In the wake of Super Bowl XL, which included a very questionable on-the-field decision regarding whether Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger broke the plane of the end zone on a sneak play, we argued that the time had come to employ technology that would allow officials to know conclusively when the ball has entered the end zone.
As we wrote on February 6, 2006 (does this count as plagiarizing myself?):
“On review, [referee[ Bill Leavy made the right decision, since there was no indisputable evidence that the ball didn’t get in. In fact, it looked to us as if the ball kissed the plane, which would make it a legitimate touchdown. But if the call on the field had been that Roethlisberger didn’t get in, there wouldn’t have been enough evidence via replay to reverse.
“Bottom line — it’s time to develop an electronic system for determining whether the ball entered the end zone. Otherwise, the NFL should revert to the original rule requiring the runner to actually ‘touch down’ the ball in the goal area.”
Nearly three years later, and three days after an identical situation helped deliver for the Steelers the AFC North crown, a university in (you guessed it) Pittsburgh is designing the tools to make it happen.
According to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University is working with her students to develop a ball that can be equipped with remote sensing technology.
“When I moved here, I loved the people and their energy,” said Dr. Priya Narasimhan, “and then I fell in love with football and I just started watching the Steelers and now, you can’t get me out of the home on Sundays.”
We think it’s great, and not just because yours truly holds two undergraduate degrees from that fine institution. (Great, now they’re going to call and ask me for money.) We have long believed that the league must embrace all available technology in order to ensure that the calls on the field, and those made via replay review, are accurate.
But if Dr. Narasimhan truly is a Steelers fan, she might want to wrap her project up in a sack and send it to the bottom of the confluence. The Steelers have been the beneficiaries of the current imperfections in the system; improving the technology could end up costing them games.
ROBOBALLS COMING?
Posted by Mike Florio on December 17, 2008, 9:05 AM EST
Permalink
81 Comments 
Latest Stories in: Baltimore Ravens, Pittsburgh Steelers, Rumor Mill, Seattle Seahawks
Email
Latest Stories in: Baltimore Ravens, Pittsburgh Steelers, Rumor Mill, Seattle Seahawks
81 Responses to “ROBOBALLS COMING?”
I’m for this only if it glows on TV like the old Fox puck
So what the NFL will employ dozens of these remote sensing footballs in order to ensure that the ball crossed the plain of the goaline. Like it or not the officials will always be part of the game. That one play did not determine the outcome of the game, it may of put the Steelers in the lead, but Baltimore had chances they just didn’t capitalize on them.
Just can’t let it go, can you.
I wonder if that last line wast a blatant attempt to incite a few comments from Steeler fans. Hmm…
Aren’t a few incorrect or even bad calls part of the game? Instant replay removed alot of them, which is great, and pro refs would remove many more. However, part of the beauty of sport is A. the simplicity of it, or at least the illusion of that. Striving to perfect the way football is played too much hurts more than it helps. Oh yeah, anyway B. is the joy that can be had from your team getting away with murder (not literally Ravens fans) on the field. The refs throwing a bs pass interference flag or giving a craazy good spot on a ball. I think that stuff is important, and part of what makes the NFL so great.
It’ll never work.
Awesome – about time. As an individual in the computer science field, this is long overdue, they should do the same with hockey and baseball too. Stop these judgement calls.
I’m afraid it won’t stop the incessant whining.
Mike, you’re just reporting this because you’re a Tartans homer.
Admit it!!!
You have two degrees from Carnegie Mellon? Never would have guessed with the articles you post…
There is one problem with this. What if the player is juggling the ball on a comeback rout? If he is bobbeling the ball after it crosses the line, gains posession of it after he returns to the field of play, and is tackled shy of the end zone? The the alarm will sound that the ball broke the plain, even though posession was not until the receiver is out of the end zone. Why dont they put a camera EXACTLY on the line, over the referees head so there is a clear view down the line?
Or… improving the technology could shut the rest of you up.
I disagree with introducing technology like this because it brings into question other integrity issues with the league and puts the league in a tough spot if it’s a very questionable call and the technology faults or otherwise. Alternatively we could employ the idea of putting cameras directly along the goal line and sideline, this way there is no ‘angle’ issue involved when making the call, we can then all have access to the exact same view and the officials can make a much easier call from that angle.
Florio,
Hasn’t anyone told you that if you plagiarize yourself you’ll go blind?
Only one conclusion one can make, Goodell is in the Rooneys’ back pocket. Or is it vice versa?
Oh well, congrats Steelers******
If there was technology that could tell if the ball ‘broke the plane’, the Steelers still would have been awarded that touchdown because the ball did break the plane. The question is, did the receiver have possession when the ball was breaking the plane? That is still a judgement call that the ref would have had to make.
Yeah too bad the call wasn’t what it should have been, no touchdown and holding (tackling) on Alan Faneca. You would think the refs were biased in that game or something.
Well, at least we didn’t get any absurd calls, like a quarterback being called for a 15 yard illegal block penalty when he was actually making a tackle on a return. Something that ridiculous could make people think the game was fixed or something.
Oh wait…
Not to rain on your parade but the system would need to be extremely complex. Take for example if the receiver is in the endzone, ball crosses the plane, but receiver doesn’t gain control of the ball until it is out of the endzone. How does the ball know that it is under control of a receiver?
I’ve been wanting a chip in the balls (ouch) for a while, not just for breaking the plane, but also so that officials don’t just guess where punts go out of bounds, etc…
But I don’t know that the technology works in this case. The ball could have crossed the plane, but theres no way of knowing if it did so while in possession of the receiver.
“Improving the technology could end up costing them games.”
Or improving the technology could end up getting blowhards like you to quit whining. Getting the call right would be an added bonus.
That’s dirty.
Florio says:
“But if Dr. Narasimhan truly is a Steelers fan, she might want to wrap her project up in a sack and send it to the bottom of the confluence. The Steelers have been the beneficiaries of the current imperfections in the system; improving the technology could end up costing them games.”
LOL!
This guy loves to needle people. Not only does it drive traffic to the site, it qualifies him for the 2008 “Jagoff Award” given to the “Hack” with the most creative, tasteless, and incendiary commentary style.
The site is more about Florio than anything else. He toots his own horn about being a CMU undergrad (twice LOL!), as if anyone other than him “shives a git”, ….providing additional proof that he is indeed a true”Jagoff”!
He is a legend in his own mind. How he can even stand to be in the same room with himself is truly astonishing.
Busting his balls is what keeps me coming back to his site.
He has me “hooked”!
LOL!
Wait, didn’t Adidas develop a soccer ball using ASIC (application specific integrated circuit) chip technology that was almost done in 2006? What happened to that project?
still having problems overcoming the fact the steelers beat the ravens i see. and you’re so right, the steelers are the only team in history to benefit from an official’s call to win a game. let. it. go.
seek help, for yourself and your family.
.
Reminds me of a hentai I saw back in the day called Ogenki Clinic.
It had roboballs in it. He seemed to be a talented doctor.
funny- i gave a presentation in high school, 91′ i think, on a system that detected the ball crossing the goal line. I wonder if I have any rights here… =)
numerous people and officials have provided links and visual evidence that shows big ben scored in the superbowl, and holmes scored sunday. but those will not be acknowledged by you. the head of officiating comes out and backs the call made by the official and you twist the story into some kind of misleading headline to suit your own cause. the people that want to believe one way or another will never have their minds changed, but when direct proof is given to you and you just pretend it doesn’t exist, well that’s pure, unadulterated insanity. you may want to get your hate in check before it consumes you. i mean, you’re right to talk about the greatest football franchise ever, over and over and over, but even us diehard fans think your obsession has become a bit overkill now.
.
How about we tackle the big problems first.
MAKE PASS INTEFERENCE REVIEWABLE.
STOP PUTTING THE GAMES IN THE REFS HANDS
I AM LOOKING AT YOU POLIAN.
They’ve tried it in other sports and have since taken it out because it wasn’t really effective.
And Florio, get over it.
It’s obvious the Ravens won’t be keeping the Steelers from winning games, Florio, you might as well pin your hopes on technology.
The ball doesn’t have to “know” it is being possessed properly, you numbskulls! You think maybe the stripes can take care of that part? HMM??
Yeah they did develop the technology for soccer and they used it in some exhibition games, but for some asinine reason they stopped using it. There was talk of using it in some tournaments, but FIFA shot it down.
Its a Game
And like all games its subject to interpretation by humans and all their glorious frailty. You seemed to want to take the human quality out of the game. Some of the best games in NFL history have been decided by human judgments… good, bad and sometimes ugly ( its what makes it fun).
One of these days you will advocate using those Stupid robots that Fox uses on the screen to do all the playing. Lets get rid of the players…
Two Degree’s from CMU huh? Further proof of you being a closet steelers fan…although my guess is that it might be out of the closet now! Congrats!
Anyway, I think they should just burry one of those “invisible” dog fences along the goal line, and then put the transponder inside the football. They could add some LED lights and modify it so as soon as the ball breaks the plane it lights up and makes sounds!
This is a stupid idea (much like the blue puck…if you can’t see the puck, get some glasses, or a bigger tv…). I mean why stop at just the goal line, they could use it to determine the exact spot of the football on every single play. If you’re going to take the human element out of football then why even play the games with players? Just let the madden simulations determine the entire season…we could have a superbowl every weekend!
F off Florio!
how about instead of beating on the steelers constantly you just dont even mention them on your page. they could win 10 SB in a row and you would still complain about them or throw a jab in there, bottom line they are the best team in football this year
patsfan and nideak,
that’s what you have the refs for. the tech will let the refs know if the ball is across the plane then the refs will be able to decide if control was established by the player. this isn’t going to take the refs out of the game it is just gonna be an aid for them to utilize.
I do however agree with the other posters in regards to the camera’s. If we can have camera’s on wires floating above the field, following the ball wherever it goes, why for the love of god can’t we get definitive camera angles along the sidelines and goal lines. Its not like they need to be for use by the TV networks, infact it would be better if they were only for review purposes because they could set them at 100+ frames per second as opposed to 60/30 (HD/Standard).
I don’t see why people think technology will replace the ref’s judgement. If anything, technology would just be yet another tool for the refs to use to determine if it should be a touchdown or out of bounds or whatever. The ball would say “crossed the plane” but then the ref would determine whether he had possession or both feet down or whatever. Though I do agree. Getting away with murder in football is something that you remember for the rest of the season.
As an Eagles fan, thank you Falcons!
I actually wrote a paper on this exact subject. JonS is right, Adidas was developing a soccer ball in conjunction with Cairos technologies and a couple university programs. The idea was tested in 2006 and 2007 but it was found that there were still some major bugs that would need to be worked out before it could actually be applied.
They don’t use GPS either because the distance that are worked with are so small. A better option might be radio frequency identification tags (RFID) that can pulse up to 2000 times a second to give a much more accurate reading. Even with this, it may only be accurate to a couple inches. It would probably have to get down to millimeters improve upon video replays.
A further problem with this is that antennas need to be placed all around the stadium to get an accurate reading of the ball in 3 dimensional space. The position is figured out by calculating the time delay of the signal traveling to each antenna. I found that the cost of this would be upwards of 200,000 dollars. With upkeep and security this would certainly be much more.
There is of course the issue of game play that people have already discussed a little bit here. I am not too sure that the officials would want yet another thing to have to worry about. They might also not like the idea of having their eyes tell them one thing on the replay and technology tell them another. There would have to be a certain “chain of command” developed between officials and technology.
Okay, you win. All our Steeler fan secrets are leaking out and we’ve lost security in our NFL domination project.
Did you know that Sirhan Sirhan and Lee Harvey Oswald were Steeler fans? I heard the guy that ran Project Blue Book for the Air Force had a brother in law that went to the second grade with Dan Rooney. The Illuminati and the Masons launched a scheme years ago to infiltrate the ranks of the officials in order to win football games for the Steelers. And we’d have gotten away with it too if it weren’t for those pesky kids (at Carnegie Mellon U).
It would be a good move. Anything they can do to ensure that the right calls get made will improve the game.
Folks keep talking about taking the fun out of the game, but the fact is it’s a business first, game second. Wins and losses equate to revenues, and while the action on the field is exciting and make football the most exciting sport in the world, getting it right is more important than simply just playing the game.
Hey, all they have to do is get the system to put up an indicator – maybe a green light – on the video any time the ball is over the goal line. Then, on revue, they can look for the receiver gaining possesion and see if the indicator is set. If so TD, if not no TD. Seems pretty simple as far as how you’d use it. Designing it so it’s foolproof – that’s the tough part.
@ JonS:
Yeah, what the hell happened to that?
why dont they just change to touchdown rule(just has to touch line) to what it is in hockey(has to completely cross) that would put an end to all this “did he break the plane”
I’ve long thought they should and could do this. First, you can spot the ball exactly on punts out of bounds. Second, you can tell whether or not the ball crossed the plane on plays where possession is not an issue. Third, it would eliminate the rare case of an ambiguous field goal. Fourth, with a little bit of calculation, it could tell whether or not a first down was achieved. And if you wanted to get really fancy, you could sync the replay cameras with the position marker so that a review like the one in the Ravens-Steelers game would be conclusive. Of course you could also do the completely and totally obvious thing and have fixed cameras staring down all the goal lines and side lines as should have been done when replay was first instituted.
No way. You want this, play XBox. Keep the game a game.
Wait, didn’t Adidas develop a soccer ball using ASIC (application specific integrated circuit) chip technology that was almost done in 2006? What happened to that project?
____________________________________________________
They put it in a soccer ball, and nobody in the US cared.
“Yeah too bad the call wasn’t what it should have been, no touchdown and holding (tackling) on Alan Faneca.”
Faneca doesn’t play for the Steelers anymore… he’s a Jet
Thread No.5 !!! Where’s Fletcher Prouty when ya need ‘em ?? !! Damn !
idontknow says:
December 17th, 2008 at 9:35 am
If there was technology that could tell if the ball ‘broke the plane’, the Steelers still would have been awarded that touchdown because the ball did break the plane. The question is, did the receiver have possession when the ball was breaking the plane? That is still a judgement call that the ref would have had to make.
Exactly! And it doesn’t take a CMU graduate to realize this. Just common sense.
It’s football, not tennis. Maybe they need to implant the players hands and feet with sensors too so they can tell if possession occured at the same time the ball crossed the endzone.
@idontknow
Absolutely correct.
And in the case of a run, it’s all about when the knee is down. You can’t take the ref’s and judgment calls out of game.
What we should be focusing on is improving officiating!
If this was implemented, it would have to be with instant replay. Review when the runner or receiver is down and where the ball is at that second according to the sensor. This is the only way it would work. Otherwise everyone would just stick the ball out after they hit the ground.
Don’t put a chip in the ball, do what some of the coaches have said and have multiple camera angles down the goal line on each side and from up on high in high-def. This will give everyone a chance to argue their ass off as usual, but you will have a better shot at indisputable proof. Better yet let the fans at home see what the ref is seeing when he review the play for those 3 minutes–put that feed right on national TV. You put a chip in there and everyone will be bitching about conspiracy or the usual stupid bullshit on this website. The camera don’t lie, plus it will keeps hacks like you in business Florio with all the bitchin’ and moanin’.
“There is one problem with this. What if the player is juggling the ball on a comeback rout? If he is bobbeling the ball after it crosses the line, gains posession of it after he returns to the field of play, and is tackled shy of the end zone? The the alarm will sound that the ball broke the plain, even though posession was not until the receiver is out of the end zone.”
A) You probably wouldn’t use it in that situation. But B), if they’re excessively smart, they’d start timestamping individual frames for replay as well as the new ball. Then it would be completely trivial to determine the time at which the receiver got control of the ball, and then determine if the ball was in the endzone at that time.
Quite frankly, I don’t know why they haven’t at least timestamped the frames for replay yet, as it would help in situations like where you can see the ball from one camera and the guy’s knee in the other, but you need to sync them up to see if the ball was out before the knee hits. Just an example, there are quite a few others.
“Why dont they put a camera EXACTLY on the line, over the referees head so there is a clear view down the line?”
Answer to that is probably the same reason they haven’t done what I recommended above (timestamping the frames). They’re totally dependent on the network camera crews for replay, which is sort of a joke. They should at least augment that with league-owned cameras (even if low-def) that are placed along the goal line, both sides and both ends.
I agree, judgement calls will almost always be part of the game, but if there is any way to lessen the judgement calls, I’m all for it. I’m not really too concerned about this one instance with the Steelers and the Ravens, but other ones where it isn’t so clear, quarterback sneaks for example. The idea that such a system would have to be ridiculously complex is a silly notion. A basic system would just determine if the ball actually broke the plane. A baseball system would easily determine fair/foul balls, home runs, etc… it’s not really rocket science, but I assume the rest of you are content with olympic style scoring… I give Big Ben a 9.5.
I just want to see one of these old refs trying to change the ball’s batteries mid-game. “Let me get out my reading glasses.”
New technology has always made its way on to the field and in most cases has made it better. Better equipment, ensuring better saftey. Better media technology making the games more enjoyable for TV viewers. Chips is the balls to determine TDs just makes sense. Its not much of a leap to use it to determine if a first down was achieved, or to mark forward progress.
For all the problems with the refs this year, I would think we would welcome the advances.
I see one day when every player has sensors all over his uniform to determine the precise moment a player is actually down, thus knowing the exact location of the ball at that moment. This list of possibilities is really endless. It doesn’t change the game, only the refs impact on it.
nice shot thrown in there at the end…every team (not just the Steelers) COULD lose games because of this technology…i don’t know what you hate more the steelers or the fact that ESPN has a much bigger dick than you
It appeared that FIFA (soccer) had their smart ball basically perfected but pulled the plug on it in March. Some still want the human element plus they were concerned about it hindering the natural flow of the game. As some posters point out, football (the pointy ball kind) has a number of other elements involved, namely possession and feet down, that football (the round ball) doesn’t. All soccer would need is to determine if all of the ball crossed all of the line between the goal posts and under the cross bar and was propelled in a legal manner and provided that no other infringement of the Laws occurred…
Well, never mind.
All this shows is that Tom Jackson is a Denver homer who simply hates the Steelers.
THis makes a lot of sense. Add an RFID tag or something. It could be used for touchdowns, first downs, or ball placement after each play. It would help take the human error out of offciating. Assuming the technology doesn’t have any human error in design or implementation…
I think all the people complaining about this new technology are Stealers fan. Why whould they want something that could possibly be detrimental to them winning games. Sorry, too many big words for you guys.
Is it plagiarizing yourself? It’s possible, John Fogerty was accused of plagiarizing his own work with CCR.
While we’re talking about rules that should be changed…. pass interference… 15 yards… enough said.
How would the Steelers suffer? No one can say the ball did not cross the plane either. The whole point of the debate was the overruling of the on field call. Most people have said that the ball may have touched the plane but they are not sure.
Same with the Big Ben TD in the SB. In both cases, in the worst case scenario, Steelers get the ball at the one inch line with a 4th down possibility of a QB sneak with no need for a run play. And in the best case scenario, the chip would validate the TD in one or both cases.
>>kellyb9 says:
December 17th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
While we’re talking about rules that should be changed…. pass interference… 15 yards… enough said.<<
Yeah, no. Spot of the foul is the correct penalty for PI. Otherwise you’re screwing the team for attempting what would have likely been a big play.
I am a Steelers fan and I want this technology to come through so all the Steelers bashers can move on with their life. I will gladly trade the possibility of a 4th and an inch if it means it will help the Steelers in other scenarios. I see no Dallas fans complaining about the nice spot they got on the final drive last week(TO for first down).
Oh can we have a sensor for giving the refs eyesight when they ignore the blatant holding on James Harrison in every freaking game? That one play Simms commented on where Harrison was held do badly? That happens to him more often in other games. (SD game being the prime example where Steelers got 11 penalties, but SD somehow got only 2 and not one of them was holding on Harrison who was held a bunch of times).
Good lord Florio, are you still whining about this? Move on man. There have been way worse calls to focus on. It was literally an INCH either way. it wasn’t like it was a travesty of justice. Even if they don’t get the TD Big Ben easily gets an inch on a QB sneak on 4th down. I dig this site but I’m not on it enough to know if you’re either A) a Raven’s homer or B) a Steeler hater-but obviously you’re one or both. the game’s over, the Steelers won. Accept it. Move on.
Wow! Mike Florio, Andy Warhol, Ted Danson, Jack Klugmann, Lenny & Squiggy, and JimnBigD. Not many schools have an alumni list like that. Go Tartans!
shaunypoo says:
December 17th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
I think all the people complaining about this new technology are Stealers fan. Why whould they want something that could possibly be detrimental to them winning games. Sorry, too many big words for you guys.
__________________________________
They would be Steelers fans complaining about the crap being said not the technology. The technology would have be fine if only to shut up the whining. This whole routine has jumped the shark.
I’d agree with the sensor put in the ball as well, it may not solve all problems with the refs, it’s just one less thing for people to complain about.
Also Praveen, the SD game was actually 13 penalties for 115 yards against the Steelers to 2 penalties for 5 yards against SD, the last one of which was stated to be a wrong call after the game and did not cost SD any yards, only a Steelers TD, which luckily did not affect the outcome of the game. There has not been a holding call against an opposing team on offense that is playing the Steelers for 5 straight weeks now. This is part of the reason I’ve become slightly unsympathetic to other fans complaining about bad calls during a game that go against their team.
Dude – Let it go! Cover why the Ravens coundn’t stop them. Cover the new SI Power Rankings!
Like another Ravens fan said…. Ravens fans are “whining” because we had the Refs have a strong influence on the outcome of a game and our playoff hopes….Steeler Nation whines when Florio utters the slightest of negative criticism of the Steelers…. Which one is of more consequence? So ask yourself, who’s the real cry babies, Squealers?
I’ve never understood why there simply isn’t a super-high frame-rate camera dedicated to looking directly down the goal line. It would be a step forward in making seeing when the ball breaks the plane much easier.
if there is a chip that can explain why offensive holding hasn’t been called on
a steeler’s opponent in 23 straight quarters, let me know.
as for the losers, who can’t get over superbowl xl and last weeks game
against baltimore, hug it out bitches.
BMore STyles, give me a break. If the refs wanted to kill the Ravens chances of winning the game, they would have called the play a TD on the field and there would not be any discussion about it as it was that close. The point is not that it was not a TD. THe point was the procedural precedent of replays. THere have been much worse spots for TDs in the past when there are runs up the middle on short yardage. I do not know how the refs can even spot those accurately.
And even ignoring all that, we are ignoring the fact that all it would have taken was the shortest of QB sneaks to have the ravens lose. Of course, it is possible for Ben to fumble the snap. But it is really low on the injustice scale. This is not a SD-Denver fiasco where the game would have been pretty much OVER if the call was made right and that was not even a borderline mistake. That was a case of a mistake by the ref that robbed SD of a victory because after that snap SD wins the game by killing the clock. Ravens did not seal the game by any means even if the refs ruled in their favor. The only call you have a right to bitch about is the Gary Russell non reversal. Guess what, Steelers can also complain about the non hold call on the TE who was blocking Harrison in the second half that led to Flacco having enough time to whip out a big pass.
CASE CLOSED. I thought I was the only one who noticed this when I made my comment on this site a couple of days ago. If you freeze frame and advance it near the goalline. THere are three frames or so where the ball looks to be in contact with the line. The first one is the one where most TV replays have been frozen to show the viewer it is debatable. But I advanced it on my HD screen and if you went two frames past that point, it is clear that some part of the ball is touching the frame.
On TOTAL ACCESS, Mike Periera did the same exact thing I did on my tv. I hope this puts a freaking end to this controversy. Hell, even if you are not convinced, even the one inch line would be too harsh a spot for this. you pretty much put the ball right on the endzone line. Ravens werent robbed of anything.
The thing that really bothers me the most about this “controversy” is that it’s taking away from what a nice frigging catch that was. They just played it in super slo-mo on Pereira’s segment on NFL Network. While leaning forward with two guys about to hit him he gains control of the ball the frame after it hits his hands. Wow.
It doesn’t bother me that you don’t print my responses double I, you still read them.
praveen:
I only made it half way through your comment; a simple “whaaaa” would have been sufficient.
Bmore Styles says:
December 17th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
Like another Ravens fan said…. Ravens fans are “whining” because we had the Refs have a strong influence on the outcome of a game and our playoff hopes….Steeler Nation whines when Florio utters the slightest of negative criticism of the Steelers…. Which one is of more consequence? So ask yourself, who’s the real cry babies, Squealers?
_____________________
You, sweetheart.
But if Dr. Narasimhan truly is a Steelers fan, she might want to wrap her project up in a sack and send it to the bottom of the confluence. The Steelers have been the beneficiaries of the current imperfections in the system; improving the technology could end up costing them games.
(1) Hell yeah, I’d be in favor of eliminating an element that can compromise the rightful resolution of the games;
(2) However, I take issue with the comment about the Steelers being the beneficiaries of an imperfect system:
(a) without question, at least 3 inches of the ball from the nose back broke the forward invisible plane in Super Bowl XL on Roethlisberger’s carry. It’s right there on film/tape – the eye in the sky doesn’t lie;
(b) as for the Ravens game last Sunday, Holmes *instantaneously* secured control with 2 feet down in the field of play (i.e., possessesion). At that precise instant, the ball breached the imaginary vertical plane. That’s all it takes – it doesn’t take Larry Cszonka bouncing off goalposts and coming to rest four yeard deep in the end zone.
(i) As for the Ravens game, one must cede that the “rule” requiring indisputable visual evidence to overturn a call on the field is the only legit angle that can be played to the contrary, but even then, anyone sensible (if they had to bet their mother’s life on it) would say Holmes broke the forward plane. Besides, it wasn’t like the ruling on that one play cost Baltimore the game. Pittsburgh still had the ball at the 2 centimeter line with a gasping Ravens’ defense that just gave up 92 yards piece by piece over the preceding 3 minutes.
One last thing – saying “improving technology may end up costing them games” incorrectly presupposes that chance occurrences are more likely to repeat the past. Not true. A fair coin flipped 5 times that comes up Heads still has just as good a chance of coming up Tails as Heads on the sixth try.