Beef Up Replay

Replay is a good thing. Rebuilding New Orleans, it's debatable how responsible that is. Replay does not need tweaking. Replay needs to be spelled out in black and white and aided by technology.

The interception return for a TD by Ohio State against Penn State that made it 20-6 (21-6 with the extra point), shouldn't have been a TD (at least according to MW and TK) because the Buckeye spiked the ball before he got to the end zone! It still would have been a one possession (potentially) game if they'd given the ball to the Nittany Lions, as they should have. Would it have mattered? Maybe. Probably not, though ... PSU wasn't exactly marching up and down the field and lighting up the scoreboard.

At this point, I'd love for Roy to chime in. In a fairly recent discussion, we talked about replay and the idea of using multiple camera shots to recreate a 3-D image of the play (is it NBC that shows the replays that aren't actually replays, the ones tha! t look like video game replays?). I don't know how accurate the current system is or what the exact capabilities are, but it is worth looking into. Tennis is using technology to get tough calls right. That's tennis! Football should be able to keep pace. Sure, it's a slightly more intricate matter, but it would be really nice to create a 3-D animation that allows the replay official to scroll around, change his perspective, zoom in and out, etc.

Taking the OU onsides kick play as an example, the model would allow the replay official to determine who touched the ball first. Then, he could look straight down the 45 yard line and determine exactly where OU WR Malcolm Kelly was when he was hit and where the Oregon Duck was when he contacted the ball. Just pause the replay when the Duck touches the ball and then change the angle to look down the line and see that it's short of the 45. It would be simple. And, maybe it's not the best idea to have retired offi! cials in the box. There is a reason they aren't on the field. Is it really smart to have them determining some of the most important calls in a football game? I guess so, especially if you don't care who wins the game.

Anyone can officiate something. It's easy to know the rules and how to apply them. The difficult part is implementing that knowledge at game speed. I'm not going to say that is easy. But, replay slows it down. You don't do it at game speed. It's easy to apply the rules to replays if you know what the rules are.

This leads to my other point ... there should be strict rules on what is reviewable and what isn't. The replay official in the Oklahoma State v. Houston game wrongly overturned a fumble call that gave the Cougars the ball back and allowed them to continue a TD drive. C-USA has suspended the official for screwing up the call. The worst thing is that he overturned the play based on something that is unreviewable. Apparently, forward progress is only reviewable in certain situations, and ! whether or not forward progress is stopped before a fumble isn't reviewable. I don't really understand why it is only reviewable in certain circumstances, but that's the rule.

Players, coaches, officials and fans should have access to a list of the reviewable plays (with descriptions) and plays (and descriptions) that aren't reviewable. If something comes up that isn't on the list, then the game official can make a determination, but that shouldn't happen. This is not difficult. It's actually quite simple. I don't know what the hang-up is.

Tell the replay officials what plays they should be looking at and which ones they can't overturn. Tell them what to look for on each play based on the applicable rules. And, finally, give them the technology to get the looks they need to get it right. Or, I guess conferences can just cut their losses and suspend the officials after the damage is done.