Greg Ambroose wrote: > Mike Machnik's (and other's) less than enthusiastic endorsement for replays > is puzzling. We communicate via the Internet, a truly remarkable 20th (and > 21st) century testament to technology. Yet, when it comes to sports we want > to remain in the dark ages. I'll agree that, when used incessantly, replay > becomes tedious. The NFL's problem is that they used it too much, for every > mundane play. If we saved replay for only goals how many times we would it > be used it per game? Ryan Robbins' reaction as an umpire is puzzling as > well. Isn't it the credo of every official to get the call right. There are > certainly occasions in every game where the officials huddle together to > interpret a rule or to get a 2nd opinion on whether a call was the correct > one. Why not use the technology we have to enhance the results of these 2nd > opinions? Off the top of my head I can think of 4 instances where a game > might have been better served by having replay: > 1) 1994: Northeastern scores the apparent winner vs > LSSU, only to have it waived off. LSSU goes on > to win the game and the national title. > 2) 1993: LSSU scores the apparent tying goal in the > NCAA Final vs. Maine, only to have it waived of > off. Maine wins the game and the title. > 3) 1994: Detroit Lions beat the NY Giants in OT. > The tying and winning TDs are scored by Herman > Moore on plays where the replay clearly shows > he did not have possession (TD#1) and he was > down by contact (TD#2). The Lions make the > playoffs, the Giants don't. > 4) 1985: Royals vs. Cardinals World Series. Don > Denkinger calls Jorge Orta safe at 1st base when > he is clearly out in the 9th inning of the 6th > game, Royals down 3 games to 1. Royals rally, > win the game and the Series. > > I say, lets get the call right, especially when the outcome of a game or the > season hangs in the balance. > > Greg Ambrose > Go UNH BLUE, beat Denver! > When I got down to the 1985 example in this list, I expected to see a comment that RPI's George Servinis was offsides. Since this was not used as an example, I will admit that I agree with what Greg wrote. The key point must be, however, that replays should only be used on rare occasions, essentially when the game hangs in the balance. On a different vein, I want to add my comments to what others have said about Bob Croce's reasons that RPI may beat Minnesota. RPI does have a chance to beat Minnesota, but how can he say that Minnesota started off hot and finished the rest of the year as basically a .500 team when I recall that RPI started the ECAC season at 5-0 ended up 10-9-3. Clearly, RPI is currently on a bit of a roll, but so is Minnesota. I personally think that some of the Badger fans will root for "anyone but Minnesota" but others will root for their fellow WCHA team. I will root for Clarkson to win (until they meet up with RPI :-) ). As to the size of the rink -- it has been pointed out that the larger rink is favorable to both teams. Ralph Baer Go RPI! (by the way, what is a "Rensselaer Tech" ? )