|
Post by badgerbreath on Oct 1, 2015 10:12:58 GMT -5
I agree with DMT. You want to get the call right - especially in obvious missed calls. There are so many volleyball matches that you are bound to get subpar refs -- or refs having a bad day. A lot of the flow problems are rough edges, IMO. Line calls could be made very quickly for instance -- see tennis, and soccer in england.
Touches at the net are harder. Daydreaming here, but I always thought it would be cool if they had something akin to fencing, where the ball lights up or you get a beep when the defensive teams get a touch on a hit. Well, maybe there is only a light on a board near the sidelines that can be read by a ref.
If you want to reduce the propensity to game the system, attach a cost to an incorrect challenge. Maybe a lost timeout. That would ensure that truly egregious calls do get fixed, and those are the ones we want changed.
Or you could have Russ Rose at every match. I still remember the clearly incorrect out call from a down ref on an amazing hit to the deep corner by Lowe at the regionals. Rose, who was right there, virtually exploded at the ref even though the call favored for his team. The call was quickly reversed.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Oct 1, 2015 10:14:07 GMT -5
Instant replay works beautifully in professional tennis. It helps that it is limited to judging whether balls were in or out and that the technology is highly standardized. The disruptions in professional volleyball are mostly the result of disagreements over what part of the play is being challenged and the coaches' sideline antics about the challenge decision.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Oct 1, 2015 10:17:05 GMT -5
Instant replay works beautifully in professional tennis. It helps that it is limited to judging whether ball were in or out and that the technology is highly standardized. The disruptions in professional volleyball are mostly the result of disagreements over what part of the play is being challenged and the coaches' sideline antics about the challenge decision. Baseball has a rule that if anyone argues about the outcome of a video replay decision, they are automatically ejected from the game.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Oct 1, 2015 10:19:53 GMT -5
Instant replay works beautifully in professional tennis. It helps that it is limited to judging whether ball were in or out and that the technology is highly standardized. The disruptions in professional volleyball are mostly the result of disagreements over what part of the play is being challenged and the coaches' sideline antics about the challenge decision. Baseball has a rule that if anyone argues about the outcome of a video replay decision, they are automatically ejected from the game. Ejections from a game are my favorite play in baseball.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 10:21:08 GMT -5
I think the "antics" has more to do with using the challenge as a timeout and some other gamesmanship, but volleyguy may have had something else in mind.
If the NCAA can do it as efficiently as the FIVB does, it's not nearly as awful as what we have now.
I just think that the best way to get a call right is to not make the rules impossible to enforce.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 10:23:02 GMT -5
I don't think that the referees of the match who were involved with the initial call should have any responsibility in reviewing the plays. At least not by themselves, as displayed at the Minnesota match?
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Oct 1, 2015 10:27:11 GMT -5
It would be chaos to allow all schools to simply begin implementing instant replay. There are still a number of schools who have difficulty implementing a live stream, much less a coordinated challenge system. Rolling it out on a limited experimental basis makes sense if the NCAA is truly interested in doing so.
|
|
|
Post by vbprisoner on Oct 1, 2015 10:30:44 GMT -5
I think the "antics" has more to do with using the challenge as a timeout and some other gamesmanship, but volleyguy may have had something else in mind. If the NCAA can do it as efficiently as the FIVB does, it's not nearly as awful as what we have now. I just think that the best way to get a call right is to not make the rules impossible to enforce. The "antics" is exactly what happened in the OU / ISU match last night. During an OU run of a couple points CJL went to the down ref with her challenge card in hand and they spoke for 30+ seconds and the announcer commented that the last point was not going to be challenged and CJL was using the opportunity like she may challenge after talking with down ref but she basically created a mini time out.
|
|
|
Post by coachwpassion on Oct 1, 2015 10:35:35 GMT -5
Timeouts are shorter than the replay challenge we are witnessing now. In the OU/ISU match last night, the challenge lasted over 3 minutes. And coaches can talk to their team during this time. It should be similar to the NFL where you lose a timeout; if you do not have a time out, then you cannot challenge. Or after point 20 an official who is watching the camera film can call and officials time out. I doubt this will work in our game as it is probably too fast but it would prevent stalling at the end of the set but allow those coaches who used both timeouts the opportunity to challenge a bad/missed call.
I like badgerbreath idea of a net that lights (fencing idea) but not sure it is feasible.
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Oct 1, 2015 12:07:49 GMT -5
I think there are a few things necessary to make this useful.
1. Video boards would be helpful so that the replay footage can be played for the crowd. That would help keep the crowd engaged during the review period.
2. A rule prohibiting coaching during replays. The on-court players should be able to huddle on the court, but there should be no coaching or bench interaction allowed, to discourage coaches from calling bogus challenges just to get a time out.
3. I agree with @gopherfan that the replay officials should be completely independent of the floor officials. This is how they do it in FIVB.
4. Coaches must be very clear about what they are calling for review: net touch, block touch, foot fault, or in/out. The coach should have a card for each reviewable element, and the coach has to indicate with that specific card what they are asking the replay official to look for, and they can't go changing their mind or arguing about it.
5. At the very least, continuing to protest after a replay ruling should be a red card.
6. Perhaps a time limit on the officials doing the review. 3 minutes is ridiculous. Set a fixed period of time for the coach to indicate what he wants replayed, and a fixed period of time for the review, and if there's not enough video evidence within that timeframe to overturn the call, then the call stands.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2015 19:03:15 GMT -5
Still can't find anything from the B1G about this or any description of the green cards being used.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Oct 1, 2015 20:17:45 GMT -5
There was one in the UW-WSU match where the ball hit almost right in front of the linesman, a good six inches in, and she called it out. Yeah, no replay reviews in the Pac-12. I'd like to see them at least in the regionals. Not going to happen this year. NCAA already decided that until they get more data from this year. Even then, it will probably get tweaked in when a challenge can be called. At the FIVB World Cup in Omaha, coaches were using it to prevent the other team from challenging a call and to be used as a 3rd time out near the end of a set. I'm not in favor of doing it for conference matches, but believe that it isn't already being done in Regionals and Final Fours is simply indicative that the NCAA doesn't really care about volleyball. Devising a system and rules for instant replay that doesn't overly disrupt game flow is not rocket science.
|
|
tim01
Sophomore
Posts: 176
|
Post by tim01 on Oct 2, 2015 0:17:51 GMT -5
Does anyone know if the replay equipment is standardized across the handful of venues that are using it? Is everyone using their own brand and model equipment for the replays?
If every participating school is cobbling together their own instant replay system, that could be a major reason for the timeliness of the reviews.
I'm curious, because I have an 8-input HD instant replay system at my house (I work with professional video equipment). I have the ability to view 8 HD replays simultaneously (all synced together), then designate which to review to full screen...and can quickly go back/forth between the same or multiple shots. ESPN and many other major broadcasters use this exact system.
Even with a simple, easy to use system, the real limitation is camera quality and camera placement. It the camera isn't pointed at the disputed action (or it is moving and blurry), no replay system is going to help.
|
|
MyNameHere
Sophomore
Enter your message here...
Posts: 189
|
Post by MyNameHere on Oct 2, 2015 17:01:36 GMT -5
Does anyone know if the replay equipment is standardized across the handful of venues that are using it? Is everyone using their own brand and model equipment for the replays? Each school is using the equipment they have in their venue. The minimum number of cameras is three. Some schools are using broadcast-quality equipment, others not so much. This, paired with the skillset of the individual running the video equipment, who is typically a staff member of the host institution. My understanding is most referees, while given the option of scrobbling through the video themselves, are instead directing the video person to do it. It's becoming apparent through this season's trial period for the challenge system that a) two endline cameras and one net camera simply won't catch much of the action that is disputed; b) high-def video (and a high-def monitor) are an absolute must; c) even with HD, there are still frame-rate issues to solve; and d) getting the feed from the production truck into the review monitor is a hit-or-miss proposition. The goal for 2015 is to gather data, to see whether or not implementing a challenge review system is feasible for the future. Cost limitations for a non-revenue sport are obviously playing a large part in the (lack of) quality of some of the systems. The NCAA wanted a trial run before any new procedure was rolled out nationwide. And no, this will not be used in postseason before it's been implemented during the regular season.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2015 17:53:35 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but all of these things should have been known beforehand. They could have asked ME and I'm just a fan.
|
|