interesting, even memorable (Starr 52).Thus, instant replay was restored, thanks to a 28-3 vote by the owners last March (Rand D1). It is under experimentation to test and see if teams want to re-instate instant replay into the NFL. According to the article “Flag is Thrown on Bad Calls” in USA Today by Erik Brady: “Lately, NFL officials have fallen short of excellence, let alone perfection” (1A). Enthusiasm among owners for replay immersed after the 1991 season because of owners’ concerns that there were too many replays, and they often caused excessive delays (Rand D1). Attempts to bring back replay failed to get the necessary 75 percent majority at each of the last two winter meetings. But among former staunch opponents, Bills owner Ralph Wilson changed his mind surrounding the issue. This came after two officiating mistakes denied his team a victory against the Patriots. Chiefs owner Lamar Hunt was willing to see whether the new system, which puts a 90-second limit on replays, avoids ruining the flow of games. Sports journalist Steve Lopez expounds:Some owners fret about game delays (as if officials don’t already huddle like zebras at a watering hole); technological complexities; and when to allow challenges, by whom and how often. Legitimate concerns, but guess what, guys? Air-traffic control is complicated. So is gene splicing. But reviewing a 5-yard run on instant replay? Is there any good reason, with a game on the line, a season on the line, maybe the Super Bowl on the line, that everyone but the referees should have the benefit of technology that’s roughly 35 years old (Lopez 58)?However, in its earlier incarnation, instant replay was often blamed for delays in the game and sometimes for adding yet another layer of mistakes. But proponents say improved technology means it will work better now. “Tony Verna showed off his latest creation: a cell phone-size TV with ...
