The extra set of blind eyes up in the booth
Is it possible that we can just scrap this silly instant-replay system that we have in place?
Seriously, we were a lot better off when the mistakes were made on the field.
And I'm not just talking about the high-profile case involving Oregon and Oklahoma from a few weeks back - where officials missed not one, but two calls that led to a game-winning touchdown for the Ducks that should never have been put on the scoreboard.
The guys in the Atlantic Coast Conference, for example, aren't even getting the little things right.
Take, for instance, the call from the Maryland-Georgia Tech game on Saturday involving a reputed fumble by Tech wideout Calvin Johnson.
It was clear from replays that Johnson never had possession of the ball - but the game officials ruled the play a fumble, and despite the fact that ESPNU went to commercial after the change of possession, the people upstairs never buzzed down to the field to suggest that the play be looked at further.
To be fair, Tech coach Chan Gailey had ample opportunity himself to challenge the play himself and did not - but that, to me, is beside the point.
Every play in the new system can be and thus should be looked at in between plays - and some rather obvious bad calls are slipping through the cracks in spite of this.
What's worse, to me, is that it seems that the guys on the field are hesitant to make calls on bang-bang plays - knowing that they can go to the booth to get it right, or something like it.
The problem there is the court-of-law-like standard of "indisputable video evidence."
For starters, what is "indisputable video evidence," exactly? Is it like pornography - we know it when we see it? Or is there some scientific way to look at a replay and determine whether or not the call on the field was the correct one?
We all know the answer to that - it's just another judgment call, which means it is just as prone to being wrong as anything that the guys down on the field can offer up.
Which brings me back to my original point - why bother with this kind of a system when it's only as foolproof as the fools in charge of implementing it?
- Chris Graham