July 30th, 2002, the NBA would be changed forever. Instant Replay got adopted into the NBA. Technology allowed for this system to be made which puts the play in slow motion for the referees to make the right call. Publicly humiliated by stars–such as Jayson Tatum, but Al Riverson–head of officiating disagrees. All the NBA wants to do is make the right call. Why do players, like Jayson Tatum, not like this system?
Many sources led me to conclude that instant replay helped maintain integrity in basketball.
One major argument opposing people make when it comes to this system is to let the players play. The fans want to watch basketball with as little ref interference possible. This statement totally makes sense to me until the game gets out of hand or the refs can’t visibly see what is going on. An example is when Samaki Walker made a 3-pointer after the buzzer sounded. Why should we let a team win by an error made by the human eye? I’m all for human officiating. It’s better for the game, but that’s
…show more content…
Constant physical contact and missed calls are just general things that referees can miss and not call. Fans become outraged due to no calls and horrible calls. Hence, the NBA institutes the instant replay system to cut down on the missed calls. Matthew Pitman, Golden State Warriors Public Address Announcer, thinks that instant replay is a good thing for the game because he wanted integrity for the NBA. He thought that the human element of refereeing was a big deal. He doesn’t want robots to be officiating because it would make his job much harder as a PA announcer. The reason why they instituted the instant replay system for the missed calls that a human eye cannot catch. Matt insisted on keeping the human referees because it felt more genuine to have them ref. Pitman experienced this in the “bubble” for the NBA playoffs during COVID. His thoughts–Human referees were better than