I used to officiate basketball games back east where a coach could list up to four names of officials who would not be allowed to do his games. It made us all concentrate more.
Regarding the incident in Cleveland – the official on the field erred in not seeing the drop; the official in the replay booth (the real culprit) waited too long to signal the field; the referee goofed in not following league rules to disregard a challenge after the next play was run.
But the real problem goes deeper – if a coach can challenge a rule for 28 minutes, why not 30? But, why place rulings at the disposal of the coach? Aren’t the officials paid big bucks ($100,000 for a part-time job) to declare what happened? Why is the replay official considered a bad guy, if he overrules a field official? (Incidentally, baseball has a worse problem – why should a third baseman have to say the runner left too soon on a sac fly? Why doesn’t the third base umpire enforce the rule that says he can’t do that without being asked? Same on a check swing – why does the catcher have to appeal? Oh, yes, conversely, why can’t a batter appeal to the first base umpire to overturn a checked swing called strike?)
Suppose basketball had a similar procedure – a coach could ask for an instant replay on a traveling violation or a charge/blocking call?
Two things would help all sports: 1. Officials enforce the rules as they are written. If the rules are “wrong” (see, strike zone, phantom double play, etc.), change the rules. 2. Have all officials rated by coaches, managers etc. and get rid of the bottom of the barrel. (Results of games should be determined by the players, not by the incompetence of zebras)
I sympathize with the Brown’s fans – they finally get an official’s mistake to benefit their team, and then the officials make a deliberate mistake to cover their rear end.
Everett
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
