No system will ever be perfect, and that includes replay. Replay
has a distinct disadvantage when compared to using humans. First,
cameras don't usually move around; they're fixed in one place;
they can't anticipate what's going to happen. While humans shouldn't
make it a habit of anticipating every play because things don't
always turn out the way humans expect them to, humans do have
instinct and experience. Cameras are away from the action and even
zooming in isn't going to help much.
 
Second, television is two dimensional. Humans see things in three
dimensions and are better able to determine what happened.One of
the reasons replay in the NFL didn't work out that well was so
many calls that were referred to the replay official came back
with "inconclusive."
 
As a sports official myself (baseball), I believe that replay
would actually cause officials not to try very hard to be in
position for every play. Why? Why worry too much about getting
into position when you can go to the tape?
 
And who's to decide what should and should not be subject to
replay? Again, the official is right there, he has the angle;
the camera is most likely going to be out of position and it
won't be right there, even with zoom.
 
But why stop with allowing officials to use replay? When are we
going to start demanding that players be replaced by robots
that could play the game flawlessly? I think we're losing sight
of the fact we're humans and it's just a game.
 
Officials are no more responsible for "blowing" games than the
players are. It would very refreshing to ask a player who
criticizes an official why he missed that easy pass that could
have resulted in a goal.
_____________________________________________________________________
Ryan Robbins               "Nothing in fine print is ever good news."
University of Maine                                  -- Andy Rooney
_____________________________________________________________________
[log in to unmask] ____________________________________________