Kentucky Derby outcome ramps up debate over replay in sports
 

Over the years, those who have railed against replay have argued that sports must tolerate some degree of human error. That debate has received a boost from an apparent equine error.

https://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wor...7066496672.jpg

For the first time in 145 runnings of the Kentuky Kentucky Derby, officials disqualified the winner due to a foul that few understand, but that was significant enough to flip the outcome from a 9-2 favorite to a 65-1 underdog. Most of the prior runnings lacked the benefit of multiple angles of high-definition video evidence that would have revealed the kind of subtle rump bump that can get a horse tapped on the shoulder. Today, the things that did and didn’t happen during a race (and every other sporting event) can be seen and scrutinized, and decisions can be adjusted.

The availability of a vehicle for fixing problems not spotted in real time should be celebrated, not castigated. But the “get replay off my lawn” crowd has seized on Saturday’s stunning reversal as proof that the reliance on video review is ruining sport. It’s a strange hill to die on, given that it rests on the idea that bad calls are OK.

They’re not OK, especially with legalized gambling spreading quickly from coast to coast. As more and more Americans wager hard-earned money on the outcome of sporting events, the outcome must be as pure and reliable as possible.

No one is arguing that the rules didn’t require the disqualification of Maximum Security, probably because few understand the rules (including the horses). The argument apparently flows from the notion that some would rather have a wrong answer immediately than the right answer eventually.

more on PFT

Re: Kentucky Derby outcome ramps up debate over replay in sports
 

.

Re: Kentucky Derby outcome ramps up debate over replay in sports
 

Right decision.

Re: Kentucky Derby outcome ramps up debate over replay in sports
 

I was listening to some guy on national radio the other morning who was going on and on about how replay is "ruining sports" for him. He thought it was so unfair that the horse who crossed the finish line first was not, therefore, the winner. I heard some other radio guy talking about how he's sick of the "whining" for more replay.

What is with people like that? Ya know, I think I'm going to challenge Usain Bolt to a race. Maybe I'll wait for the gun before I start running, or maybe I'll just take off when I feel like it. Heck, I might even run into him. Because, apparently, none of that matters as long as I cross the finish line first.

Rules exist for a reason. In a perfect world, there would be no mistakes to correct. But that isn't reality, is it? So we have replay, to at least TRY to get it right. Why would anyone have a problem with that? Just how bad do you have to pee, that you are so affected by the extra minute or two of waiting, so that a play, or outcome, can be properly ruled? And how is it that wanting to get it right is "whining"? It seems to me that complaining about the delays caused by replay is, in fact, whining.

Re: Kentucky Derby outcome ramps up debate over replay in sports
 

The horse did in fact block the upcoming horse by shifting lanes. That's against the rules. Safety first and foremost.

Re: Kentucky Derby outcome ramps up debate over replay in sports
 

I guess this is the new normal for us. Any time there is a controversial replay, we have to go over that awful non-call again and again...

Re: Kentucky Derby outcome ramps up debate over replay in sports
 

This just puts more egg on the face of the NFL. If a rule is on the books but not enforced, is it a "rule"? We no longer get the "story of what happened" we get OPINIONS. I heard one talking head try to compare Horse Racing to NASCAR. "I've seen drivers block the guys behind them and they don't get penalized" He's an EGGSPURT just ask him!!

Re: Kentucky Derby outcome ramps up debate over replay in sports