Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt
English isn't even my first language and I can tell you that what's in your head is not the same as what you are saying. You are the one arbitrarily limiting replay in your proposal. Your criteria for reviewability are not defined with articulable purposes. The way it is now, the limits are defined in terms of specific purposes and reasons. So, want to grasp what is arbitrary and what isn't, and try answering the question I asked instead of whatever you think the question is?
|
This play is the same as a lot of plays that are reviewable. It's a play that was clearly called incorrectly on the field and would be easily fixed by replay if it weren't excluded for no real reason.
Adding fouls to the list of reviewable plays is way beyond what I'm suggesting. I'm not sure how you think the current system is fine, but my proposal arbitrarily limits replay when my proposal is merely fixing the current system without fundamentally changing it.
As I said, I'd be okay with reviewing fouls so long as they don't pointlessly exclude certain fouls from review.