TyposIncoming | Lakers

39 | 3 hours ago

The idea is that you want the consistency of having the same refs making the decisions for the whole game. That would be the argument for it.

Thats_Amore | Kings

12 | 3 hours ago

They shouldn’t review judgement calls. Only black and white stuff. 95% of blocks/charges you could convince yourself either way on replay. Leave that to the floor and let the league office review things like out of bounds or shot clock violations.

We’ve strayed so far from the idea of incontrovertible evidence. If you can’t see what happened within one or two replays, leave it be.

Replay has destroyed the watchability of this sport.

supacatkid | Thunder

2 | 3 hours ago

So they do have specific rules that they can apply especially upon discussion of all the refs.

I’d argue that upon review, even with judgement calls, they get the call right with significant regularity. Like with blocks/charges, they aren’t trying to “convince” themselves they are looking for very specific indicators and then come to a consensus decision. It is still subjective but much less so than a lot of fans think.

Thats_Amore | Kings

2 | 3 hours ago

But the idea that they’re actually calling the rest of the game this way isn’t really consistent either. I agree that they get it right way more often than not on the floor (and that there’s probably much more that goes into reviews than we understand).

I think we have to accept some amount of human error to make the game more fluid and enjoyable.

dakadoo33

2 | an hour ago

It’s not even the 5050 calls that i have a huge issue with, its the calls where the refs are forced to contend with clear situations visible on replay, that they have been letting go for both sides the entire game. You cant get on that mic and say, “there was a foul, but it rose to a level that the officiating crew has been letting both sides rise to all game”. So instead you get these gotcha moments, where a foul that hasn’t been called all game happens to land in a window of time that is reviewable and now the refs HAVE to call it a foul.

So now what do the refs do and what do the players expect for the rest of the game? do they call that foul live on the court? do they just call it once for the opposing team and revert back to the old style? its an absolute trap for the refs.

And you can literally see those situations play out sometimes on this sub(which has been pretty much just been bitching about ref bias and dirty players or whatever). After a review the way a game is refed will suddenly change and its considered bias on the court but it was just the poison the refs are forced to ingest when trying to contend with this horrifying system.

Also just annoying stoppage.

billybanks1132 | Spurs

35 | 3 hours ago

So you can go to commercial and make money off ads and then turn it into a spectacle instead of it being efficient.

SpatiallyLisa

10 | 3 hours ago

Then whoever’s fixing the games would have to pay off more refs lol /s

Kuraha_ | Bucks

3 | 3 hours ago

Also everything has to be as annoying as possible so they can cut away and play ads

EastBay_P

1 | 3 hours ago

This was my cynical take! Lol

EastBay_P

12 | 3 hours ago

The nba isn’t officiated following their own rules, so that kind of replay could cause a lot of issues. What do you even call when every play has a number of infractions - most of which you haven’t actually called all game?

Ok-Topic-6095 | Spurs

3 | 3 hours ago

The game threads are toxic af, but I have been saying all playoffs that calls are so dependent on game crews and even they will change up how they call games if “its getting out of hand”

sloBrodanChillosevic | Supersonics

5 | 3 hours ago

I would assume to keep decision making in the hands of the same refs. If Zach Zarba is the crew chief, Zarba & his crew should be making the decision on how the game is officiated. It shouldn’t also matter who is in Secaucus looking at the video and their interpretation of the contact on the play.

In a perfect world, all of the officials would see it the same way, but we don’t live in that world.

Ant-Bear

12 | 3 hours ago

Keeping the decisions in the same crew is not a desirable situation. It’s the same principle as checks and balances - the oversight is not supposed to be done by the same people that made the initial decision.

TitoBuente

4 | 3 hours ago

Totally!!! I don’t get it!

JeramiGrantsTomb | Thunder

5 | 3 hours ago

If I were going to steelman the idea, I would say that good refs enforce a consistent standard throughout the game, but different refs might enforce a different standard. So if you’ve had a “let them play” guy all game and your defense has adjusted to that, and then on a replay you get teleported to Secaucus and a guy who believes in calling tickytack fouls, that’s no good.

iguacu | Supersonics

7 | 3 hours ago

In theory, the remote refs only overturn “clear and obvious errors”. It goes without saying that there is a lot of discretion in the difference between a “normal” error and a “clear and obvious” error, particularly when the remote refs are watching the play in slow-motion replay, but that is the idea to ameliorate the problem you described.

Peakbrowndog

3 | 3 hours ago

It’s an entertainment product, not an efficiency product. More time reviewing means more time for ads.

Dependent_Oven_974

2 | 3 hours ago

This happens in VAR in football (soccer) and the remote refs are just as inept as the on field ones

FeeNegative9488

1 | 3 hours ago

It is done in combination between a remote ref and the on court refs.

In fact for Game 5 today, John Goble will be the replay ref and the on court refs are Scott Foster, James Caper and Tyler Ford.

itsme32

1 | 2 hours ago

Because Emeratis has to get its airtime.

GrapTops

1 | 2 hours ago

It would be nice to have the game called by the book all year, let the players adapt instead of forgetting rules when it’s convenient

yung-dracula | Warriors

1 | an hour ago

I don’t think the refs union would ever go for it. Look at how red assed MLB umps get at being reviewed, these guys are all petty tyrants and they hate being undermined, even if it’s by another ref.

Why TF is video review done live on court and not via remote refs?