Official stoppage for review

[Gus]

I think the official stoppage for review without coaches challenge needs to be eliminated. The officials stop the matches quite frequently to review their own calls. Yes, they overturn them sometimes but at some point the matches just need to be wrestled and if there are bad calls a coach can challenge. Otherwise, let’s keep the matches rolling without so many breaks. 

[Caveira]

I would wager.   One day AI will be helping or fully officiating sporting events.   Adding tracking devices to the athletes equipment or a ball to track where they are etc…..   right around the corner.   

[CHROMEBIRD]

31 minutes ago, Caveira said:

I would wager.   One day AI will be helping or fully officiating sporting events.   Adding tracking devices to the athletes equipment or a ball to track where they are etc…..   right around the corner.   

Likely helping more than fully officiating. Baseball piloted technology in the minors to accurately call strikes/balls. It did a better job than humans at making the correct calls, but everyone hated it because the robot umpiring made games last a lot longer. Like laws, many sports rules are subject to interpretation.

I do agree that the reviews in wrestling really slows down the action, for better or for worse. It was especially bad at NCAAs last year. Officials burnt a ton of time with reviews.

[1032004]

I was literally just thinking this today, that it seems like there have been a lot more of these this year.  Sometimes it is the refs deciding on their own, but often it is preceded by the coaches arguing that they “shouldn’t have to use their challenge” for that particular call, which also adds time.  Maybe get rid of the official’s review, but give the coaches 1 more challenge?

[Caveira]

31 minutes ago, CHROMEBIRD said:

Likely helping more than fully officiating. Baseball piloted technology in the minors to accurately call strikes/balls. It did a better job than humans at making the correct calls, but everyone hated it because the robot umpiring made games last a lot longer. Like laws, many sports rules are subject to interpretation.

I do agree that the reviews in wrestling really slows down the action, for better or for worse. It was especially bad at NCAAs last year. Officials burnt a ton of time with reviews.

You’re not wrong.   Soccer in Europe has offsides called by computer now.  Maybe even in the World Cup I think.   
 

for the record I prefer pure human refs without challenge bricks or anything else.   

[D3UC157]

I like it as an option.
 

Intuitively, I would think humans are more likely to be open to “let me go double-check myself on that, I’m not 100%” and possibly change something. 

As opposed to someone else saying they got it wrong and literally ‘challenging’ them. 
 

Coaches need their obligatory challenge. But the “self-challenge” by a ref seems like a good thing.

[Caveira]

2 minutes ago, D3UC157 said:

I like it as an option.
 

Intuitively, I would think humans are more likely to be open to “let me go double-check myself on that, I’m not 100%” and possibly change something. 

As opposed to someone else saying they got it wrong and literally ‘challenging’ them. 
 

Coaches need their obligatory challenge. But the “self-challenge” by a ref seems like a good thing.

Wonder if anyone with actual human psychology experience would weigh in.  (I have zero… other than one psych class a 20 years ago in college). 
 

I feel like refs that have the backup of replay just make the easier call then go to the film to review.  Knowing they have that causes so many more reviews than necessary.   Tempo in wrestling is so much more important than like the nfl or mlb to me.  It’s a noticeably different product.   

[Wrestleknownothing]

41 minutes ago, Caveira said:

You’re not wrong.   Soccer in Europe has offsides called by computer now.  Maybe even in the World Cup I think.   
 

for the record I prefer pure human refs without challenge bricks or anything else.   

Not exactly. It is called VAR for video assisted ref. The same as video reviews in the NFL. There is a certified ref sitting in the league offices watching video to assist the on field ref. They are also experimenting with putting sensors in the balls so that they know for sure if it crosses the goal line.

[ionel]

1 hour ago, Caveira said:

You’re not wrong.   Soccer in Europe has offsides called by computer now.  Maybe even in the World Cup I think.   
 

for the record I prefer pure human refs without challenge bricks or anything else.   

There is no offsides in soccer. 

[Caveira]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Not exactly. It is called VAR for video assisted ref. The same as video reviews in the NFL. There is a certified ref sitting in the league offices watching video to assist the on field ref. They are also experimenting with putting sensors in the balls so that they know for sure if it crosses the goal line.

Fair lol.  You win ha.   
 

I do believe it will get more and more cpu driven vs human driven over time though.   Time will tell 

Edited January 28 by Caveira

[Caveira]

1 hour ago, ionel said:

There is no offsides in soccer. 

Fair.  -2 for me tonight 

[Gus]

3 hours ago, D3UC157 said:

I like it as an option.
 

Intuitively, I would think humans are more likely to be open to “let me go double-check myself on that, I’m not 100%” and possibly change something. 

As opposed to someone else saying they got it wrong and literally ‘challenging’ them. 
 

Coaches need their obligatory challenge. But the “self-challenge” by a ref seems like a good thing.

Too many stoppages for my liking. Wrestling is a sport where conditioning is a huge tool and these stoppages take away from that. 

[FanOfPurdueWrestling]

I had the opposite feeling today, coaches shouldn’t need to challenge as much and official challenges should happen more often.

 

But also I feel like that does mess up the flow of matches. I want the right call so challenges are necessary, they need to make them quick though. 

[dragit]

I hate current replay in most sports as I don't think it justifies the stoppage, particularly because they blow the call anyway a lot, and because they can't reverse when everyone knows they should a lot.  

It's particularly frustrating in wrestling because it's an action sport and a conditioning sport.  As a fan the stoppages have noticeably lessened the viewing experience for me.  One of the best selling points for the sport previously was that there aren't any timeouts.  That's gone by the wayside.

I'm not totally anti electronic help.  Tennis has been helped enormously by many tournaments going all laser calls.  If the ball lands out, a recorded voice instantly yells, "out," and the point is over.  There are no arguments at all.  Who can you argue with?  Also, the players have confidence in the accuracy.  This improves play quality, because you don't have players getting doubts in their mind about the fairness of the competition.

Someone mentioned balls and strikes in baseball.  I actually advocate that they go all electronic on balls and strikes, and get rid of replay for everything else, all other calls stand.  Missed balls and strikes affect the outcome of baseball games 10 times more than missed other calls.  The players have zero confidence in the home plate umpires, most of whom are not good at their jobs, which are very hard even if you're good at it (ball moving 95 mph, moving a foot or more, large human blocking your view).  My understanding is that the minor league experiment, kind of like the old tennis system of challenges, worked very well and did NOT slow down the game.  The pitcher, catcher, or hitter immediately touches their hat, and the ump is immediately given the call.  That's it.  

It really depends on the physics of the sport and whether, like tennis, but generally unlike wrestling, they're susceptible to a clear, objective, electronic result.  But I start with a bias against because the breaks in action are so substantial, and the results often ridiculous (last minutes of an NBA game are a joke, so long, and they screw up all the time).

Another thing and I'll shut up.  A lot of the overrules are to me pretty pointless.  When a runner slides in safe and then is off the base for .00001 seconds when his foot comes off before his hand comes on, have we accomplished something by calling him out?  There are also some situations in basketball where the last person to touch the ball is basically a technicality, it's been knocked out by someone else.

[MPhillips]

9 hours ago, dragit said:

There are also some situations in basketball where the last person to touch the ball is basically a technicality, it's been knocked out by someone else.

The last person to touch a ball that goes OOB is a, "technicality?"  Can you help that make sense...

[dragit]

4 hours ago, MPhillips said:

The last person to touch a ball that goes OOB is a, "technicality?"  Can you help that make sense...

I know it sounds ridiculous but it's a situation that happens sometimes.

You've got the ball.  I swipe in and knock it hard out of your hands.  100% of the time without replay you guys get the ball.  But they go to replay and the frame by frame shows that it technically rolled off your fingertip after I hit it.  So I knocked the ball out but it's off you. The rest of the game it's always called the other way, so it's not a mistake by the ref. 

[ionel]

17 minutes ago, dragit said:

I know it sounds ridiculous but it's a situation that happens sometimes.

You've got the ball.  I swipe in and knock it hard out of your hands.  100% of the time without replay you guys get the ball.  But they go to replay and the frame by frame shows that it technically rolled off your fingertip after I hit it.  So I knocked the ball out but it's off you. The rest of the game it's always called the other way, so it's not a mistake by the ref. 

@Ban Basketball where are you?