ago, Yuccaguy said:

Are your ready to PAY for a "replay official" that's on-site (and rules intelligent enough to convey the correct administrations?).... 

If that is the case for the brevity of the IHSAA...I am retiring tomorrow and becoming a replay official.  

The scope of this discussion is the state finals.  That's two days.  Six games.  Adding a replay official is not going to break the IHSAA football committee's budget.

[RingLeader]

5 hours ago, scarab527 said:

I'm inclined to agree with this but I also remember the catch-that-wasn't in that Pioneer-North Vermillion game. It's a hard call because if you implement it for the finals inevitably people will start to clamor for it in every game. 

If its available use it. Period

I think refs with lesser egos would for sure be for it. Why not? Takes the blame off them.  Bottom line get it right if you can. What’s the harm

[foxbat]

44 minutes ago, Yuccaguy said:

Are your ready to PAY for a "replay official" that's on-site (and rules intelligent enough to convey the correct administrations?).... 

If that is the case for the brevity of the IHSAA...I am retiring tomorrow and becoming a replay official.  

A lot warmer up in that booth in Indiana in November ... and the food's better than on the field.

[Ballhawk]

Having the gigantic screens in LOS already makes it difficult for an official if he did miss a call, so why not use replay in the finals?    IMO, there should be a neutral 3rd party observer to decide if a play needs reviewed and not the coaches.  He could call it down to the referee on the field.

I would think we'd all agree that we wouldn't want anything that would cause games to last any longer.  The TV schedule would really be messed up if you add replays to the mix.

[Bobref]

21 minutes ago, Ballhawk said:

Having the gigantic screens in LOS already makes it difficult for an official if he did miss a call, so why not use replay in the finals?

Every time I worked the Finals, the last thing I said to the crew before we broke to our kickoff positions at the start of the game was “DON’T LOOK AT THE VIDEO SCREEN!”

[JustRules]

5 hours ago, Ballhawk said:

Having the gigantic screens in LOS already makes it difficult for an official if he did miss a call, so why not use replay in the finals?    IMO, there should be a neutral 3rd party observer to decide if a play needs reviewed and not the coaches.  He could call it down to the referee on the field.

I would think we'd all agree that we wouldn't want anything that would cause games to last any longer.  The TV schedule would really be messed up if you add replays to the mix.

FBS games take on average 3 hours and 25 minutes. D3 games take on average 2 hours and 45 minutes. Same rules. Same timing/clock procedures. Similar number of plays, penalties, incomplete passes (things that stop the game).

There are only two differences and they contribute significantly to the longer game times:

• Replay
• TV time outs

They keep trying new rules to speed up the game. They help marginally. The two things above are never going away.

[Yuccaguy]

7 minutes ago, JustRules said:

FBS games take on average 3 hours and 25 minutes. D3 games take on average 2 hours and 45 minutes. Same rules. Same timing/clock procedures. Similar number of plays, penalties, incomplete passes (things that stop the game).

There are only two differences and they contribute significantly to the longer game times:

• Replay
• TV time outs

They keep trying new rules to speed up the game. They help marginally. The two things above are never going away.

Bally Sports and the IHSAA are all about MORE commercial (money) heading their way.  So the length of a State Finals game is in significant to them at this point.  

[tango]

2 hours ago, Yuccaguy said:

Bally Sports and the IHSAA are all about MORE commercial (money) heading their way.  So the length of a State Finals game is in significant to them at this point.  

It is if the second half only takes 25 minutes. 

[PHJIrish]

Just do it!

[PHJIrish]

On 11/7/2022 at 2:35 PM, PDB26 said:

I am philosophically opposed to replay at all levels of sport.

Practically, I could be in favor of a world in which replay reviews were conducted in some arbitrarily-short period–say thirty seconds or less–and the officials only had full speed footage to review. The mistake should be so blatantly obvious–which is to say that everyone should know something is wrong–that allowing it to stand would run counter to the idea of fair play. I'm almost certain that I'd still be opposed to this proposed format for reviews if they were to be implemented in high school sports. 

I'm for replay to be fair and get the play call right, no matter how long it takes.  The teams deserve that, imho!

[Bobref]

As of now, the folks at 9150 N. Meridian are staunchly opposed to the concept of replay. I wonder if they would feel the same way if we had experienced in LOS on Thanksgiving weekend what the Georgia folks did in their 3A championship game.

https://www.ajc.com/sports/high-school-sports-blog/ghsa-to-seriously-consider-instant-replay-in-wake-of-another-controversial-call-in-3a-state-title-game/625NLDQ7EJD3XCVAAIUJIM4Q2Y/

GHSA to consider instant replay after latest controversial call in state title game

‘We owe it to the players and coaches to do everything we can to make sure the correct result is reached ...’

The Georgia High School Association will consider using video replay to review officials’ calls in the wake of a controversial play in Saturday’s Class 3A football championship game, three members of GHSA’s board of trustees indicated Monday.

“Yes, I think we are going to have to look at this,’’ board chairman and GHSA president Jim Finch said. “Currently, it is against the GHSA bylaws to use video evidence to overturn judgment calls. It’s not something that we can just vote on today to pass and be effective immediately. It will require some thought and planning.”

Board members Jasper Jewell and Steven Craft echoed Finch’s remarks.

“We almost have to now,’’ Jewell said. “We have no choice but to have it for championship events, at least.’’

Said Craft, “It is not possible in the regular season, but we need to look at using replay for the championship games. We owe it to the players and coaches to do everything we can to make sure the correct result is reached.”

The play that reignited the debate occurred in the final minute of the Sandy Creek-Cedar Grove game at Center Parc Stadium.

Travis Franklin scored the winning touchdown in his team’s 21-17 victory on a 1-yard run with 50 seconds left, but video from the GPB Sports broadcast indicated that Franklin was tackled short of the goal line. The play took place on third down, so Sandy Creek would have had another shot at the touchdown or a tying field goal. Video replays met with harsh criticism and went viral.

Cedar Grove ran a controversial play of its own earlier in the game, when quarterback Elliott Colson was ruled short of the end zone on a third-down run from the 2. GPB replays appeared to show the ball crossing the line.

Cedar Grove coach John Adams was pleased to hear that the GHSA will consider replay in the future.

“Maybe something good to come out of this game will be replay so you don’t have that error in a big game,’’ Adams said. “I know those are judgment calls, and I’m not dogging any referees or anybody. Sandy Creek played a heck of a game. But there was a reason they implemented replay in college and NFL. Even referees at that level sometimes make mistakes, so let’s find a system where we can make a correction on a mistake of that magnitude.’’

GHSA bylaws don’t allow officials to use replay to overturn calls during games or for the GHSA to change the outcome of completed games based on video evidence. Schools also may not base appeals on video evidence.

The Sandy Creek-Cedar Grove call was the most controversial since 2017, when Peach County believed a bad call cost it a late touchdown in a 10-6 loss to Calhoun in another Class 3A championship game.

On that play, Peach County’s Noah Whittington caught pass at the Calhoun 5-yard line and stretched out for the goal line. The ball popped loose in the end zone when it hit the ground. Instead of a touchdown or first-and-goal with 3:33 left, the play was ruled an incomplete pass, giving Calhoun possession on downs.

At the time, the GHSA noted that National High School Federation rules prevented the use of video replay. In 2019, the NFHS approved video replay for postseason contests, and a minority of states, including Alabama, now employ it.

The trustees have the power to implement instant replay in Georgia, but any change almost certainly would go through the GHSA’s executive committee, which has representatives from the GHSA’s 64 regions. It meets in April.

GHSA executive director Robin Hines and his office have no authority to change bylaws, only to enforce them. Hines had no comment Monday.

The board members acknowledged that any proposal would require planning and discussion to consider feasibility and protocols.

“For example, is instant replay used only in the finals?” Finch said. “Would this be used for all sports? Whose video evidence? GPB’s camera angles? Perhaps begin with football, since it has the most sophisticated camera coverage, and see how it works. Another issue would be training for officials. And I’m sure there are many other factors I have failed to mention. But if we have the technology, and we can get the correct call, then I say we can at least begin exploring the answers to the questions I posed.’’

Other considerations would be determining which plays can be challenged, who can initiate a review and who makes the decision to overturn, how many cameras to employ and the costs of equipment and hiring more officials.

“The biggest challenge would be logistics, which is why I think only championship games, because those venues will have the bandwidth to take care of that,’’ Jewell said. “I don’t think cost will be as big of a factor as people think. I do know there has been talk this weekend, very unofficial through some of the board of trustees. We all agree that we have to seriously consider replay.”

[JustRules]

The states that have implemented replay have generally kept it simple. They only use the line feed from the broadcast. And limit replays to scores and sidelines. Officials in the states who have done it have said it's not used often, but it has been helpful when it's been used.

[dazed and confused]

On 12/14/2022 at 8:13 PM, Bobref said:

As of now, the folks at 9150 N. Meridian are staunchly opposed to the concept of replay.

Is there proof of this ?

[Bobref]

1 hour ago, dazed and confused said:

Is there proof of this ?

I got it from the horse’s mouth, so to speak. It’s no secret.

[Tommy]

In NCAA Division II there is no instant replay until the national semifinals.

[Grover]

If I was in charge of sports for only one minute I would permanently outlaw replay in every sport.  I can't stand it.  So what if some of the calls aren't correct.  It will balance out.  Replays are huge momentum killers.  A pox upon the house of anybody who suggests tainting high school football with replay.  Never never never.