Booth review question...

[CySmurf]

I have trust issues...
We should be able to hear the headset conversations between booth and official...Or anyone else communicating on the officials headset. Sometimes I get the sneaky suspicion the "powers that be" are telling officials which way to call a review to fit their agendas. Am I paranoid?
...Like I said, I have trust issues.

 

[BCClone]

I have trust issues...
We should be able to hear the headset conversations between booth and official...Or anyone else communicating on the officials headset. Sometimes I get the sneaky suspicion the "powers that be" are telling officials which way to call a review to fit their agendas. Am I paranoid?
...Like I said, I have trust issues.

Paranoid.

 

[AllInForISU]

I have trust issues...
We should be able to hear the headset conversations between booth and official...Or anyone else communicating on the officials headset. Sometimes I get the sneaky suspicion the "powers that be" are telling officials which way to call a review to fit their agendas. Am I paranoid?
...Like I said, I have trust issues.

I want this too. One of the pro spring leagues did it and it was awesome.

 

[IceCyIce]

Paranoid yes for good reason. But definitly better than hemarrhoid

 

[larry]

I've seen this in cricket as well. You get to see exactly what the referee is looking at and hear what is being said as he goes through his thought process.

 

[3TrueFans]

It should be more transparent just because it’s helpful for everyone, not because I think someone is telling a ref to call something because it’s a specific team or whatever. Even if they just released the audio after the games for big calls would be nice, they do that for premier league sometimes.

 

[Cychl82]

I think that they just have no idea what to call sometimes. There are rules like targeting that these people screw up constantly. That play in the Peach bowl was text book targeting that should have been called. That not being called targeting makes me lose any faith in the set up also because it was Texas. I remember a play years ago when ISU played WSU against Minshew in the bowl game where our DL was tripped, Minshew was already laying on his back and our DL landed and hit helmet to helmet AS HE WAS FALLING DOWN! I remember that being one of the biggest plays of the game, targeting and he was down, WSU won. Im with the ASU coach......evidently nobody really knows what it is.

 

[Drew0311]

I have trust issues...
We should be able to hear the headset conversations between booth and official...Or anyone else communicating on the officials headset. Sometimes I get the sneaky suspicion the "powers that be" are telling officials which way to call a review to fit their agendas. Am I paranoid?
...Like I said, I have trust issues.

I think the refs should have to answer post game questions on questionable calls at the very minimum. The losing team players and losing team coaches have to, why would that replay official and the rest of the officials not have to explain why they made a certain call or didn’t make a certain call. Why is it targeting in one situation but not the other

 

[Walden4Prez]

I think the refs should have to answer post game questions on questionable calls at the very minimum. The losing team players and losing team coaches have to, why would that replay official and the rest of the officials not have to explain why they made a certain call or didn’t make a certain call. Why is it targeting in one situation but not the other

100% agree that PAID officials should have to answer questions after every game, just like coaches and players.

 

[Isualum13]

I think it would help with all reviews if the reviewer doesn't know what the ruling on the field is. Tell them what they are reviewing (catch, fumble, tageting, etc) and let them tell you what they see.

 

[AllInForISU]

I think it would help with all reviews if the reviewer doesn't know what the ruling on the field is. Tell them what they are reviewing (catch, fumble, tageting, etc) and let them tell you what they see.

You want to add another person to the situation?

Personally, I’d just like a time limit on reviews. 90 seconds max like the NFL used to do. If you can’t figure it out in 90 seconds, it doesn’t change.

Also, expedited review in college needs to happen asap

 

[jackrabbit]

I have trust issues...
We should be able to hear the headset conversations between booth and official...Or anyone else communicating on the officials headset. Sometimes I get the sneaky suspicion the "powers that be" are telling officials which way to call a review to fit their agendas. Am I paranoid?
...Like I said, I have trust issues.

I think that would be very informative. However, right now you don't get to hear the communication between the umpire and the back judge or the side judge etc. And as mentioned the UFL did allow the communication between the replay booth and the officals to be heard last season (2024). If the Big 12 wants to set itself apart, maybe do this for all conference games.

 

[AltoonaFish]

There is nothing an official can say to make anyone happy. I didn’t see it or I was out of position isn’t going to make any one happy. There are also several questionable calls during games , where do you draw the line? It would only make things worse and absolutely fix nothing.

I think the refs should have to answer post game questions on questionable calls at the very minimum. The losing team players and losing team coaches have to, why would that replay official and the rest of the officials not have to explain why they made a certain call or didn’t make a certain call. Why is it targeting in one situation but not the other

 

[Isualum13]

You want to add another person to the situation?

Personally, I’d just like a time limit on reviews. 90 seconds max like the NFL used to do. If you can’t figure it out in 90 seconds, it doesn’t change.

Also, expedited review in college needs to happen asap

No. The replay official should be in the dark about what is happening in the game and what the call on the field is.

 

[ISUAgronomist]

You should be paranoid when fine people like Brad Van Vark are allowed to be the replay officials.

 

[AllInForISU]

No. The replay official should be in the dark about what is happening in the game and what the call on the field is.

Then how do they signal down for a replay on something the field officials got wrong

 

[Drew0311]

There is nothing an official can say to make anyone happy. I didn’t see it or I was out of position isn’t going to make any one happy. There are also several questionable calls during games , where do you draw the line? It would only make things worse and absolutely fix nothing.

I disagree. A call this big needs an explanation. If it makes some people mad, so be it. If your audience don’t understand the rules, there is no point of the game. We all understand every other rule. Explain to us why u are not calling this rule as it is written

 

[9104Griffith]

I have trust issues...
We should be able to hear the headset conversations between booth and official...Or anyone else communicating on the officials headset. Sometimes I get the sneaky suspicion the "powers that be" are telling officials which way to call a review to fit their agendas. Am I paranoid?
...Like I said, I have trust issues.

This actually happens in high level rugby matches. The Television Match Official will have a conversation with the head referee and it's shared on the TV broadcast.

 

[AltoonaFish]

I disagree. A call this big needs an explanation. If it makes some people mad, so be it. If your audience don’t understand the rules, there is no point of the game. We all understand every other rule. Explain to us why u are not calling this rule as it is written

What is the threshold for an explanation? Timing of the call? Does the first drive get explanations such as a bad spot or a missed hands to the face? Or do they only need to answer for a controversial call in the 2nd half? Or 4th quarter or only with 2 minutes to go or if Texas is playing?

 

[Peter]

I appreciate the NBA where the official has to announce the reasoning behind the call for any review.