Again: Violation of the Indisputable Video Evidence Standard

© Sam Navarro-Imagn Images

Replay officials regularly fail to perform the task assigned to them. Instead of adhering to the standard designed to circumscribe their decision-making, they make rulings based on personal opinion. Rather than assessing whether a call under review could be reasonably disputed, they abdicate objectivity and base their decisions on their personal, subjective views of what the call "should" have been.

Video Replay Review Standard

The NCAA Football Instant Replay Coaches Manual sets forth the basic standard for reversing on-field calls: "There must be indisputable video evidence for an on-field call to be changed by the Instant Replay Official."

The word "indisputable" is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as "[t]hat [which] cannot be disputed; unquestionable."

Regrettably, replay officials often fail to adhere to the "indisputable video evidence" standard. Replay officials are human beings, and human beings are necessarily flawed. Human beings struggle to avoid allowing incursions of subjectivity into applications of purportedly objective standards.

Faithful execution of an objective standard of indisputability ipso facto excludes all uncertainty. Perhaps application of such a standard is simply unattainable when left to the devices of human beings.

Transgression of the Standard

There was certainly no fidelity to the standard at the conclusion of the Virginia Tech-Miami game on Friday evening.

According to the officials on the field, Virginia Tech's Da'Quan Felton reeled in a 30-yard touchdown pass as time expired to give the Hokies an upset victory over the Hurricanes. However, the call was reviewed, and after a delay of over six minutes, the pass was ruled incomplete, resulting in a win for Miami.

The official review took place at the ACC headquarters in Charlotte, N.C.

The length of the review period is the first clue that the replay officials did not adhere to the objective review standard. The disputability of an outcome increases as more and more and time is consumed in assessment. Another clue that the ultimate decision was predicated on the subjective views of the replay officials rather than the purportedly governing objective standard is the lack of consensus among observers. For example, take a look at the divergent viewpoints expressed about the play by hosts of ESPN's Gameday this morning:  

Pat McAfee expressed one assessment: "The ball's moving.... [T]he ball was never secured.... How about them overturning that, too?"

Kirk Herbstreit presented his diametrically opposed evaluation: "I don't care what the call [was] ... His foot was down. He's lying on the ground. He has possession. Then it got dislodged.... It survived the ground.... Whatever the field [call] is[,] how do you flip that?"

Then, Desmond Howard offered yet another take: "No, you can't even see the ball.... That's the problem [about them overturning the call]."

Thus, the relevant information seems to bolster the conclusion that replay officials are simply not honoring the standard they have been charged with enforcing.