Replay

[brown town sooner]

OK...this was a hot topic a couple of weeks ago in the Colorado game. After yesterday's game...is everyone still happy with instant replay? Once again, there were reviewed plays that went the other direction and once again the game was delayed at the minimum 15 minutes because of the officials trying to review a call on the field. I'm tired of it....get rid of it!!! It takes too long and most of the time they seem to get it wrong. Until they get monitors on the field like in the NFL they need to bag it. Any thoughts?:mad:

[CatfishSooner]

replay sucks

[StoopTroup]

It stinks the way it is right now.

[85sooners]

**** the replay!!!!!!!!!!!

[Newbomb Turk]

Only thing I don't like about replay is it takes too long. Take one or two looks at it - if you can't tell by then, just leave the call as it was on the field. No need to look at it for 5 minutes.

[humblesooner]

Only thing I don't like about replay is it takes too long. Take one or two looks at it - if you can't tell by then, just leave the call as it was on the field. No need to look at it for 5 minutes.

Agreed.
And one more thing - they need to either have 3 in the booth to discuss what they are seeing or put it on the field like the NFL.
There is no way that a single person who has had no input for an entire game should be able to control the outcome of a game over an entire stadium of officials, coaches, players. They can (and have) made changes based purely on opinion of what PROBABLY happened, rather than what the camera shows, as they are supposed to.

[brown town sooner]

I wasn't able to watch the first half yesterday so I was listening to Bob and Merv.....geez....
I personally don't think the NCAA thought out the replay thing well enough. I know the argument is going to be "it takes too much money to put monitors on the field." PLEASE!!!!!!!! Millions upon millions of dollars are being made each and every Saturday off of college kids who entertain for free and don't get a paycheck. The least that could be done would be to invest some money and get this thing done the right way or do away with it all together. To me it is MUCH easier to be ****ed off at an official on the field and realize they "blew a call" than it is to sit there for what seems hours on end waiting for some d-bag in the booth to maybe see something that should be changed.

[cheezyq]

I think they have to re-think their definition of "conclusive evidence" in overturning some of these calls. To me, that means that an OBVIOUS error has occurred in the call; but it seems that if there's the slightest glimpse of anything that can be overturned, as long as it hurts OU, it's reversed.

The one good thing is that OUr guys have learned that you can't leave it up to the friggin' replay.

[Curly Bill]

In theory replay is great. In practice I've seen too many of them screwed up royally by apparently incompetent or downright crooked replay officials. So...until this can be remedied I say put it on ice.

[tigepilot]

Before replay was implemented I was a HUGE replay proponent. However, I don't like any part of they way it's used in college ball. First I have to say I can't remember a replay, right or wrong, going OU's way whether it's a close call or not. I'm sure there has been some go OU's way but it's so seldom I can't remember or believe it. The problems I have with college replay are:

1) Takes too long.
2) If every play is being reviewed then there is no need for a coach to have to think about challenging a play unless he intends to use a timeout there anyway.
3) Irrefutable evidence to overturn would be a fine requirement by me if only it was actually done that way. For instance, there is NO WAY there was irrefutable evidence that OU (don't remember the reciever just now) didn't catch that ball close to the ground late in the Colorado game. If so, then you'd have to say that the interception earlier was really 'dual possetion' since there was just as much or more evidence to support that (not saying OU didn't deserve the loss here, just making a point). This part might actually work better if there were on-field screens and the judgement of iffrefutalbe evidence came from the crew that actually made the original call as is done in the NFL.
4) If the requirement is irrefutable evidence to overturn, quit returning with the responce "call was confirmed" when you're not going to overturn. That statement implies that there was irrefutable evidence supporting the call made on the field which is not the same thing... I don't know why, but that part REALLY bugs me.

I would rather just not have replay that to have it the way it is now. It's much preferable to me to think that a ref blew a call that he had to make based on live action from his own viewpoint than to think a call was blown by someone that had the benefit of slow motion video from multiple angles.

That being said, having missed the first 30 minutes of the game (bar I was at having trouble finding the game) and then missed much of the last drive (some idiot kept trying to tell me how bad college ball was because of the lack of playoff and wouldn't shut up), I didn't have any problem with the way this game was called... nothing was glaringly bad to me anyway.

[Crucifax Autumn]

No change in my opinion...replay is a good thing, but replay that obviously isn't working correctly sucks.

[Scott D]

1. in college ranks replay is still in it's infancy. The nfl has had a couple of decades to work on and perfect their system.

2. each conference handles replay differently, therefore the ncaa doesn't have much say over it.

[Crucifax Autumn]

2. each conference handles replay differently, therefore the ncaa doesn't have much say over it.

As much as I hate giving any more power to the NCAA, This is most of the problem. It needs to be handled consistently throughout all the conferences.

[Curly Bill]

As much as I hate giving any more power to the NCAA, This is most of the problem. It needs to be handled consistently throughout all the conferences.

true dat..on all points you raise

[brown town sooner]

I agree...if it is a conference thing then the NCAA needs to step in and put some mandates forth. I hate the NCAA too but this is ridiculous. I have watched/do watch a lot of college football and there seems to be one thing consistent with the IR across the nation. IT TAKES TOO LONG!!!! Not only that, you get the sense that the guys in the booth are trying to hard to see things that are or aren't there. It's not rocket science and shouldn't be this hard. Put a monitor on the field, eliminate the control of the guys in the booth, who most of the time it has been proven are from the area where the game is located therefore bringing in bias, and let's either get this thing right or get rid of it. Stoops isn't going to say anything stupid but I would bet that deep down he hates the whole thing, especially since it has went against the sooners so many times and has had some major impact on games they have played.

[Crucifax Autumn]

Here's how I see it. The networks show it 500 times anyway...buy a cheap tv and run a cable wire to the sideline. How much can that really cost? Have a replay official and the on-field guys all look at it and argue for a few minutes and be done with it.

[stoopified]

I think they have to re-think their definition of "conclusive evidence" in overturning some of these calls. To me, that means that an OBVIOUS error has occurred in the call; but it seems that if there's the slightest glimpse of anything that can be overturned, as long as it hurts OU, it's reversed.

The one good thing is that OUr guys have learned that you can't leave it up to the friggin' replay.
I thought I was the only one suffering from OU Replay Conspiracy Syndrome(OURCS). :)

[CtheB]

Personally, I find it almost amazing that we haven't gotten pregnant.

[85sooners]

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b358/paul--moore/dead-horse-fast2.gif

[brown town sooner]

What's your point 85sooners? Don't like the topic?

[Wishboned]

If I never heard the phrase "after further review" again I would be quite happy.

[Crucifax Autumn]

"after further review" replay is really working out badly.

[Miko]

"after further review" replay is really working out badly.

...first down oregon.


Honey, give me your red shoes, I need something to throw!!!

[Texas Golfer]

The concept of the replay reviews is good. But the NCAA needs to monitor it and fine heavily any booth official who obviously gets it wrong.

The whole world is seeing the same replays and everyone can see when the booth official gets it obviously wrong. We should be able to have confidence in the integrity of the officials but, more often than not, their biases are controlling outcomes of games.

[OUmillenium]

College replay must go. It is a travesty to the athletes, fans, and coaches.

[OUGuf]

I find it completly rediculous that they spend upwards of 15 minutes looking at a call. If you sit and look at the same play with slow-mo and freeze frame for 15 minutes then I can guarantee that there is not "Irrefutable Proof" that the field call doesnt stand.
I say untill the NCAA hires the replay officials, and closly monitors them, then they need to go away. There is obvious bias comeing out of the booth not only against Oklahoma. I saw several times over the past few weeks utterly terrible calls coming down from on high.
Of course nothing will be done. It will continue like it is for another 15 years untill USC, or ND finally get a bad review against them then it will all come crashing down.

[brown town sooner]

True that.....there has got to be some regulation and it needs to start SOON.

[sanantoniosooner]

They should post the play on youtube and render a decision based on feedback replies.

"Upon further review......it's determined that the quarterback is killing dolphins in his tuna net........Loss of down"

[XFollower]

I think the player in question and the ref should fight for the outcome. Do that for a few games and the ref'ing would get more accurate.