Replay deserves a look from the Big Ten

Sporting News, The, Oct 15, 2001 by Tom Dienhart

It has been more than a year, but the images still haunt Illinois.

The Illini were leading Michigan, 31-28, with 3:43 left in their game last September. On third-and-7 at their 23, running back Rocky Harvey fumbled. The Wolverines recovered; replays showed Harvey was down before losing the ball. The call stood.

On Michigan's second play after getting the ball, Wolverines running back Anthony Thomas fumbled while fighting for extra yards. Illinois recovered, but the officials said Thomas was down before fumbling. Replays showed he wasn't. Thomas scored on the next play to give Michigan the lead for good.

If only there had been instant replay. Without it, Illinois had the wind knocked out of its 3-0 start and went 2-5 the rest of the season.

There will be officiating gaffes this year. Already, we've seen referees wave off a good touchdown catch by Minnesota in an overtime loss to Purdue. Some of those miscalls won't matter, but others--like those in the Illinois-Michigan game--will have major impacts.

"Those were two, tight, tough fumbles," says Dave Parry, the Big Ten's supervisor of officials, of last year's game in Champaign, Ill. "At normal speed, with a human eye, it's probably inconclusive. But we got the slo-mo from ESPN, and we think we were wrong on both of them.... With replay, we could have corrected one of those for sure. And the one could have been the game decider in the end."

The Big Ten needs to lead the charge for replay reform. No other league has discussed the subject as much nor been as affected by its absence recently.

"We took a vote (at a coaches meeting within the last year) and it was unanimous by the Big Ten coaches that we were in favor of replay," says Indiana coach Cam Cameron. "The reason, I think, is Dave Parry was in favor of it."

But despite those in favor of the proposal, it was shelved for several reasons, including:

Extending games. There are concerns that games already drag on too long. Last year, the average time of a Big Ten game was 3:31; this year, games are averaging 3:10. With the element of replay, game times almost are guaranteed to increase. As it is, fans often fidget in their seats while waiting for coverage to resume after commercial breaks. League officials almost can hear TV viewers changing channels during delays when a decision on a play is being made.

Expense. Some type of camera accommodations would have to be made for games that aren't televised. In an era when athletic budgets are being pulled tighter, the last thing an athletic director wants is another big bill.

Equal opportunity. Because replay wouldn't be available to every Division I-A team, those that had it would have an edge. For instance, an obvious bad call that causes Toledo to lose a game to Bowling Green couldn't be reversed if the MAC didn't have replay. That loss could cost the Rockets a chance to go to a bowl--and the money and valuable exposure that come with a postseason appearance.

Coaching pressure. Any replay rules likely would mimic the NFL's, including one in which a team loses a timeout if a coach's challenge proves wrong. Some think coaches don't need to endure the additional wrath from fans they would encounter if they lost timeouts.

Still, in the quest to get it right, replay can work in the college game. And it doesn't have to cost a lot. Parry estimates the NFL's replay budget is between $10 million and $11 million. The college game doesn't need to spend that much. In fact, much of the personnel and equipment needed already is in place for the Big Ten to make a test run.

At each Big Ten game, the league has a technical advisor in the press box in front of a TV monitor, observing the performance of the referees. At the end of the contest, he reviews a tape of the game with the officials. That person could become the point man for reviewing disputed calls.

If a coach wanted to challenge a call, he would contact the on-field official who acts as the liaison with the networks in organizing TV timeouts. The official would communicate with the technical advisor in the booth in determining the outcome of the play. The only new expense incurred would be the cost of walkie-talkies for the official and the technical advisor.

The Big Ten also would make an attractive replay laboratory because most of its games already are televised. This year, 53 Big Ten games will be broadcast. In comparison, the Big 12 will have 42 and the SEC 37. Camera equipment would be needed at the handful of games not televised, which would constitute the biggest expense in this experiment.

Yes, there is a financial cost to implementing replay. It is the biggest hurdle replay must clear. But there are other costs--financial (funds lost in missing a bowl) and emotional (teams and fans yelling, "We was robbed!")--that must be paid if bad calls are allowed to stand. Just ask Illinois.

"It's probably way off," says Parry of replay. "But say they make a bad call in the BCS title game and someone wins because of it. I think there would be a (hue and cry) for replay. It would take an egregious error, something that really made a difference.