When officials saw receiver N’Keal Harry step out of bounds in the second half of Sunday’s game at New England, even though he didn’t, Patriots coach Bill Belichick had no way to challenge what should have been a touchdown, because he had exhausted his budget of red flags. But when it comes to plays that could have been/should have been touchdowns, it shouldn’t be that way.
If the ruling on the field had been that Harry scored, the play would have been subject to automatic replay review, regardless of whether the head coach inclined to test the decision had saved a replay challenge. Automatic replay review also should apply when the ruling on the field, if ruled properly, would have resulted in a touchdown.
It’s a simple and fair expansion of the replay process, one that should apply both to scores and turnovers. Put simply, automatic review should be available for all scoring plays and for plays that would be scoring plays if the ruling on the field is changed. Likewise, automatic review should be available for all turnovers and for plays that would be turnovers if the ruling on the field is changed.
For example, if a player catches a pass in the end zone and the ruling is that it’s a touchdown, an automatic review happens. If the ruling is that the player dropped the pass, the review happens only if the coach has a challenge available and chooses to use it -- or if it happens in the final two minutes of either half or overtime.
That’s not the way it should be. While naysayers will insist that this expansion will tend to make games longer, the more important reality is that it will tend to make the outcome of games more accurate, eliminating the donut hole that robbed the Patriots of a touchdown due to: (1) the failure of the official to call the play properly in real time; and (2) the inability of Belichick to challenge it, because he was out of time outs.