About the author


Steve Czaban is a 25 year sports radio veteran, who hosts an afternoon drive show in Washington D.C. "Czabe" also writes and edits his own commentaries for www.czabe.com and other on-line and print publications. He can be reached at czabe@yahoo.com.

Related Articles


  1. 1


    One of the unintended consequences of all this replay is how refs call the game. If something kind of, sort of, maybe looks like a turnover or score they call it as such knowing it will be reviewed. This is contrary to the desired outcome of replay, more accurate calls. No matter how closely you review anything (a document, safety procedures, NFL plays) there will be the occasional mistake; therefore, the less inaccuracies to start with, the less chance something is missed on review.

  2. 2


    THIS ^^^!!!! I make this point all the time while watching games with friends.

  3. 3

    James Yanushka

    Your arguments, while nice tries, will never hold up. There are many, many instances where replay does get it right and its what the viewing public wants We see instant replays immediately and vote, good, bad call. That genie will NEVER be put back in the bottle. “Just a game” argument? Not for the billions of dollars spent on “just a game” or sport or jobs, including yours, associated with the industry. While true, ithey are just games and entertainment, athletes have died while playing, not over stupid calls, but playing sports. Sorry, won’t happen, ever. Just because of the error of human judgement used in managing and adjudicating the calls, not the mechanisms involved. Ref lover though you are, it won’t happen they get it wrong, its their fault to own it and its plain for anyone to see, ON REPLAY! . If they don’t like it, then don’t be a ref or ump, simple!

  4. 4

    Wendy Cook

    Seems like replay and reviews are embraced by the same well-intentioned people who give us zero-tolerance policies in our schools. In theory, zero-tolerance policies help schools eliminate drugs and other offenses by enforcing rules consistently and without human bias, error or whim. In reality, it works until some honor student has to be suspended because she forgot about two aspirin tablets in her purse.

    Likewise replay proponents think they can right all wrongs while eliminating human error. What they really lose is human judgment which, while not perfect, often is preferable to the absurdities of unintended consequences, Most important, in the Miami-Duke debacle, even prolonged replay review failed to be the prized cure-all for human shortcomings.

    There’s actually a saying that ties to your point – “the perfect is the enemy of the good” – and it applies every single time a game is paused to consult nameless league officials, At least on-field officials have to answer for their ridiculous calls.

  5. 5

    Matt D.

    I don’t know if this is a “bit” you are doing or not. If it is, stop. Please. Every time you go off on this rant, I turn you off. It’s boring and makes you sound bad.

    To the argument:

    “Replay is the leagues attempt to right an egregious wrong…” blah blah.
    No, replay is an attempt to prevent a wrong from happening.

    “Replay will never get it right 100% of the time, so we might as well end it instead of chasing perfection”
    So, If replay doesn’t work perfectly now, then it’s a total failure?

    Respectfully, you need to give technology a chance to be improved. The first iterations of seat belts left people paralyzed with snapped spines. Thank god we didn’t chuck the whole idea.
    Or maybe more to something nearer and dearer to you… the first RC quad copters had very limited range, were not stabilized reliably and didn’t include 4k video cameras on a gimbal. Total failure… don’t waste your time trying improving it.

    To your point today, Replay didn’t get it wrong, a fallible ref did. The same refs who called it a touchdown in the first place. Replay gave it a chance to be corrected, and those same refs failed again. Don’t blame the camera or the technology or the process. Blame the management.

    The sad part is, if you weren’t intent on keeping up the “bit” as the grumpy old man wanting replay off your front lawn, you could probably come up with a few reasonable ways to improve the system.

  6. 6


    I think that they shouldn’t look at slow motion, other than a still frame to see if a line was crossed. The biggest flaw in the system is trying to determine possession in super slow motion. Should only be reviewed at normal speed. 99% of the world knows that the infamous Dez Bryant play last year was a catch – by all means human. But when you get the lawyers involved is where it gets messy. Several plays since then have underlined the point.

  7. 7


    I’m with Czabe on this….and I’m also with him that we are in the 20% or so minority…as above comments reflect.

    Matt, you want a few reasonable ways to improve the system? Scrap replay and spend time and money saved (not that NFL is worried about $$$) on simplifying the Talmudic rule book and training better referees. Bringing in new blood and retiring obviously bad ones would help as well.

    Sports, like all human endeavors, is imperfect. I just want to watch a game in a reasonable amount of time and move on with other things that, yes, are more important.

  8. 8

    Mike Fossler

    I’m with you on this, Czabe. Replay is killing the game of football. Whenever someone scores, you can’t really get excited about it until the idiots upstairs review the play. It’s a joy-killer.

    Look, the refs are part of the game, fallible as they are. Sometimes calls go your way, sometimes they don’t. That’s life. Slowing the game down to “get it right” takes a lot of the fun out of watching football. How about scrapping replay and holding the officials to a performance standard?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© , Steve Czaban. Website developed and managed by Enlutions