http://www.eastsideboxing.com/news.php?p=20753&more=1 From the main page. What do you guys think of implementing something like this? I think in Tennis the challenge rule is great. It's not disruptive to the game, keeps umpires in check, but still doesn't interfere with (in fact it can illustrate) a players skill. In NRL however, it's not so great (though, I think the guys running that sport are to blame for that)... NRL has 2 refs, instant replay and STILL they get decisions wrong. And even with 2 refs, they still aren't confident in making calls with out assistance if there is even a skerrick of a chance it's a bad call. There's something not right with that for me. It's just got no flow and NRL seems like every year they change things - trying to make it 'better' but it's not better at all. It's the same if anything (if not worse off for it). I love that football hasn't done it yet and don't want it to to be honest. I know we would have gone further in the WC and I don't know why I think this way, but to me it's a good thing that the game is still in the ref's hands on that one. It's the same game we've been watching for years and years now and I like the idea of it staying that way. In boxing however, I think maybe an outside ring official should be able to contact the referee (through an ear piece?) when there is a possible discretion with the fighters or the ref's course of action as a result of an incident. (I haven't thought about the best way to implement it at all really) Obviously the flow of the match and not stopping the fight for a prolonged time are paramount to getting it right. In fact, maybe it will never work simply because of that - the only time a fight stops is when there's a foul, Mouth piece out, tape to cut etc adding instant replay in there might disrupt things too much. I think it would work if it wasn't relied upon so much like it is in NRL try scoring now. It really wouldn't be used often so long as ref's remain confident in making decisions and are only corrected by an official would it? How many circumstances can you think of that the video ref might interrupt a fight? And how often might it occur on average? I'm open to it. A wrong decision in boxing feels really wrong for me. 2 guys slugging it out like that - for one to suffer for a bad call is a real injustice.
Thats the main part, in team sports etc they can come back the next week etc to regain points on a ladder, but boxing these guys train there asses off and a bad decision in a title eliminator etc can ruin a guys career or put him back up to 2 years to get back, imagine a similar situation happened in a real world title fight tha thappened with Dib and the jap bloke, and there has been numerous calls of knock downs counted from low shots and visa versa with shots that have been called low when they weren't.
Not sure, remember the Soto loss by DQ to Lorenzo when even with a slow mo replay Joe Cortez still gave the win to Lorenzo? A good idea but I'm not sure if it can be implemented into a working format.
This has to be implemented , if a refereer rules a cut caused by a punch,but its actually a headbutt, during the 1 min break, the ref can be informed that it was a headbutt.
I think it's a bloody minefield. I really do. Refereeing & decisions have to be as close as possible to what the crowd sees. Refereeing by replay will eventually send a message to live performances that the game is better seen on TV. Turning around the dwindling crowds is a huge issue for boxing, if we are going to do this, we will have to start installing the big screens & that will only compound my earlier opinion (Better on TV). While I enjoy watching replays because I want to see fair play, the other side of me says nothings perfect, & a well refereed fight is as close as it needs to be. Having said that, something as crucial as a head clash/cut, which can end the fight instantaneously without a legal blow & can put a fighter out of action for several months, would be a concession I'd make. That criteria though, should be hard & fast. I know low blows & tosses (Damaged limbs) can end a fight illegally but allowing that would be the thin end of the wedge IMO.
Perhaps then a replay review of a fight following it should be given more of a look in by sanctioning bodies or someting... Imo one of the biggest jokes is how rarely decisions and bad calls are reversed or changed to NC when the result is clearly wrong. Judges in particular should be held a little more accountable for clearly bad choices and scores made through a fight. It's so hard to get a result changed in boxing unless there is clear fowl play or, as it seems, the fighter contesting has access to enough money.
One of the main players in the rejection of reversed decisions is betting. One correction could open a Pandora's box I think. Every week on the Sunday roast, Mr McGoold & the boys despair over the video ref. They keep changing things to make it "perfect" & that's never going to happen, & I can see the same thing happening with boxing. Some judges do get it wrong, there's no doubt about that, & the main evidence comes from the other judges. We are constantly reminded that being ringside is different from sitting in front of a TV, & I agree, but, whenever I score a fight off the TV, I'm rarely out of sync with at least one of the judges. It's a complex thing, but I think we have to stick with what the crowd sees, Live, & leave the forensic examinations to officials purely for the purpose of lifting their game. JMO
This technology might have been useful on Superboxer night 1. That night, the supposed 'accidental elbow' in the cruiserweight bout might have been called differently if officials had seen the replay we did and noticed that it was two elbows in rapid fire, not one. Like-wise in Dib's bout with the clearly-after-the-KD-punch. Though in that instance the ref appeared to have a clear view!
