Jump to content


Photo

Video review process is busted (Tom Ryan is right)


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 wrestlingnerd

wrestlingnerd

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 6,309 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 11:29 AM

N.B. This post is not about Mark Hall, although it involves his finals match. For the record, I believe that match was poorly reffed. I believe Bo's TD was not called properly and I believe the second stall call was not called improperly. But that's not the point of this thread.

 

The point of this thread is in the title.

 

Flo summarizes Ryan's tweets about the process and adds some context in this article. Notably, both JB and DT weighed in and agree the process is not a good one. DT mentioned it multiple times during the NCAA finals broadcast, which is notable since he is a PSU guy.

 

http://www.flowrestl...ss#.WNBnEzsrLx4

 

Here is what got me: "In 2017, just 17% of the coaches challenges resulted in an overturned call.  In 2016 it was 14.5%, in 2015 it was 20% and in 2014 it was just 8%."

 

That woks out to an average of UNDER 15% per year... which is a joke.

 

Football is a different sport, but the NFL's video review averages a 36% rate of overturning calls after video review SINCE 1999.

 

Any system in which the person getting reviewed decides the outcome is intrinsically flawed. Cognitive bias is absolutely a thing, and quite well-documented and studied. How you let the same refs, who are fundamentally predisposed to be biased FOR their initial call, be the only people who determine what the video review shows is beyond me. What a stupid process. 

 

Is it an improvement over nothing? Sure. But at an overturn rate of under 15%, it's more of an annoyance and hindrance to the flow of the sport than a revolutionary concept of fairness. Humans make mistakes. Refs are humans under intense pressure, especially at the NCAAs. The video review process must be changed to involve people who are not biased to make the call one way or the other. The refs absolutely must be involved, but maybe the sport could learn a thing or two from the NFL, which has 18 years of history tweaking video review after a ton of trial and error....


Edited by wrestlingnerd, 20 March 2017 - 11:31 AM.


#2 gimpeltf

gimpeltf

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 4,897 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 11:48 AM

So what should the percentages be? And how would you decide that?

 

Let's not forget that a number of the challenges are made because- you might as well challenge that last second close call. And others are done simply because you have a review left and the kid needs a break.

I do think the process needs tweaking. Probably at the conference/national events where you generally have officials sitting around waiting to rotate in and also generally have a head ref/assigner we probably should visit having some of them involved in the reviews in some capacity, at least if not do it entirely as you mention. I don't know if it is a good thing to bring up the way the Olympics do it given what appeared to be corruption in the whole process but I think they might well have the right way to do it assuming integrity.

I did find at the EIWAs that the official called reviews had a higher rate of overturning than the coach requested reviews. 

I was only suggesting that simply throwing out stats doesn't say much and as you mentioned football is a different sport.



#3 wrestlingnerd

wrestlingnerd

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 6,309 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:01 PM

So what should the percentages be? And how would you decide that?

 

I feel it should be higher than 14 and change percent. But who knows. The point is, I don't know of any sport in which the refs are THAT accurate over extended periods of time, especially in a sport with as many permutations of possible motions to follow as wrestling (it's not just about whether a receiver grabbed a ball before it hit the floor or some lineman grabbed a jersey, etc.). I think that's impossible.

 

Your point that there are throwaway challenges made because you might as well do them applies to almost every sport. If you give coaches a certainnumber of challenges, they're going to use them. And still, the NFL overturns 36% of the calls and the NBA, a much simpler sport to ref (at least in my opinion), close to 20%.

 

I agree the international styles do it right--at least from a process perspective. They have to deal with bribes and political jockeying, which is another matter, but the process is better than having the guy who blew a call review his own call and then announce to the world that he messed up. That is stupid.


  • silver-medal likes this

#4 Billyhoyle

Billyhoyle

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 2,157 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:05 PM

Ideally you'd have an extra ref doing the reviews.  I'm not sure if it's possible to write a rule that only applies at events large enough to have that extra ref.  Even then, if the refs are friends, one might not want to overturn the call of the other.  



#5 jeffr_ideal

jeffr_ideal

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 3,101 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:09 PM

Or have a ref in a blind booth that does not know the call or is even watching the match.  They give him the clip and a few minutes to make the call. 



#6 jammen

jammen

    Silver Member

  • Members
  • 1,221 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:50 PM

I'm probably the only one who wishes that the video review was eliminated.  It disrupts the flow of the match, is gamed by the coaches, and still makes bad calls.  I wish the head ref and 2nd ref were the sole authorities.  Also, change overtime matches to 2 minute sudden death td or it becomes a referee's decision.  Back in the day this incentivized wrestlers to work hard and reduced stalling.


  • Ching likes this

a fish rots from its head, but hope springs eternal.


#7 LemonPie

LemonPie

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 3,886 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 12:53 PM

I agree.  


Anyone but Heil '18


#8 silver-medal

silver-medal

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 01:00 PM

Bo Jordan is not the first wrestler in history to be the victim of a questionable call  by an official (Oliver, Ramos, Churella, etc...) but he's the first to have a video review that appears to indisputably show that the call is wrong.   Remember, there's no reaction time.  None.  The moment Hall is on his hip with his leg hooked and hand down, Bo has two points.  

 

The way the review process is set up, Hall's reversal would have been removed and the score would have been 2-1 Bo.  Let's say Hall escapes before the period ends.  It's 2-2 and Bo goes down to start the third.  He gets out, it's 3-2 Bo and now the action begins.  That's the match that we should have seen and the one both wrestlers deserved.  Instead we got a crap outcome because an official had a lapse in judgement.  


  • cjc007, rhino184 and NYWRESTLER94 like this

#9 lu_alum

lu_alum

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 4,535 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 03:35 PM

Flo summarizes Ryan's tweets about the process and adds some context in this article. Notably, both JB and DT weighed in and agree the process is not a good one. DT mentioned it multiple times during the NCAA finals broadcast, which is notable since he is a PSU guy.
....

He may be a PSU guy, but don't forget where he went to HS. He's probably been around the Jordan family longer than he's been around Happy Valley.

That being said, third party review makes sense.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited by lu_alum, 20 March 2017 - 03:40 PM.


#10 wrestlingnerd

wrestlingnerd

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 6,309 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 03:39 PM

He may be a PSU guy, but don't forget where he went to HS. He's probably been around the Jordan family longer than he's been around Happy Valley.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

He made that comment not during Bojo's match, but speaking generally.



#11 bigmik

bigmik

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 7,389 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 03:47 PM

Bo Jordan is not the first wrestler in history to be the victim of a questionable call  by an official (Oliver, Ramos, Churella, etc...) but he's the first to have a video review that appears to indisputably show that the call is wrong.   Remember, there's no reaction time.  None.  The moment Hall is on his hip with his leg hooked and hand down, Bo has two points.  
 
The way the review process is set up, Hall's reversal would have been removed and the score would have been 2-1 Bo.  Let's say Hall escapes before the period ends.  It's 2-2 and Bo goes down to start the third.  He gets out, it's 3-2 Bo and now the action begins.  That's the match that we should have seen and the one both wrestlers deserved.  Instead we got a crap outcome because an official had a lapse in judgement.


If the ref gave Bo the TD when it was scored, Hall is still in position to get the reversal. If we are giving scenarios on what "should" have happened, we should start with the one where the ref made the correct calls the first time. In this case, the correct call would have Hall up 3-2 and on top.

#12 Powerline

Powerline
  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 03:59 PM

Did you see the words he mouthed to the Penn State after the match? "Bull **** call, bull **** call"

#13 lu_alum

lu_alum

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 4,535 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 04:21 PM

If the ref gave Bo the TD when it was scored, Hall is still in position to get the reversal. If we are giving scenarios on what "should" have happened, we should start with the one where the ref made the correct calls the first time. In this case, the correct call would have Hall up 3-2 and on top.

You are correct that that would have been the score, had it played out continuously.

However, once it went to video review, correcting the non-call TD would have reset the clock to the point at which the corrected call took place. That would have made the score 2-1, Bo.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

#14 bigmik

bigmik

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 7,389 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 04:50 PM

You are correct that that would have been the score, had it played out continuously.
However, once it went to video review, correcting the non-call TD would have reset the clock to the point at which the corrected call took place. That would have made the score 2-1, Bo.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes, I know that. My point was if we are going to talk about "the match that we should have seen", then we should talk about the one where the ref made the (supposedly) correct calls the first time without a review. You could make a case that the review, whichever way it is called, unfairly hurts one of the wrestlers in the match.

Edited by bigmik, 20 March 2017 - 05:03 PM.


#15 wrestlingnerd

wrestlingnerd

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 6,309 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 04:55 PM

he's the first to have a video review that appears to indisputably show that the call is wrong.   Remember, there's no reaction time.  None.  The moment Hall is on his hip with his leg hooked and hand down, Bo has two points.  

 

While our opinions are aligned and I too feel Bo had the TD, it's not true that there is no reaction time in that situation.

 

In a situation where the attacking wrestler is behind the defending wrestler (rear standing position) and gets three of the defending wrestler's supporting points (e.g. two feet and a hand) to touch the mat even for a literal instant, that's two, TD. However, this is the ONLY situation in which there is literally zero reaction time required for a TD. In every other TD situation, control is still required.

 

An example of a situation in which no control is required is Imart's first TD against Joseph. http://www.flowrestl...is#.WNC-SjsrLx4

 

Notice Joseph's hand touches the mat for literally just an instant, but that was clearly two for Imart.

 

On every other situation, however, a subjective determination of control by the ref is required before the two are awarded. Why the hell the rules are this confusing is very frustrating to me (and I'm sure, most fans). However, that is the status quo.


Edited by wrestlingnerd, 20 March 2017 - 05:48 PM.


#16 repechange

repechange

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • 442 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 04:59 PM

Wouldn't the score have been 3-2? Assuming Jordan gets the quick escape then it is 3-3 going into the third period. At that point the entire dynamic of the match changes.

#17 HurricaneWrestling

HurricaneWrestling

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 7,463 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:55 PM

Remember, there's no reaction time.  None.  The moment Hall is on his hip with his leg hooked and hand down, Bo has two points.  

 

Not trying to start an argument, but are you sure there's no reaction time for takedowns?  That issue was recently discussed on the "Inconsistent Officiating" thread.  The consensus there was that there's only one type of takedown where there is zero reaction time (rear standing position with a hand touching the mat).  In other takedown situations reaction time is still applicable.

 

Also, over on the Hawk forum, a poster started a threat titled "Officiating insight at NCAAs."  The OP said that he happened to be sitting next to the head of the NCAA's officiating evaluators.  A conversation they had confirmed the above understanding of the takedown rules.  (You can read about the circumstances at: https://iowa.forums....4/#post-4211326 .)



#18 HurricaneWrestling

HurricaneWrestling

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 7,463 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 08:00 PM

^ Not piling on, as Wrestlingnerd and I cross-posted.  As you may surmise, I'm in agreement with his interpretation.



#19 silver-medal

silver-medal

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 10:43 PM

I thought there was no reaction time because we've all seen how TD's are generally called today.  If there are certain situations where that is not the case, I'm unaware.  

 

If the ref calls 2 for Bo and we never have an action stoppage, Hall gets a reversal.  Now it's 3-2 Hall to start the third and Bo is on bottom.  



#20 gowrestle

gowrestle

    Silver Member

  • Members
  • 1,434 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 11:18 PM

Regardless, it was a call that could have gone either way. I feel it was the correct call but I also understand why others feel differently. No doubt having a third party evaluate the video would be appropriate. However, I am not a fan of video review because of the impact it has on the flow of the match. I think it does more harm than good.

I am disappointed in the timing of Tom Ryan's criticism about the video review process and the call in Jordan's match. His actions take away from Hall's victory. Besides, there was plenty of time left in the match for Bo to score points and win. Unfortunately for Jordan, he put the outcome of the match in the hands of the officials.


Wrestling

Edited by gowrestle, 20 March 2017 - 11:24 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users