February 11, 2006
NCAA moving towards challenge system for replays
The NCAA Rules Committee has submitted a revision to the instant replay rules, adding a challenge component for all conferences using replay. Under the new proposal, the NCAA would not mandate instant replay, but all conferences using replay would use one standard system that would allow coaches to challenge a call on the field.
Coaches would call timeout to make a challenge. If the call was overturned, the team would keep its timeout and retain its challenge until they lost one. If the call were upheld, the team would be charged a timeout and the coach couldn't challenge again."There could be as many challenges as they are right about," said Ty Halpin, associate director of the playing rules oversight panel. "The committee felt they should be rewarded as long as they got the challenge correct."
Of all the instant replay systems in effect, only the Mountain West Conference implemented a challenge component last season.
Another proposal by the Rules Committee would eliminate the visiting team's perogative regarding replay in non-conference games. This past season, the game officials could not use replay in the game if the visiting team did not approve in advance. Under the new proposal, replay usage would be determined by the home team's conference rules.
Both proposals must be approved by the NCAA's playing rules oversight panel before they would be "official", but both are expected to pass without further revision.
Other proposals put forward by the rules committee are directed at shortening the games:
- halftime would be shortened from 20 to 15 minutes,
- game clock would start when the ball is kicked - not when it is touched by the receiving team
- starting the game clock on a change of possession when the ball is ready for play
- kicking tees shortened to one inch to reduce touchbacks
Comments:
posted on February 11, 2006 9:56 AM — link — abuse?Kevin Donahue said:
Thanks, Eddie. One too many last night, I suppose. Updated as noted.
posted on February 11, 2006 3:08 PM — link — abuse?
The rules committee passed it, but it does have to be approved by the playing rules oversight gang. (I think I mentioned that above. Yep) If I would have thought y'all were going to be this critical, I wouldn't have come back. ;)
Robert D FOrtner said:
posted on February 12, 2006 12:31 AM — 152.163.100.196 — link — abuse?
Agree with most all proposals EXCEPT:
1. Shortning halftime drom 20-15 min is unfair to Bands, and fans to go outside and discuss first 1/2. This adds to the excitement and enjoyment of the game as well as giving the players a much needed breather to recoup energy and fully cover adjustments to play/gameplan.
2. All shortening tee will do is continue the "war" to get long kick-off players to put it in the endzone. Besides it takes the "choice" away from the receiver.Personally, I would like to see the "halo rule" return, that helps reduce injuries and does NOT lessen the excitement of the game!!! WDE
posted on February 12, 2006 7:18 AM — 66.186.235.209 — link — abuse?
If I'm understanding the proposed challenge system correctly, I don't like it. I'd rather go with a fixed number of challenges. Ideally, unlimited challenges would be best, so NO bad call goes unchallenged, but of course that's completely unrealistic because coaches would start challenging every call that didn't go their way, and games would last 6 hours. Still, I'd rather see some other ding for losing a challenge besides "you can't challenge any more calls today". How about just treat a lost challenge like a severe penalty-- 15 yards and loss of down if you're on offense, 15 yards and automatic first down if you're on defense.
posted on February 12, 2006 9:05 AM — link — abuse?
You also lose a timeout if you lose a challenge, so there is a double-ding. I'm not sure I like the losing 15 yards part, though I agree something more should be in there.
posted on April 9, 2006 11:09 AM — link — abuse?
Bob - As best I can tell from reading the new proposal, IR would be used in every game (including non-cons). This year, the visiting team could refuse IR (ie USC refused against Notre Dame), but this proposal looks to change it. As best I'm aware, the home team has never been able to selectively refuse IR.
ksuwild said:
posted on May 22, 2006 6:05 PM — 135.214.154.104 — link — abuse?
At the very least IR should be added to all conference championships as well as all bowl games. It makes refs accountable for good and bad calls, and in general raises the level of calls made. I wouldn't mind seeing it in all games but you have to remember that some of the teams in the smaller conferences might not be able to afford that. I agree that there would have to be a way to keep coaches from getting IR happy. Let's not turn College Football into a marathon.
Please note that all comments are subject to the Fanblogs Comment Policy.
eddie said:
posted on February 11, 2006 9:33 AM — 129.171.49.95 — link — abuse?The first one on the list should read halftime would be shortened from 20 to 15 minutes instead of being shortened from 15 to 20 minutes.