SEC approves a new collaborative replay policy for this fall

[WizardofhOgZ]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/new-sec-replay-rule-could-help-lessen-mistakes-on-targeting-calls/

[31to6]

http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/new-sec-replay-rule-could-help-lessen-mistakes-on-targeting-calls/

So the SEC offices in Birmingham can weigh in on any calls against Alabama controversial calls?

Fantastic.

[hawg IQ]

Anybody like to see just general improvement in SEC Officiating. Can we get a collaborative plan going around that thought a little bit. And concerning the replay booth guy- can we go back to overwhelming evidence to overturn a call instead some personal opines/ or favor the higher ranked team calls.

[DeltaBoy]

Good move.

[Dwight_K_Shrute]

In it's purest form it's a good move.  But I have full confidence in the SEC to screw it up. 

First as has already been said, instead of investing in new technology invest in better on field officiating.  Better officiating on field reduces the need for replay. 

Next you know who these centralized replay officials will be?  Former sh***y on field SEC officials who are now past their prime to be on the field.  Just a way to give those GOB's a paycheck for awhile longer. 

Their test consisted of an SEC spring game.  Seriously?  A game that isn't even an exhibition but a scrimmage amongst the same team where absolutely nothing is on the line.

Nothing about this screams improvement, but it does scream SEC SEC.

[hoggusamoungus]

In it's purest form it's a good move.  But I have full confidence in the SEC to screw it up. 

First as has already been said, instead of investing in new technology invest in better on field officiating.  Better officiating on field reduces the need for replay. 

Next you know who these centralized replay officials will be?  Former sh***y on field SEC officials who are now past their prime to be on the field.  Just a way to give those GOB's a paycheck for awhile longer. 

Their test consisted of an SEC spring game.  Seriously?  A game that isn't even an exhibition but a scrimmage amongst the same team where absolutely nothing is on the line.

Nothing about this screams improvement, but it does scream SEC SEC.

With a little ACC ACC thrown in.

A week after the ACC announced it will use collaborative instant replay in 2016, the SEC has approved the same measure.

[Mike_e]

You know why they went ahead and implemented this for the coming season, right?


We play Florida this year.

[SamBuckhart]

Swell. Will it speed up the game any?

[Inhogswetrust]

They should let Hog fans watching at Buffalo Wild Wings decide...........................

[TUSKtimes]

The targeting rule has been overall a success in safety. You just don't see the cobra-like launching, knock them and yourself out, kind of violent hit. Some of the interpretation about what is launching still needs to be improved on with officials. Plus offensive players are doing way too much launching that is not looked at.

What is really excesses is making a player sit out the first half of the next game if the penalty occurs in the second half. Getting tossed in any game should be punishment enough.

Otherwise, it's served a good purpose.

[WizardofhOgZ]

The targeting rule has been overall a success in safety. You just don't see the cobra-like launching, knock them and yourself out, kind of violent hit. Some of the interpretation about what is launching still needs to be improved on with officials. Plus offensive players are doing way too much launching that is not looked at.

What is really excesses is making a player sit out the first half of the next game if the penalty occurs in the second half. Getting tossed in any game should be punishment enough.

Otherwise, it's served a good purpose.

I disagree.  Late in a blowout game, the specter of having to sit out part of the next game can be a deterrent to keep some jackass from taking a cheap shot on a defenseless player.  If you had your way, all that would get the offender is a place on the sidelines (well after the game had already been decided) to dance and taunt with his fellow teammates.  As the rule is now, you have to think about the consequences in the next game as well - and that's a good thing, IMO.



.

[TUSKtimes]

I disagree.  Late in a blowout game, the specter of having to sit out part of the next game can be a deterrent to keep some jackass from taking a cheap shot on a defenseless player.  If you had your way, all that would get the offender is a place on the sidelines (well after the game had already been decided) to dance and taunt with his fellow teammates.  As the rule is now, you have to think about the consequences in the next game as well - and that's a good thing, IMO..

Not sure who you've been watching play football, maybe the Miami hurricanes. Either way, the rule has worked and the game is a lot safer for it. 

[31to6]

Not sure who you've been watching play football, maybe the Miami hurricanes. Either way, the rule has worked and the game is a lot safer for it. 

You are mostly correct. The problem with the rule is not the rule, it is the inconsistent implementation.

Targeting is called and players have been ejected when later replay showed it to be far from cut and dried.

Conversely, players have been carted off the field after what replay later showed to obviously be targeting but no flag was thrown.

I don't think anyone can effectively defend the notion of going back to a pre-targeting-rule football. With what we understand about concussions, it is just not possible even if we wanted to have players taking that level of risk.

But there are legitimate complaints on both ends of the spectrum: when bad calls have disparate impact on a competitive game and when bad no-calls lead players to think that a particular officiating crew is letting them play closer to the edge--resulting in injury.

[TUSKtimes]

You are mostly correct. The problem with the rule is not the rule, it is the inconsistent implementation.

Targeting is called and players have been ejected when later replay showed it to be far from cut and dried.

Conversely, players have been carted off the field after what replay later showed to obviously be targeting but no flag was thrown.

I don't think anyone can effectively defend the notion of going back to a pre-targeting-rule football. With what we understand about concussions, it is just not possible even if we wanted to have players taking that level of risk.

But there are legitimate complaints on both ends of the spectrum: when bad calls have disparate impact on a competitive game and when bad no-calls lead players to think that a particular officiating crew is letting them play closer to the edge--resulting in injury.

About this same time, I recall watching helmets flying through mid-heaven at a remarkable pace. They make a simple penalty of having to go out a play when you lose your bonnet and suddenly helmets were strapped down and fitting again. How unsafe was that stunt? Just to say, you almost have to legislate good sense on the playing field. Kids are too reckless with their health.

I'm happy the SEC office is trying to be more fair about a very punitive penalty. But what is launching and targeting has been very subjective so far. They do need to clean up a consistent definition. And some of these offensive players are equally guilty as well.

[flynhog]

Florida isn't going to like this.