Replay question

[Petro-Sooner]

Someone explain me this. Coaches can challenge a play once per half correct? If so and its not over turned that team loses a time out. If every play is reviewable then why have the challenges?

[bakerjrb]

Let me ask a question on a similar vein (since I can't post new threads yet):

For those of you who watched the game on TV, what was the explanation as to why the Sweed "incompletion" in the first quarter was not reviewed? It was clear at the stadium that he caught the slant, took two or three steps, and then lost the ball when contact with the OU defender was made, both in real time and on the Cotton Bowl replay big screen. Given our "luck" with replay, I fully expected the impending replay to "confirm the call on the field", but was amazed that no review was undertaken.

Thankfully, it did not affect the ultimate outcome. But a Texas fumble deep in their own territory to start the game might have led to the blowout that some of us were expecting.....

And, yeah, being there to see it all was great. :)

Boomer!

jrb

[Boomer.....]

Someone explain me this. Coaches can challenge a play once per half correct? If so and its not over turned that team loses a time out. If every play is reviewable then why have the challenges?
Every play is "looked at", but doesn't mean that they will stop the game for it. That is why coaches will call a timeout after a questionable call to give the booth more time to look at it. Why they don't just challenge the play themselves, I don't know.

[tulsaoilerfan]

Stupid system IMO; they should just go to whatever the NFL does, and only review close plays in the last 2 minutes of the half and let the coach challenge 2x per game no matter what half( i think that's what it is anyway) :)

[Boomer.....]

Let me ask a question on a similar vein (since I can't post new threads yet):

For those of you who watched the game on TV, what was the explanation as to why the Sweed "incompletion" in the first quarter was not reviewed? It was clear at the stadium that he caught the slant, took two or three steps, and then lost the ball when contact with the OU defender was made, both in real time and on the Cotton Bowl replay big screen. Given our "luck" with replay, I fully expected the impending replay to "confirm the call on the field", but was amazed that no review was undertaken.

Thankfully, it did not affect the ultimate outcome. But a Texas fumble deep in their own territory to start the game might have led to the blowout that some of us were expecting.....

And, yeah, being there to see it all was great. :)

Boomer!

jrb
I am not sure if you can review an incomplete pass.

[Vaevictis]

Every play is "looked at", but doesn't mean that they will stop the game for it. That is why coaches will call a timeout after a questionable call to give the booth more time to look at it. Why they don't just challenge the play themselves, I don't know.

If you can get the booth to review a play without using your challenge, why not?

[humblesooner]

Someone explain me this. Coaches can challenge a play once per half correct? If so and its not over turned that team loses a time out. If every play is reviewable then why have the challenges?

The replay officials only have about 40 seconds between plays to find something reviewable. I would guess that they look at 4-5 views of each play. Also, they sometimes have more than one thing to look at. It could be that they have to determine if a receiver's foot is down and also determine if he had control at the time his foot is down. Watching that many different angles, the next play may have already started before they see all angles. Once the next play starts, the previous play can not be changed, regardless how bad it is mucked up.

The challenge is there for a coach to stop the play and tell the officials specifically what he thinks they need to be looking at. It may be a play where the official is trying to see if a receiver's foot is in bounds, and the coach will tell them it doesn't matter because the player was bobbling the ball.

Before challenges were allowed, Bob (and I think A&M??) used a time out to allow the officials more time to look at a play. After the extra time, the plays were changed. They lost a timeout just so the officials could get a play right. The challenge allows the coaches to stop play for extra time on the review, without losing a timeout.

My issue with the challenges is the number that each team gets. You only get one challenge per half.
In my opinion, you should only lose your right to challenge once you lose a challenge. If you challenge every play and you are correct, you should maintain your challenge option. Think about lester Saturday night. He basically wasted his challenge for 7 yards of field position. Since he was right on the challenge, he should still have had an option to challenge another, more crucial play later in the game. But since he used it on the kick return, he did not have a challenge left for a close spot of the ball or something later in the game.

[Scott D]

Someone explain me this. Coaches can challenge a play once per half correct? If so and its not over turned that team loses a time out. If every play is reviewable then why have the challenges?

the main issue is that it all too often depends on the conference in regards to a coach's challenge. for most of them it appears to be a coach calling a time out to get a challenge in, and if they win it, they get the time out back. I think one conference actually has moved onto giving coaches the red "hankie" if they choose to make their challenge.

[sooner518]

Let me ask a question on a similar vein (since I can't post new threads yet):

For those of you who watched the game on TV, what was the explanation as to why the Sweed "incompletion" in the first quarter was not reviewed? It was clear at the stadium that he caught the slant, took two or three steps, and then lost the ball when contact with the OU defender was made, both in real time and on the Cotton Bowl replay big screen. Given our "luck" with replay, I fully expected the impending replay to "confirm the call on the field", but was amazed that no review was undertaken.

Thankfully, it did not affect the ultimate outcome. But a Texas fumble deep in their own territory to start the game might have led to the blowout that some of us were expecting.....

And, yeah, being there to see it all was great. :)

Boomer!

jrb

The play was blown dead very soon after the fumble, therefore it is impossible to challenge because there is no way of knowing who would have gotten the ball, or where the ball should be spotted since players tend to stop playing when the whistle is blown. It was obviously a fumble but once that ref blew the whistle, we were SOL.

As soon as the ref blew the whistle, I started yelling at the TV because once he does that, there's no way it can be ruled a fumble, whereas if they had not blown the whistle, let us recover, they could still have gone to replay to check if the pass was really incomplete or a fumble.