There is too much made of how long a sporting event takes.
We can’t have more instant replay in baseball because games that take three hours would possibly take an extra 30 minutes, if it’s horribly officiated. The same applies for football.
But if basketball and hockey can do it, why can’t both baseball and football?
In the NHL, every second of the game is under review in terms of goals scored, as there is a replay official constantly watching — and re-watching — to see if a goal was a goal and if a non-goal was in fact a goal.
In the NBA, they can at any time check to see if a two-point jumper was a 3-pointer.
So what’s the difference if the NFL has the power to now review every touchdown, as the League will have starting in 2011? Mike Pereira, of FOXSports.com, explained the new rule change:
I think the new rule is great, yet there are already complaints from bloggers/columnists about how it will make the game even longer.
Hell, at this point, the entire football fan universe are just hoping to see a game; they do not care if it happens to be longer.
Or at least, they shouldn’t.
Yahoo! Sports NFL blog, “Shutdown Corner,” complained about the new rules, writing:
“And think about this, too: You know that super-annoying thing that networks do when, after a score, there's a commercial break, they come back for the kickoff, and then have another commercial break, and it seems like there's about a half hour between plays from scrimmage? Throw a replay break into that, too. You'll see the same Coors Light commercial six times before anyone takes another snap.”
Yeah, you may see a few extra Coors Light commercials, but the good thing will be that every touchdown will be legit and no one can ever complain that the referees stole a game. Plus, in the event that there is a poorly officiated game, a coach will not have to worry about the second half if he is out of challenges. And there will be no more hesitation to try and correct a potential bad call because you’re worried about losing a timeout.
In a week where we've seen a Red Sox-Rays game go 16 innings and a USA women's soccer game go to penalty kicks, there's been a lot of talk about how long games are right now. But let's not worry about how long games are and rather worry about getting them right. We have the technology to perfect official calls and we should use it. We shouldn't fear the future of sports. We should embrace it and use the newer technologies as much as possible.
I think the NFL rule change is a great step forward for the NFL, and I look forward to real touchdowns being scored in 2011, even if I have to make fun of the Coors Light “Super Cold” label a few extra times a day.
We can’t have more instant replay in baseball because games that take three hours would possibly take an extra 30 minutes, if it’s horribly officiated. The same applies for football.
But if basketball and hockey can do it, why can’t both baseball and football?
In the NHL, every second of the game is under review in terms of goals scored, as there is a replay official constantly watching — and re-watching — to see if a goal was a goal and if a non-goal was in fact a goal.
In the NBA, they can at any time check to see if a two-point jumper was a 3-pointer.
So what’s the difference if the NFL has the power to now review every touchdown, as the League will have starting in 2011? Mike Pereira, of FOXSports.com, explained the new rule change:
"If an official rules a score (touchdown, field goal, safety or extra point) during a game, the replay official will automatically review the play. If there is any question as to whether the ruling is correct, they will buzz down to the referee and ask him to come to the monitor to review the play. If the replay official confirms the ruling is correct, they will buzz the referee indicating he is clear to let the scoring team attempt the extra point, or kick off if the scoring play was a field goal, safety or extra-point attempt. A coach will not be allowed to challenge the ruling of a score. The intent is to save the coach from having to challenge the ruling of a score and, thus, increase his chances of not running out of challenges or timeouts," Pereira said.
I think the new rule is great, yet there are already complaints from bloggers/columnists about how it will make the game even longer.
Hell, at this point, the entire football fan universe are just hoping to see a game; they do not care if it happens to be longer.
Or at least, they shouldn’t.
Yahoo! Sports NFL blog, “Shutdown Corner,” complained about the new rules, writing:
“And think about this, too: You know that super-annoying thing that networks do when, after a score, there's a commercial break, they come back for the kickoff, and then have another commercial break, and it seems like there's about a half hour between plays from scrimmage? Throw a replay break into that, too. You'll see the same Coors Light commercial six times before anyone takes another snap.”
Yeah, you may see a few extra Coors Light commercials, but the good thing will be that every touchdown will be legit and no one can ever complain that the referees stole a game. Plus, in the event that there is a poorly officiated game, a coach will not have to worry about the second half if he is out of challenges. And there will be no more hesitation to try and correct a potential bad call because you’re worried about losing a timeout.
In a week where we've seen a Red Sox-Rays game go 16 innings and a USA women's soccer game go to penalty kicks, there's been a lot of talk about how long games are right now. But let's not worry about how long games are and rather worry about getting them right. We have the technology to perfect official calls and we should use it. We shouldn't fear the future of sports. We should embrace it and use the newer technologies as much as possible.
I think the NFL rule change is a great step forward for the NFL, and I look forward to real touchdowns being scored in 2011, even if I have to make fun of the Coors Light “Super Cold” label a few extra times a day.
Comments