[76lsjumb]

[quote author=paloalto link=topic=16702.msg190568#msg190568 date=1490414994]
[quote author=IM in OC link=topic=16702.msg190560#msg190560 date=1490412867]
Stanford has had better teams than this season.
I do not think they have one as tough and gritty as this team.

I agree. Changing the subject, the officials take way too long to review plays on video.  There has to be a way to speed that up.  Also there are too many timeouts at the end of a game for the casual fan to stay engaged.  The last five minutes probably lasted about twenty minutes.  I stuck with the game because I am a Stanford fan.  Many others probably went channel surfing and never returned.
[/quote]

Agree with the reviews taking too long. It also happened in the Gonzaga vs WV men's game yesterday that I had a need to watch. The outcome was obvious, the play-by-play and color guys pretty much called it right away, and yet it took forever for the obvious to be the "official" decision. At best, it turns the casual fan off. At worst, it shifts the entire complexion of the game, momentum-wise, flow-wise, etc.
[/quote]

I was at the Gonzaga v. WV game.  As you indicate, it was obvious to all ~16,000 spectators from the single big screen replay about 10 seconds after it happened that the call on the floor was wrong and should be overturned. There were apparently only 3 people in the entire SAP Center who weren't aware of that at the time, and all 3 were wearing striped shirts.  Over the next ~5 minutes before the call was reversed, there were three separate outbursts of loud, sustained booing, and, after play resumed, it took about 60 seconds of play before the general level of energy and excitement in the arena -- which had been quite high immediately before this -- got back to even close to what it was before.

But the really crazy thing about the "go to the monitor" rule as it currently exists is that, had the ball gone out of bounds literally two seconds earlier, the bad call would presumably have been allowed to stand and play would have resumed immediately!  It happened at 1:59 left on the game clock -- and the refs can only do a monitor review for an OB call in the last two minutes of regulation [or during overtime].  While I in NO WAY want to expand the time of the game during which this travesty can be perpetrated, it is insane to have a rule that results in the exact opposite call, during the game, simply because of a two-second difference on the game clock.  A wrong call at any time -- not just in the last two minutes -- can be crucial.  However, it is in the last two minutes that the imposition of these interminable delays probably has its most adverse effect.  If calls are only going to be reviewable for two minutes, why not just make it the period from, say, 18:00 to 16:00 in the second half and, for the rest of the game, including the end -- indeed, PARTICULARLY at the end -- just tell the refs to do their job better...?  ;)

Later in the evening, during the Arizona game, the officials went to the monitor for some reason that wasn't readily apparent to anyone in the arena, and, again, after a long delay and numerous conferences, one of them ran over to the TV announcers, talked for a while, and then they resumed the game.  At no time did the arena announcer provide any explanation as to what was happening.  Again, the crowd wasn't too happy.

After all, when you're at the game in-person, channel-surfing isn't even an option.  :)

[76lsjumb]

[quote author=paloalto link=topic=16702.msg190568#msg190568 date=1490414994]
[quote author=IM in OC link=topic=16702.msg190560#msg190560 date=1490412867]
Stanford has had better teams than this season.
I do not think they have one as tough and gritty as this team.

I agree. Changing the subject, the officials take way too long to review plays on video.  There has to be a way to speed that up.  Also there are too many timeouts at the end of a game for the casual fan to stay engaged.  The last five minutes probably lasted about twenty minutes.  I stuck with the game because I am a Stanford fan.  Many others probably went channel surfing and never returned.
[/quote]

Agree with the reviews taking too long. It also happened in the Gonzaga vs WV men's game yesterday that I had a need to watch. The outcome was obvious, the play-by-play and color guys pretty much called it right away, and yet it took forever for the obvious to be the "official" decision. At best, it turns the casual fan off. At worst, it shifts the entire complexion of the game, momentum-wise, flow-wise, etc.
[/quote]

I was at the Gonzaga v. WV game.  As you indicate, it was obvious to all ~16,000 spectators from the single big screen replay about 10 seconds after it happened that the call on the floor was wrong and should be overturned. There were apparently only 3 people in the entire SAP Center who weren't aware of that at the time, and all 3 were wearing striped shirts.  Over the next ~5 minutes before the call was reversed, there were three separate outbursts of loud, sustained booing, and, after play resumed, it took about 60 seconds of play before the general level of energy and excitement in the arena -- which had been quite high immediately before this -- got back to even close to what it was before.

But the really crazy thing about the "go to the monitor" rule as it currently exists is that, had the ball gone out of bounds literally two seconds earlier, the bad call would presumably have been allowed to stand and play would have resumed immediately!  It happened at 1:59 left on the game clock -- and the refs can only do a monitor review for an OB call in the last two minutes of regulation [or during overtime].  While I in NO WAY want to expand the time of the game during which this travesty can be perpetrated, it is insane to have a rule that results in the exact opposite call, during the game, simply because of a two-second difference on the game clock.  A wrong call at any time -- not just in the last two minutes -- can be crucial.  However, it is in the last two minutes that the imposition of these interminable delays probably has its most adverse effect.  If calls are only going to be reviewable for two minutes, why not just make it the period from, say, 18:00 to 16:00 in the second half and, for the rest of the game, including the end -- indeed, PARTICULARLY at the end -- just tell the refs to do their job better...?  ;)

Later in the evening, during the Arizona game, the officials went to the monitor for some reason that wasn't readily apparent to anyone in the arena, and, again, after a long delay and numerous conferences, one of them ran over to the TV announcers, talked for a while, and then they resumed the game.  At no time did the arena announcer provide any explanation as to what was happening.  Again, the crowd wasn't too happy.

After all, when you're at the game in-person, channel-surfing isn't even an option.  :)