Is there too much bias to the challenge system due to home-field advantage? I always figure if there is a way to correct a bad call that will have a strong effect on the game, I would like to see it corrected. However, I'm watching a lot of games where I see this home-field bias. If there is a bad call against the home team, you will see that replay played as much as possible, giving the coach a chance to evaluate before throwing the red flag. On the other hand, a play that could questionable go against the home team, doesn't get a review. I don't like this perceived bias, but I don't have a better solution. You could put the officials upstairs in more control, but I'm not convinced this would be better. Until then, it just becomes home-field advantage.
I don't know about a home field bias but it seems with the new rule in which u get a 3rd challenge if the 1st 2 are upheld, has made the refs let plays go when they clearly should be blown dead. Case in point the INT on MNF that was clearly a trap. They let the play continue & forced the other team to use a challenge. Refs who have a high percentage of calls over turned should be penalized if they already arent.
I really hate the home field advantage of instant replay. I actually started a thread on this very topic. It costed the Vikings a touchdown in their MNF game. I believe the league is going to address this in the offseason. There are sets of rules and regulations that the home stadiums must follow. I think that if we are going to have instant replay, then both coaches need to have equal access to replays on the big screen.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bakes781)</div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know about a home field bias but it seems with the new rule in which u get a 3rd challenge if the 1st 2 are upheld, has made the refs let plays go when they clearly should be blown dead. Case in point the INT on MNF that was clearly a trap. They let the play continue & forced the other team to use a challenge. Refs who have a high percentage of calls over turned should be penalized if they already arent.</div> I don't know that I agree. If a ref truly doesn't know, he should let the play continue and allow the replay to do its job. If he "guesses" that they play should be stopped, he blows his whistle and the replay cannot be reviewed anyway. He can do much less damage by allowing the play to continue if he truly doesn't know. I guess it depends on what you use the word "clearly", but remember that the refs probably don't like the play stoppage any more than we do. Personally, I don't like to stay later at work because my boss had to correct my work, and I doubt they don't either. As far as your specific example, it is a good one to my point. The replay of that INT (which was definitely a trap) was played on the big screen several times before Gibbs threw the flag. On the other hand, Portis's knee was clearly down when touched by a defender but DC was smart enough not to show any replays of it to Parcells. Now obviously Dallas had their chance to try to review it in the booth in time, but its not the same...
I don't think that there is a home field bias. I have a differant problem with the replay system. It's the fact that a coach can't challenge a call in the last 2 min of a half. That is a very crucial parts of the game. Just look at last year during the NFC playoffs between the Packers and the Eagles. The Eagles came up 1 to 2 yards short on that 4th and 26 but the refs gave them a good 3 yards and the Eagles eventually won the game. If Sherman was able to challenge it the Packers would of gotten the ball and won. I'm not a Packer fan far from it just that part of the rule doesnt make any sense to me.
There is a hoime field advantage but it doesnt bother me for 1 reason. Teams hire people to take a look at every play after they are finished and then the coach has a headset on and communicate.
