Upon Further Review: A Brief History of Instant Replay

Steven Branscombe, Getty Images
Steven Branscombe, Getty Images

© Ron Sachs/CNP/Corbis

Instant replay in sports has sparked about as much controversy as it has eliminated since the feature was introduced more than 50 years ago, but it's hard to imagine watching games today without it. Here's a look back at the men behind the invention and how various sports have incorporated the use of instant replay through the years.

Instant Replay Pioneer

George Retzlaff, a Toronto-based producer for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's wildly popular "Hockey Night in Canada," used a hot processor to produce a wet-film replay of a goal during the 1955-56 season.

Retzlaff annoyed the advertising agency that sponsored the show by not providing advanced notice that he was planning to employ this innovative technique, and the program's other production studio in Montreal didn't have the equipment to replicate the method, so Retzlaff never used it again. Still, Retzlaff's not-quite-instant replay was a seminal moment in the history of sports broadcasting and ranks No. 24 on the CBC's list of the greatest Canadian inventions of all time.

The Origins of Videotape-Based Replay

Tony Verna, who was hired as a director at CBS by future Dallas Cowboys general manager and NFL innovator Tex Schramm, had experimented with videotape while working the 1960 Rome Olympics. Verna spent a lot of time directing football games and was determined to find an interesting way to fill the lulls in the action between snaps. He also wanted to be able to show viewers the game that was taking place away from the ball on a given play. "If it didn't happen on TV, it didn't happen," Verna told Joe Starkey of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review in 2003. Verna eventually developed a system—using audio tones added to the cue track of the videotape—that enabled him to rewind to the point just before the ball was snapped on the previous play for instant playback.

Instant Replay's Big Debut

Verna debuted his instant replay technique on December 7, 1963, during the annual Army-Navy football game. While technical glitches with the 1,200-pound videotape machine that Verna had transported to Philadelphia's Municipal Stadium prevented him from using the feature in earlier in the game—one replay camera was focused on Navy quarterback Roger Staubach and another on Army quarterback Rollie Stichweh throughout the day—it was finally introduced on Stichweh's one-yard touchdown run in the fourth quarter. As the touchdown was replayed at full speed, and therefore indistinguishable from live action, play-by-play man Lindsey Nelson declared, "This is not live! Ladies and gentlemen, Army did not score again." According to Verna, the first replay tape, which has since been lost, was recorded over a tape that included episodes of I Love Lucy. Verna went on to a distinguished career in television and detailed the invention of instant replay in a 2008 book.

Early Spread and Opinions of Instant Replay

Instant replay slowly became more ubiquitous. In 1965, the New York Times reported on a new feature of baseball broadcasts on ABC, which was the first network to use slow motion replay. "At least one station plans to introduce 'instant replay' and also a 'stop motion' or 'freeze' technique that could prove whether a base umpire's call on a runner was in reality right or wrong," Val Adams wrote. "The day of reckoning for umpires may be near." Former baseball slugger Ralph Kiner, a commentator for the Mets, had a different opinion. "I never saw the camera yet that could countermand an umpire, considering that the camera angle is just as prone to error as anything else," Kiner said. "In fact, video tapes seem to show how few mistakes umpires make."

A Costly and Useful Innovation

Instant replay, especially in the early days, was an expensive production. In 1966, the Pacific 8 college football conference voted to outlaw the television device that enabled football coaches to view instant replays on the field. Most of the schools that voted against the device, which provided a competitive advantage, did so because of the cost associated with purchasing one. There were other instances when coaches wondered when instant replay would be adopted to improve the game. One such example came in 1966, when Florida defeated rival Florida State in a game that featured a controversial finish. Officials ruled that FSU receiver Lane Fenner was out of bounds when he caught what would have been the winning touchdown. "I know it's a judgment call and there is nothing I can do about it," Florida State head coach Bill Peterson said. "But with all the electronic devices we have in football, why don't we have videotape or something like it to help officials?" Dave Nelson, a secretary for the NCAA, replied, "It is not true that pictures don't lie." College football wouldn't adopt a form of instant replay to determine calls until 2004.

In-Stadium Discretion

While leagues didn’t initially adopt instant replay for use by umpires and officials, teams took advantage of the technology to improve the in-stadium experience for fans. In April 1977, the four-man umpiring crew of a game between the Braves and Astros in Atlanta left the field in protest of the scoreboard operator’s decision to show a controversial replay. Predictably, the crowd began to boo the umpires after the replay revealed that they had made an incorrect call. The umpires received word from Braves management that close plays would not be replayed in the future before returning to the field. In fact, the Braves installed a former major league umpire in the press box to decide whether a specific play was too controversial to show.

One year earlier, the New York Yankees were fined $1,000 and reprimanded by the league after using their instant replay scoreboard to “produce fan reaction against the umpires.” A Yankees team spokesman responded in The New York Times, “We would like to point out that we have only the fans in mind when we use our scoreboard for instant replays. The board cost us $30 million and we see no reason why fans at the ballgame should see any less than the fans at home.” Today, most leagues have policies about what replays can be shown in stadiums and arenas. In the NFL, only the broadcast feed is shown on video screens and it must not be shown after the referee makes his call. You’re unlikely to see a replay of a close play on the scoreboard at a baseball game, especially a questionable ball or strike call.

The NFL’s Trial Run and Instant Replay Adoption

The NFL implemented a trial run of instant replay during seven preseason games in 1978. “We’ll do a dry run on the replay on officiating decisions,” Commissioner Pete Rozelle told reporters. “We’re not going to implement anything, but it will be part of a study.” In 1986, the NFL approved replay for use in regular season games. A game official in the press box reviewed plays on the same feed that viewers at home saw and had the authority to reverse any call that was “totally conclusive.” The league mandated that any replay decision be made within 15 to 20 seconds so as not to disrupt the flow of the game. “It will be expensive,” Tex Schramm said at the time. “But money doesn’t make any difference to this league.”

Communication between the replay official and the on-field was initially a problem. During a Monday night game early in the season, the on-field officials nullified a Denver Broncos touchdown because of what they ruled was an illegal forward lateral. The official in the replay booth reviewed the play and determined that the call was wrong, but by that point the Broncos had already run another play. Toward the end of the season, The New York Times and CBS Sports conducted a poll about the system. Sixty-six percent of fans thought it improved the game; 20 percent thought it made the game worse. Coaches and owners voted to drop replay in 1992, complaining that it slowed the pace of games, but voted 28-3 in favor of reinstating it as a challenged-based system before the 1999 season.

Baseball Resists

Perhaps in the interest of preserving the heritage of America’s national pastime, baseball has been the most hesitant of the major sports to adopt replay. In 1988, MLB Commissioner Peter Ueberroth declared, "There will not be instant replay of any sort. We're just not going to do it. The umpires making split-second decisions is part of the flavor of the game. We don't want to lose that flavor. You can make a dish so bland that it's not worth sitting down at the table." Ueberroth’s announcement came one week after an umpire used a scoreboard replay to reverse one of his calls.

In 2008, the league instituted replay of disputed home run calls. This season, Armando Galarraga’s imperfect perfect game, in which first base umpire Jim Joyce botched a call on what should have been the final out of the game, brought baseball’s replay debate front and center once again. The Little League World Series began using instant replay in 2008 and switched to a challenge-based system this year. Each manager receives one challenge per game, and if the umpire's call is overturned, the coach retains his or her challenge.

Replay Rules and Systems in Other Sports

Here is a sampling of how replay is currently used in other sports:

National Hockey League: The NHL began using instant replay in 1991. In 2003, the league adopted a replay system that took the responsibility of making controversial calls out of the hands of an in-stadium replay official and bestowed it upon NHL staffers watching every game live from a Toronto office often referred to as the “War Room.” In addition to reviewing disputed goals, the office staffers, who have access to every television broadcast of every game, watch for illegal hits that may warrant a suspension or fine.

National Basketball Association: The NBA began using instant replay to review last-second shots after the 2001-2002 season. Since then, instant replay has been expanded to include reviews of flagrant fouls and to determine if a field goal attempt was a 2-pointer or a 3-pointer. Replay is also used to review possible 24-second shot clock violations and to determine which player last touched the ball before it went out of bounds during the last 2 minutes of regulation and overtime.

Tennis: The Hawk-Eye computer system, which processes the trajectory of a ball using several video cameras and displays a computer rendering of the ball’s path, has been used to review disputed tennis calls since 2006. In 2008, the sport’s various organizing bodies developed a uniform system of rules for utilizing the technology and decided a player would be allowed three unsuccessful challenges per set. Cricket uses the Hawk-Eye system to help determine difficult calls as well.

Soccer: Instant replay isn’t used, though some fans would like to see that change, especially after some of the disputed calls at this year’s World Cup.

Instant Replay Outside of Sports

In 1967, the Federal Highway Administration announced that it would repurpose Verna’s innovation and use video and replay capabilities to monitor busy intersections. According to an article in The New York Times, the FHWA developed a video device that would be triggered by the sound of a crash at a busy intersection. The resulting signal would preserve the video from 20 seconds before impact, which aided in the investigation and analysis of collisions. Today, the U.S. military uses the same technology the NFL uses for instant replay to analyze thousands of hours of video from Afghanistan and Iraq.

7 Ways Victorian Fashion Could Kill You

An 1862 engraving showing a skeleton gentleman at a ball asking a skeleton lady to dance, meant to represent the effect of arsenic dyes and pigments in clothing and accessories.
An 1862 engraving showing a skeleton gentleman at a ball asking a skeleton lady to dance, meant to represent the effect of arsenic dyes and pigments in clothing and accessories.

While getting dressed in the morning can seem like a hassle (pajamas are so much more comfortable), few of us worry about our clothes leading to our death. That wasn’t the case during the Victorian era, when fashionable fabrics and accessories sometimes came at great price for both makers and wearers. In Fashion Victims: The Dangers of Dress Past and Present, Alison Matthews David, a professor in the School of Fashion at Ryerson University in Toronto, outlines the many toxic, flammable, and otherwise highly hazardous components of high style during the 19th century. Here are a few of the worst offenders.

1. Poisonous Dyes

A drawing of Victorian fashions likely made with arsenic dyes
A drawing of Victorian fashions likely made with arsenic dyes
Bloomsbury Visual Arts

Before the 1780s, green was a tricky color to create on clothes, and dressmakers depended on a combination of yellow and blue dyes to produce the hue. But in the late 1770s a Swedish/German chemist named Carl Wilhelm Scheele invented a new green pigment by mixing potassium and white arsenic on a solution of copper vitriol. The pigment was dubbed Scheele’s Green, and later Paris Green, among other names, and it became a huge sensation, used to color walls, paintings, and fabrics as well as candles, candies, food wrappers, and even children’s toys. Not surprisingly, it also caused sores, scabs, and damaged tissue, as well as nausea, colic, diarrhea, and constant headaches.

Although fashionable women wore arsenic-dyed fabrics—even Queen Victoria was depicted in one—its health effects were worst among the textile and other workers who created the clothes and often labored in warm, arsenic-impregnated rooms day after day. (Some scholars have even theorized that Napoleon might have been poisoned by the arsenic-laced wallpaper hung in his St. Helena home.)

Arsenical dyes were also a popular addition to artificial flowers and leaves, which meant they were frequently pinned to clothes or fastened on heads. In the 1860s, a report commissioned by the Ladies’ Sanitary Association found that the average headdress contained enough arsenic to poison 20 people. The British Medical Journal wrote of the green-clad Victorian woman: “She actually carries in her skirts poison enough to slay the whole of the admirers she may meet with in half a dozen ball-rooms.” Despite repeated warnings in the press, and from doctors and scientists, the Victorians seemed in love with emerald green arsenic dyes; ironically, they acted like a reminder of the nature then swiftly being lost to industrialization, David says.

2. Pestilential Fabrics

Soldiers of the Victorian era (and earlier) were plagued by lice and other body parasites that carried deadly diseases such as typhus and trench fever. But soldiers weren’t the only victims of disease carried via fabric—even the wealthy sometimes wore clothing that was made or cleaned by the sick in sweatshops or tenements, and which spread disease as a result. According to David, the daughter of Victorian Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel died after her riding habit, given to her by her father as a gift, was finished in the house of a poor seamstress who had used it to cover her sick husband as he lay shivering with typhus-induced chills. Peel’s daughter contracted typhus after wearing the garment, and died on the eve of her wedding.

Women also worried about their skirts sweeping through the muck and excrement of city streets, where bacteria was rife, and some wore special skirt-fasteners to keep them up from the gunk. The poor, who often wore secondhand clothes, suffered from smallpox and other diseases spread by fabric that was recycled without being properly washed.

3. Flowing Skirts

Giant, ruffled, crinoline-supported skirts may have been fine for ladies of leisure, but they weren’t a great combination with industrial machinery. According to David, one mill in Lancashire posted a sign in 1860 forbidding the “present ugly fashion of HOOPS, or CRINOLINE, as it is called” as being “quite unfitted for the work of our Factories.” The warning was a wise one: In at least one printing office, a girl was caught by her crinoline and dragged under the mechanical printing press. The girl was reportedly “very slim” and escaped unharmed, but the foreman banned the skirts anyway. Long, large, or draped skirts were also an unfortunate combination with carriages and animals.

4. Flammable Fabrics

A woman with her crinoline on fire
Bloomsbury Visual Arts

The flowing white cotton so popular in the late 18th and 19th centuries had dangers to both maker and wearer: It was produced with often-brutal slave labor on plantations, and it was also more flammable than the heavy silks and wool favored by the wealthy in the previous centuries. One type of cotton lace was particularly problematic: In 1809 John Heathcoat patented a machine that made the first machine-woven silk and cotton pillow “lace” or bobbinet, now better known as tulle, which could catch fire in an instant. The tulle was frequently layered, to add volume and compensate for its sheerness, and stiffened with highly combustible starch. Ballerinas were particularly at risk: British ballerina Clara Webster died in 1844 when her dress caught fire at London’s Drury Lane theatre after her skirt came too close to sunken lights onstage.

But performers weren’t the only ones in peril: Even the average woman wearing the then-popular voluminous crinolines was at risk of setting herself ablaze. And the “flannelette” (plain cotton brushed to create a nap and resemble wool flannel) so popular for nightshirts and undergarments was particularly combustible if hit with a stray spark or the flame of a household candle. So many children burned in household accidents that one company came out with a specially treated flannelette called Non-Flam, advertised as being “strong’y recommended by Coroners.”

5. Arsenic-Ridden Taxidermy

Dead birds were a popular addition to ladies’ hats in the 19th century. According to David, “fashions in millinery killed millions of small songbirds and introduced dangers that may still make some historic women’s hats harmful to humans today.”

But it wasn’t the birds that were the problem—it was the arsenic used on them. Taxidermists of the day used arsenic-laced soaps and other products to preserve birds and other creatures. In some cases, entire birds—one or several—were mounted on hats. Some Victorian fashion commentators decried the practice, though not because of the arsenic involved. One Mrs. Haweis, a writer on dress and beauty, began an 1887 diatribe against “smashed birds” with the sentence: “A corpse is never a really pleasant ornament.”

6. Mercury

No upper-class man of the Victorian era was complete without his hat, but many of those hats were made with mercury. As David explains, “Although its noxious effects were known, it was the cheapest and most efficient way to turn stiff, low-grade fur from rabbits and hares into malleable felt.” Mercury gave animal fur its smooth, glossy, matted texture, but that velvety look came at a high cost—mercury is an extremely dangerous substance.

Mercury can rapidly enter the body through the skin or the air, and causes a range of horrible health effects. Hatters were known to suffer from convulsions, abdominal cramps, trembling, paralysis, reproductive problems, and more. (A chemistry professor studying toxic exposure at Dartmouth College, Karen Wetterhahn, died in 1996 after spilling just a few drops of a supertoxic type of mercury on her glove.) To make matters worse, hatters who drank while they worked (not an uncommon practice) only hastened mercury’s effects by hampering the liver’s ability to eliminate it. While scholars still debate whether Lewis Carroll’s “mad hatter” was meant to show the effects of mercury poisoning, his trembling limbs and wacky speech seem to fit the bill.

7. Lead

A Victorian facial cream containing lead
A Victorian facial cream containing lead
Bloomsbury Visual Arts

Pallor was definitely in during the Victorian era, and a face spackled with lead white paint was long favored by fashionable women. Lead had been a popular ingredient in cosmetics for centuries, David writes, because it “made colors even and opaque and created a desirable ‘whiteness’ that bespoke both freedom from hard outdoor labor and racial purity.” One of the most popular lead-laced cosmetic products was called Laird’s Bloom of Youth; in 1869, one of the founders of the American Medical Association treated three young women who had been using the product and temporarily lost full use of their hands and wrists as a result. (The doctor described the condition as “lead palsy,” although today we call it wrist drop or radial nerve palsy, which can be caused by lead poisoning.) One of the women’s hands was said to be “wasted to a skeleton.”

This article was republished in 2019.

Neil Armstrong’s Spacesuit Will Go Back on Display for Apollo 11's 50th Anniversary

Phil Plait, Wikimedia Commons // CC BY-SA 2.0
Phil Plait, Wikimedia Commons // CC BY-SA 2.0

Neil Armstrong made history when he became the first person to walk on the Moon 50 years ago. Space exploration has changed since then, but the white space suit with the American flag patch that Armstrong wore on that first walk is still what many people think of when they picture an astronaut. Now, after sitting in storage for a decade, that iconic suit is ready to go on display, according to Smithsonian.

NASA donated Neil Armstrong's suit to the Smithsonian shortly after the Apollo 11 mission. For about 30 years, it was displayed at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. Then, in 2006, the museum moved the artifact to storage to minimize damage.

Even away from the exhibit halls, the suit was deteriorating, and the Smithsonian knew it would need to be better preserved if it was to be shown to the public again. In 2015, the institution launched its first-ever Kickstarter campaign and raised more than $700,000 for conservation efforts.

After a multi-year preservation project, the suit will finally return to the museum floor on July 16, 2019—the date that marks 50 years since Apollo 11 launched. This time around, the suit will be displayed on a structure that was custom built to support its interior, protecting it from the weight of gravity. Climate-controlled air will flow through the gear to recreate the stable environment of a storage unit.

Even if you can't make it to the National Air and Space Museum to see Armstrong's space suit in person, soon you'll be able to appreciate it from home in a whole new way. The museum used various scanning techniques to create an intricate 3D model of the artifact. Once the scans are reconfigured for home computers, the Smithsonian's digitization team plans to make an interactive version of the digital model freely available on its website.

[h/t Smithsonian]

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER