Pat Posted March 31, 2004 Share Posted March 31, 2004 The NFL has decided that if you go 2 for 2 in your challenges in a game then a bonus third will be tacked on.im still thinking this one over, what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted March 31, 2004 Share Posted March 31, 2004 I say if a teams wins its challenge they should get to keep it no matter what. If a team uses 2 in teh first quarter and wins both because teh refs are screwing up they should still have 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampman Posted March 31, 2004 Share Posted March 31, 2004 Just leave it at 2--otherwise it becomes a nuisance--face it--how many times would you really need more than 2 in one game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See Red Posted March 31, 2004 Share Posted March 31, 2004 It depends stamp. It's not fair to make that judgement based on current statistics regarding instant replay usage because teams only have 2... so they use them more sparingly and in situations that may otherwise call for one, but the team would like to use it otherwise, perhaps in a late game situation. With that in mind, I agree that the point where if you do 2 challenges correctly, the refs aren't doing a very good job. My stance on it is as long as you have timeouts to burn, you should be allowed to challenge.With that said... I wouldn't be against eliminating challenges all together. I fail to see how it's fair that the offense can challenge a called fumble to keep possession of the ball, but the defense can't review a non-called fumble to gain possession of the ball. Instant replays are, often times, still an issue of referee judgement or interpretation of the rules. And I'm sure you will agree that you've seen tons that have left you to think 'he must be watching a different play' as you've disagreed with a call.And finally... if the evidence is not conclusive enough to show that you are correct -- then the evidence is not conclusive enough to prove that you are incorrect. If it can't be proven exactly what the correct call is... should the non-challenging team really get the upperhand because the refs original call, even if wrong, favored them?Leave it up to judgement of the refs. They're not crooked in their ways like NBA officials are. Sure they're gonna give Jerry Rice the benefit of the doubt over some rookie CB... but that'll exist anywhere. Especially in NCAA Basketball games in which Duke is playing .(I'm still trying to understand how Duhon can draw a charge against Xavier with one foot clearly in the air.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampman Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 I like the NHL system--the officials decide when to use it if there's room for doubt... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Discrim Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 agreed on the NBA front, they visibly make great pains to screw certain teams...they don't like the coach, one of the players is an , whatever. hell, i remember watching the Hornets-Magic playoff game two years ago when Baron hit what should have been the gamewinner-but aha! if you recall, the ref decided to blatantly screw him over even before the inbound. in asmuch words, he even admitted to doing so. i swear he is probably thankful the Hornets won in OT...who knows, he might be unemployed anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See Red Posted April 1, 2004 Share Posted April 1, 2004 And Jordan traveled on the play to win the Championship over the Jazz.And the Jazz player (Russell, I think) drained a shot at half time that was out of his hands a good second before the buzzer and they said he didn't get it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.