I think we can all agree that more transparency in sports officiating is a good thing.
The ACC made a brilliant decision when it was the trailblazer last season of allowing game broadcasts to hear the audio of how replay-review processes play out between the officials working the game and those at the replay-review center in Charlotte.
Advertisement
The problem with transparency, though, is that it shows the truth, even if it looks unfavorable for your officials and exposes their issues.
That may not have been more evident at any point in this system’s existence than at the end of Florida State’s 43-35 double-overtime loss at No. 3 Miami Saturday evening.
Go look at what everyone is saying about the replay of Duce Robinson’s non-catch on fourth-and-31 which would have given FSU a chance to pick up a two-point conversion and send the game to a third OT period. The large consensus from everyone not supporting Miami was that it sure looked like that was simultaneous possession, which would have meant a Florida State touchdown.
It may have even just been an outright FSU catch.
But because the officials waited forever to make a call (when Miami had ripped the ball away from Robinson) and deemed it an interception, that’s where the replay center was starting its assessment. And from how things sounded, they never really entertained another outcome despite this being a highly controversial (and critically important) play.
Advertisement
Here’s the full transcript of what we heard (or at least what could be made out through the mics over the loud crowd noise) from the replay center and the referee watching on the monitor as they reviewed the game-ending sequence:
Replay Center 1: Let’s wait to get (the referee) over (to the monitor) and see what views we have. The ruling on the field is going to be an interception by Miami, so when I’m looking at it here, I can see the ball here, with the (Miami) player down. He catches and he comes down, body part down. Based off of this…
Referee (interrupting): The ruling on the field is an interception by the defense.
Replay Center 1: Ok, so that’s Miami. On this (view), we’re going to see the ball coming into Miami, you’re going to see a body part down, you’re going to see the ball in his midsection. The ball does not touch the ground, so he has the ball there.
Advertisement
Referee: I agree.
Replay Center 1: So based off of this look, the ruling on the field is upheld. However, I’m looking at any other (replay).
(Indiscernible due to crowd noise)
Replay Center 2: That’s the (camera angle) we’ve been using.
Replay Center 1: Alright, so just let us know when the feeds are done coming in. But based off this look, is everybody in agreement that the ruling on the field is upheld?
Two people agree
Referee: I see control by the Miami defensive player.
Replay Center 1: I concur. We have control, we have a body part (down) and we’re all in agreement that the ruling on the field is upheld?
Advertisement
Agreement from people on call
Replay Center 1: Is there anything else coming, let’s just ask the truck if there’s…
Truck (?): That is it.
Replay Center 1: Everybody in agreement the ruling on the field is upheld?
Agreement from all
Referee: That’s the end of the game, correct?
Replay Center 1: Yep.
That’s what I could make out of it, at least.
How often have we seen interminably long reviews for plays far less consequential and far more obvious? And yet, they talked about this one for 90 seconds once the referee got on the headset.
There was no entertaining the notion of simultaneous possession. They seemed to think the replay confirmed the call on the field, which…I don’t think is remotely obvious.
Advertisement
Given the uncertainty of the angles, it seems clear whatever was called on the field was going to remain the call. But maybe you could take a bit more time to make sure given how important a moment this was?
If the transparency of the replay-review process is going to come across as so unconvincing, maybe they should just return it to how it was a few years ago. Because watching how that played out Saturday night did not convince anyone the process is working as it’s supposed to.
