Thinking about the conference games and wondering how long before the NFL just auto-reviews every catch that goes to ground like they do every scoring play. Clearly can’t rely on the refs to actually see anything.
@antonyjohnston and then we are a moment away from AI review.
“All 12 toes were in the ground before crossing the out of bounds marker so…”
@antonyjohnston It seems just a short time ago when the conventional wisdom about instant replay review was "no, you can't take the human element out of the game." But when everyone watching on TV knows the human element got the call wrong, that resistance breaks down.
@drdrang Yeah, I remember the complaints about reviews slowing the game down, and they do to an extent of course. But nobody watching last night would have complained about the run time being 15 mins longer if it meant the calls were accurate.
@antonyjohnston @drdrang it’s worked in cricket for decades, and now they’ve limited the number of reviews per game (or innings) you don’t get frivolous challenges, and it doesn’t disrupt play at all. (You usually get three appeals per innings, and if you challenge and lose, you lose one review. If you challenge correctly and the original decision was wrong, you keep the review)
@scottearle @antonyjohnston It's possible (OK, likely) my understanding of cricket has been too heavily influenced by Lord Peter Wimsey, but is it even possible to slow down cricket? Don't they break for tea?
@drdrang @antonyjohnston well a full game takes four or five days. There is a break for lunch, and a break for tea. It’s a civilised game :)
@scottearle That’s not dissimilar to the challenge rules in football. I’m talking about automatic reviews, instigated by the ref/rules, so teams aren’t penalised.