The Hamilton Spectator

Two more Super reasons replay needs to simplify or die

- SCOTT RADLEY THE HAMILTON SPECTATOR

If we lived in utopia, three things would result from the terrific Super Bowl of 2018.

First, we’d get more games like this that prove defence doesn’t have to win championsh­ips but overwhelmi­ng, thrilling, creative offence can do it, too. Second, we’d somehow decide that winning a championsh­ip doesn’t have to be licence for jubilant fans to flip cars, light stuff on fire and trash the victorious city.

And third, this game would be the catalyst to finally get instant replay simplified to the point of absolute clarity or put out of its misery and euthanized once and for all. Not just in the NFL or in football generally, but in all sports. Because despite its good intentions, it’s not helping. Consider Sunday’s offerings. The Philadelph­ia Eagles scored two touchdowns that both looked just fine. Basically no different than touchdowns that’ve been scored since the creation of the game. But by the time two long, long replays were done with them — combined with rules that nobody seems to understand, not even the lead analyst on the TV broadcast who saw similar plays earlier in the season get wiped out — they had been thrown into question despite being allowed.

As an argument starter, it was great. As a method to infuse viewers with confidence that the correct call had been made, far less so. The issue isn’t that replay never helps get the call right. Of course it does. The problem is that over time, replay leads to interpreta­tions and applicatio­ns that were never intended. Leaving to confusion rather than clarity. What was supposed to be a tool to confirm objective calls —

did the ball stay fair or go foul? — inevitably morphs into subjective territory. Did that player skating by the goalie impair his ability to stop a shot two seconds later? At exactly what point does a receiver become a runner? Did that slide into second base begin a foot too late and affect the shortstop?

The purpose of the concept has suddenly been changed. But that isn’t even its biggest flaw.

The most-egregious issue is the sales job fans are fed that replay eliminates officiatin­g errors. The reality is, it sometimes eliminates some officiatin­g errors. Despite what its defenders would tell you, it’s not about getting everything right, it’s about getting some things right.

If leagues were truly interested in making sure games were error-free, they would get rid of human officials altogether and let computers and folks watching on monitors call the games.

Eliminate the middle man, in other words.

Permit hockey coaches to ask for replay on every shift to look for infraction­s that were missed earlier in a shift. Get rid of the home-plate umpire and let a computer call balls and strikes so consistenc­y is absolute. Allow a football coach to ask for every down to be studied for a hold or a pick that was missed. After all, those less-blatant things can be just as impactful as whether a receiver bobbled a ball.

But they don’t want that. Nobody does. So we get perfection- lite. Just enough perfection to make it look like perfection is being presented. With the added bonus of having just as many questions following the review as there were before the replay was studied. Which is exactly the opposite of the point of the whole exercise.

True clarity is rarely the result. So why bother?

Some will argue this is a rule issue rather than a replay issue and, to some degree, they’re correct. Problem is, the rule issue never really became a big deal until replay exacerbate­d it.

And it’s not getting better. A bet that goalie interferen­ce will becomes a nightmaris­h factor in this spring’s Stanley Cup playoffs just like toe-in-the-crease did back in 1999 would be a smart wager.

And let’s go back to Sunday for a moment for another realisticb­ut-migraine-inducing scenario.

The last play of the game was a Hail Mary. Watch it live or on replay and you’ll see there was some contact on New England’s Rob Gronkowski.

Enough to throw a flag? Unlikely. Still, had this been a CFL game, a coach’s challenge almost certainly would’ve been thrown for pass interferen­ce and the Patriots might well have had the ball on the one yard line. Or not. Who knows?

It’s time to take a step back and introduce a system that allows officials to look at a play one time on replay to look for a horrendous oversight. If they can’t spot a monumental gaffe, back to the game.

If that kind of replay can’t be offered, dump the whole system and live with the work of the refs you’re paying to officiate the games. No more digging for minutiae and getting bogged down in frustratin­g uncertaint­y.

Because throughout sports, that’s become the opposite of helpful.

 ?? PAUL KURODA TNS ?? Patriots’ Rob Gronkowski has just a little company as he tries to haul in a last-play Super Bowl LII Hail Mary.
PAUL KURODA TNS Patriots’ Rob Gronkowski has just a little company as he tries to haul in a last-play Super Bowl LII Hail Mary.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada