The Nest

So another week (10) goes by in the NFL and another too-close-to-call play involving a touchdown.

The play:
An Adrian Peterson 29-yard touchdown run pushing the Vikings 1 point (28-27) past the Packers with 22 ticks over 2 minutes to go in the game.

The challenge (by Green Bay coach Mike McCarthy):
McCarthy contends Peterson’s knee was down before the ball broke the plain of the endzone.

The ruling:
No indisputable evidence that Peterson’s hadn’t crossed the plain before the knee was down. The play stands.

The FOX Network cameras showed the replay from 4 different angles, none of which gave a clear indication of the timing of the ball crossing the goal line and the knee hitting the ground.

At issue:
Should there be cameras specially mounted at the endzones to monitor this scenario? Would it solve the problem?

Back in September, Bill Belichick advocated the use of such cameras:

“It’s been brought up many times, but the league refuses to do it,” Belichick said. If implemented, “if you do challenge that play, then there’s absolutely one look at it and that will tell you did the ball cross [the goal line] or didn’t it cross it.”

It’s hard to argue his point. One concern is (assuming you’d need 2 cameras per endzone times 30 stadiums is 120 cameras) the cost/benefit ratio. Sure, the NFL has millions to spend on such technology. It would be a very small drop in the NFL bucket for them to shell out that kind of money.

But the NFL is a business and who do you think would ultimately foot the bill for those cameras? I’ll leave it to your imagination.

I’m all for getting the call right and for those fans who would feel the eventual trickle-down effect of the cost of those cameras? They’ll tell you it’s worth the extra few dollars per ticket if it means getting the play right. Nobody wants to see a game decided by a referee.

Tell us what you think!

instant replay football nfl