I like your 2nd choice for improvement. International soccer has gone to a digital eye for goal-line accuracy. Football could do something similar. The only problem using it in fb is that often times someone crosses the goal line after already being down. So the issue of whether someone was down or not, before the sensors on the ball and line indicate a TD, will still exist.
Hence the focus being on watching the replay to determine when the player was down. When the ball hits the line, all angles would have an indicator light up. If every angle shows the indicator light up before the player was down, then you have a score.
I was thinking #2 yesterday!
Also, I’m a firm believer that MOST games are won or lost multiple times. Turnovers or penalties stop drives way more than missed calls by the refs. Then there’s dropped passes, shanked punts, etc, etc.
Just saying the Wave had their chances just like we had ours this year. One more TD in 3 games this year and we’re 10-1.
The pylons (or “pie line” for whoever it was that called it that!) are not stable and could be knocked over so you need something that is stable but close enough to not be rendered useless because of obstructions.
If a play knocks over a pylon (pretty rare), it usually includes an out-stretched ball and video should be enough. The censors would be mainly for plays that include a pile up between the hash marks.
RFID and similar sensors are not that accurate from 20-25yds away.
1 Like
Basketball has a possession arrow to keep track of who gets the ball when it’s tied up. What if football had an ‘arrow’ that determined which team gets the call on close plays like this one? Just a thought.
In that case, maybe put them under the turf/bury them every 10 feet along each goal line. I know I’m not an expert on the technology but it shouldn’t be that hard for an expert to figure out the best way to apply it.
They could have kicked a field goal there and sent it to overtime.
2 Likes