Idea for Improving Replay

[Ilikesports17]

Tonight, as Im sure most of you know. Avery Bradley took a jumper from 23 ft and 9 inches from the basket. The official on the floor ruled it a 2 pointer. He then immediately signaled for the play to be replayed. The call was very close and they quickly announced the call would stand.

My problem here is that I feel the official was forced to make a decision on the play when he did not know if it was a three or not. Id like officials to be able to, and encouraged to call for a replay without first making a call on the floor.

My motivation for making this rule came from being on the wrong side of a ruling tonight, but the more I think about it the more I like it. If you are going to take the time to go to replay, why not go in to that replay with no bias and try to make the most correct call?

What is everyones thoughts on this rule change idea?

[jambr380]

Unfortunately, they followed the NFL's replay procedure and first make a call, most of the time. On a few occasions, I have seen the ball go out of bounds with the ref calling a 'jump ball', knowing that he was going to review it anyway. I think this is what you are talking about.

In any sport, I always hated the idea of having to stay with the original call if the replay was not clearly 'overturnable'. I suppose I understand it if it is truly inconclusive (extremely rare), but too many times in the NFL, a play was not overturned that likely would have gone the other way if there was never a definitive call in the first place.

[tazzmaniac]

Don't agree with your suggestion.  The officials on the floor need to make their call in real-time.  If the video is inconclusive, you don't want to have to go back to the officials after the fact to figure out what their call was. 

[Ilikesports17]

Don't agree with your suggestion.  The officials on the floor need to make their call in real-time.  If the video is inconclusive, you don't want to have to go back to the officials after the fact to figure out what their call was.

Don't understand this critique. With any call a judgement has got to be made. The judgement call made with the aid of replay is better than the official real time guess.

[tazzmaniac]

Don't agree with your suggestion.  The officials on the floor need to make their call in real-time.  If the video is inconclusive, you don't want to have to go back to the officials after the fact to figure out what their call was.

Don't understand this critique. With any call a judgement has got to be made. The judgement call made with the aid of replay is better than the official real time guess.

It is an official real time call not a guess.  Referees have been making them for more than 100 years. 

[Ilikesports17]

Don't agree with your suggestion.  The officials on the floor need to make their call in real-time.  If the video is inconclusive, you don't want to have to go back to the officials after the fact to figure out what their call was.

Don't understand this critique. With any call a judgement has got to be made. The judgement call made with the aid of replay is better than the official real time guess.

It is an official real time call not a guess.  Referees have been making them for more than 100 years.

Sure call it what you want. If an official makes a call then immediately signals for instant replay. I think that means he wasnt confident in that call at all. When he makes that call. He knows he is going to go look at a replay so why create a bias towards one call. If thats called a 3 on the floor its stays a 3 all day long. If its called a 2 on the floor it obviously stayed a 2.

I dont understand why you need to make a call on the floor there when you know you arent confident in your own call.