|
Post by n00b on Dec 9, 2018 11:31:39 GMT -5
You need to have rules that can be enforced by human beings during the play. You cannot have a sport where you need high definition high-frame-per-second video to enforce those rules. In my opinion. If you keep the rule set as is, then you accept the fact that if the human eye can't detect it in real time, it really wasn't that important. We are rewarding luck -- to the detriment of the sport. Use replay for the obvious stuff that missed. You get two. If you are right, you keep your challenges. If you are wrong, one of them is gone. There are way too many calls being overturned on inconclusive evidence, imo. And give Reyes/Banwarth/Cook a fricking yellow card, please. I don't disagree but how do you define what is obvious? There were three blatant net calls that were missed in real time that were obvious on replay. Kentucky's attacker on her follow through at 23-23 in the third set. Alade in the net aginst Washington State when they made the odd initial ruling that the ball was down first despite the net happening in the top tape as the ball was being blocked (it was wrong by a lot). Penn State's middle blocking the Stanford pipe was also blatant. Tougher in real time but obvious on replay were Oregon's Johnson getting called in the net pretty quickly on replay when hitting an overpass in set 2. Also, Wisconsin's non-net challenge win was also pretty obvious from the net cam.
|
|
|
Post by dawgnerd on Dec 9, 2018 11:53:04 GMT -5
Overall, I think that video review has proved to be a benefit, with a lot of wrong calls being corrected and plenty of correct rulings confirmed. I do think that the 'two wrong challenges' rule would be an improvement. If technical improvements can speed up the process, great, but not if it only results in longer examination of smaller details. I think that better line and nets view angles could achieve that.
The call causing the biggest delays are the high-hands mini-touches. These are already the hardest to spot for humans and cameras have the same problem. It does help that the coaches check with their player before challenging, because they are the one person that really knows if a touch occurred and the coach does not want to throw away a challenge. Specialized views with good cameras could help there, but minimal touches will always be a tough call.
|
|
|
Post by NebraskaVBfan93 on Dec 9, 2018 12:01:13 GMT -5
Run one of these across the top of the net and that will solve the problem.
|
|
|
Post by Hawk Attack on Dec 9, 2018 12:01:25 GMT -5
I don’t see any need to be griping about the challenges (aside from losing one when you’re correct). If sports fans can endure 0-0 OT’s after excruciatingly boring soccer/hockey games, endless TO’s at the end of football and basketball games, and the constant switching on the field of baseball, I think we can all deal with the time it takes for the challenge system in volleyball.
Plus it’s interesting and at times entertaining. Watching Hohenshelt chew the down ref out after the replay in the gym clearly showed a net violation was amusing.
|
|
|
Post by B1Gminnesotafan on Dec 9, 2018 12:15:51 GMT -5
You need to have rules that can be enforced by human beings during the play. You cannot have a sport where you need high definition high-frame-per-second video to enforce those rules. In my opinion. If you keep the rule set as is, then you accept the fact that if the human eye can't detect it in real time, it really wasn't that important. We are rewarding luck -- to the detriment of the sport. Use replay for the obvious stuff that missed. You get two. If you are right, you keep your challenges. If you are wrong, one of them is gone. There are way too many calls being overturned on inconclusive evidence, imo.And give Reyes/Banwarth/Cook a fricking yellow card, please. I feel this way too. Coaches notice that some referees are more likely to overturn so it becomes good strategy to challenge when the game is close - even if you are not sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2018 12:26:19 GMT -5
I don’t see any need to be griping about the challenges (aside from losing one when you’re correct). If sports fans can endure 0-0 OT’s after excruciatingly boring soccer/hockey games, endless TO’s at the end of football and basketball games, and the constant switching on the field of baseball, I think we can all deal with the time it takes for the challenge system in volleyball. Plus it’s interesting and at times entertaining. Watching Hohenshelt chew the down ref out after the replay in the gym clearly showed a net violation was amusing. IF the time spent resulted in correct calls, maybe it would be worth it. But too often they have video that does not help. Worse is when they make a different call based on that crappy footage.
|
|
|
Post by oldunc on Dec 9, 2018 12:46:01 GMT -5
I don’t see any need to be griping about the challenges (aside from losing one when you’re correct). If sports fans can endure 0-0 OT’s after excruciatingly boring soccer/hockey games, endless TO’s at the end of football and basketball games, and the constant switching on the field of baseball, I think we can all deal with the time it takes for the challenge system in volleyball. Plus it’s interesting and at times entertaining. Watching Hohenshelt chew the down ref out after the replay in the gym clearly showed a net violation was amusing. I've often turned on the end of basketball games that seemed to be going for exciting finishes and eventually given up do to incessant time outs, trips to the free throw line etc. I'll accept it, grudgingly, in a game where I'm invested in the outcome, but otherwise it's just not worth it- it's not basketball, it's not really sports; I'd as soon watch a bank auditor work. The current level in volleyball is just about tolerable, but it would be more bearable if the video were actually good enough to make a definitive call; it almost never is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2018 13:23:04 GMT -5
Replay sucks. People need to make up their mind--do we want the human element or not?
If we're going to have replay--I wish they wouldn't get used as bonus time outs. Give coaches unlimited replays. But after you are wrong once with a challenge, every other wrong challenge costs your team one point. That will eliminate silly challenges. Then make it so the replay official has no more than one minute from the moment she starts watching video to determine a call. If it can't be done with all the cameras/tech available in that time, it's too close to call--call stands, play on.
|
|
|
Post by Brutus Buckeye on Dec 9, 2018 14:14:47 GMT -5
They should be allowed to kick each other in the shins, underneath the net. Toe stomping too.
|
|
|
Post by ineedajob on Dec 9, 2018 14:31:15 GMT -5
Replay sucks. People need to make up their mind--do we want the human element or not? If we're going to have replay--I wish they wouldn't get used as bonus time outs. Give coaches unlimited replays. But after you are wrong once with a challenge, every other wrong challenge costs your team one point. That will eliminate silly challenges. Then make it so the replay official has no more than one minute from the moment she starts watching video to determine a call. If it can't be done with all the cameras/tech available in that time, it's too close to call--call stands, play on. I disagree that replay sucks - I hate "the human element." I agree that the "bonus timeouts" suck. I like your idea that "wrong challenges" result in a point for the other team. I'm not sure about the one-minute rule.
|
|
|
Post by gophervbfan on Dec 9, 2018 14:31:54 GMT -5
I am starting to think I would be okay with keeping the net violation rules in place and just simply get rid of the ability to challenge for a net touch. I am a big believer in trying to get technology strong enough to be able to challenge any touch call. I CARE when my team hits the ball out and the opponent had a mini-touch that may have helped cause the ball to go out. I really DON'T CARE if my team loses a point because the opponent grazed the net during a long rally and the ref missed it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2018 14:53:46 GMT -5
Replay sucks. People need to make up their mind--do we want the human element or not? If we're going to have replay--I wish they wouldn't get used as bonus time outs. Give coaches unlimited replays. But after you are wrong once with a challenge, every other wrong challenge costs your team one point. That will eliminate silly challenges. Then make it so the replay official has no more than one minute from the moment she starts watching video to determine a call. If it can't be done with all the cameras/tech available in that time, it's too close to call--call stands, play on. I disagree that replay sucks - I hate "the human element." I agree that the "bonus timeouts" suck. I like your idea that "wrong challenges" result in a point for the other team. I'm not sure about the one-minute rule. I hate it in all sports. Either use it for everything or don't use it at all. Baseball should use it on every ball or strike. Football should put a GPS in the ball, etc. Or let it all go the same way that's worked for 50+ years. All sports complain about failing ratings...replay's part of that. Is there ANY enjoyment sitting there watching a ref look at the monitor? (VB got that right this weekend though--it was interesting to watch the replay as the ref watched it, what they were watching...if you're going to do replay, at least let fans see exactly what the ref is watching) One basketball game had a delay of eight minutes this weekend--the result was putting 1.2 seconds on the clock. My attention span is just fine, but I have better things to do than watch that sort of thing. The decision was made, move on. Officials calls balance out. It's not the ref costing you the match, it's hitting five straight out of bounds or shanking a freeball pass.
|
|
|
Post by itsallaboutme on Dec 9, 2018 15:14:38 GMT -5
You need to have rules that can be enforced by human beings during the play. You cannot have a sport where you need high definition high-frame-per-second video to enforce those rules. In my opinion. If you keep the rule set as is, then you accept the fact that if the human eye can't detect it in real time, it really wasn't that important. We are rewarding luck -- to the detriment of the sport. Use replay for the obvious stuff that missed. You get two. If you are right, you keep your challenges. If you are wrong, one of them is gone. There are way too many calls being overturned on inconclusive evidence, imo. And give Reyes/Banwarth/Cook a fricking yellow card, please. LOL, but don't give Ulmer a yellow card.
|
|
|
Post by andrewwmic on Dec 9, 2018 15:17:11 GMT -5
You need to have rules that can be enforced by human beings during the play. You cannot have a sport where you need high definition high-frame-per-second video to enforce those rules. In my opinion. If you keep the rule set as is, then you accept the fact that if the human eye can't detect it in real time, it really wasn't that important. We are rewarding luck -- to the detriment of the sport. Use replay for the obvious stuff that missed. You get two. If you are right, you keep your challenges. If you are wrong, one of them is gone. There are way too many calls being overturned on inconclusive evidence, imo. And give Reyes/Banwarth/Cook a fricking yellow card, please. Did you happen to watch the PSU/Stanford match?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2018 15:18:52 GMT -5
Ullmer was nowhere near as bad as Reyes, who is a fricking assistant coach. Put a leash on him, John.
Yes, I watched part of PSU/Stanford. There's too many replays and too many grumpy coaches. Everywhere.
|
|