The problem of spotting the ball

Submitted by snarling wolverine on

For a long time, officiating crews have had chains to measure whether the spot of the ball is beyond 10 yards from the original LOS.  They now also have instant replay to review things.  But what about the spot itself?   We saw in NW-Ohio that the spot of the ball was a game-changing call, and it looked like a questionable spot.  (I thought we got a bad spot on a 3rd and 1 in our game as well, although it ended up not mattering.)  Why does the sport accept this?

It seems very strange and contradictory to me that football is willing to put up with spotting that seems like complete guesswork on the part of a line judge who is often far away from the play itself, only to then bring out the chains and measure everything.  Is there a way to use technology to improve this?

GoBlueBorderBattle

October 6th, 2013 at 1:45 PM ^

Remember when the NHL tried the growing puck thing in the 90s? I'm sure that technology could somehow be used in a football. Of course the ball wouldn't glow on the screen all game but in replay situations like they had last night I a particular game, it would prove very useful. I'm aware this will never happen, but it is one potential solution.

OuldSod

October 6th, 2013 at 4:10 PM ^

You'd only have a real time accuracy of at best 3 yards. You could do better, but the ball would have to rest at is forward location for 15 minutes and you'd have to repeat it 6 hours later with different satellite constellations. Video is the only option but then you'd have to review nearly every spot so the only realistic option is goal lines or by coaches challenge.

victors2000

October 6th, 2013 at 1:34 PM ^

I don't understand why the replay booth couldn't determine the runner was a tad farther than the spot simply by seeing the Buckeye player who tried to tackle him behind the line of scrimmage was practically where the ball was spotted.

Well I would have said something if I were them anyways.

buckeyejonross

October 6th, 2013 at 2:23 PM ^

The funniest thing in the world is some old, dumpy guy in glasses placing the ball haphazardly on the ground based on where he thinks it was from 40+ feet away, then they measure and it's a chain link away. The dude could have sneezed and given the other team a first down. It is what it is. That's football and we accept it.

M-Wolverine

October 7th, 2013 at 9:56 AM ^

For the gambling community? Which one is going to do that first?

When Vegas does their job they don't care who wins. And for every one person upset that OSU got that late TD at the end of regulation there's another guy who was thrilled. Half the people are happy and half the people are mad.

jmblue

October 7th, 2013 at 3:17 PM ^

They're not going to admit it, but I do think gambling interests have more clout than people want to believe - especially in pro sports.  Rightly or wrongly, gambling generates a lot of interest in the game.  The NFL will eventually adopt new spotting technology and college will follow.

 

mvp

October 6th, 2013 at 5:16 PM ^

I thought in our game yesterday, it was particularly bad.  Not necessarily favorable or unfavorable for one team or the other, but it seemed like there were a half-dozen times where the two line judges were more than 1 yard apart.

Usually the line judges are pretty good about "signaling" to one another about who has more confidence by the guy who's less confident adjusting to where the other is.

Regarding the comments about the hilarious nature of measuring to a chain-link after an arbitrary spot: what's your alternative?  There has to be a system.  If the judges are unbiased, the spot should be favorable for the offense just as often as it is unfavorable.  If the spot is therefore unbiased, then measuring is the best result you have. 

One alternative I can think of is going to a system where it isn't first and 10, but first and "the next line" a-la 7-on-7 rules.  This would fundamentally alter the nature of the game, though and, IMHO, be a bad idea.

pug150

October 6th, 2013 at 6:15 PM ^

I was talking to an official at a game one day and he told me when the ball is spotted to begin a series, it is always put on the line. This is so the chains will be accurate and there is always a line to make. Thus, you have the ball downed ate the half yard line, it is spotted at the 1.

MGoBender

October 6th, 2013 at 6:47 PM ^

Having talked to many football officials, I can second this.

At first, when I heard it I was taken aback.  However, it makes perfect sense.  If you start a drive on your 10 yd line versus your 10.5 yd line, it makes no difference really.  It's the spots inbetween first downs where every inch is important, but when it's first and ten, a foot or two either way is pretty much negligible, until you are in the redzone.  Even then, I was told officials will avoid not spotting a first down on a yard line.  O

Always having the first down line actually being a yard line makes it much, much easier for officials to spot the ball (it's short or it isn't) and coaches to call plays.

B1G_Fan

October 6th, 2013 at 6:56 PM ^

 There where 3 questionable calls on ball placement all of which favored Ohio. The punt that was downed at the 1 foot line where the guy who downed the ball was clearly on the goal line, The late touchdown that was reviewed late ( i have no idea how they could possibly over turn the call on the field) and the 4th down for NW. If NW gets any of those calls in their favor especially the two late ones, this is a whole new ball game.

Seriously

October 6th, 2013 at 9:11 PM ^

There where 3 questionable calls on ball placement all of which favored Ohio. The punt that was downed at the 1 foot line where the guy who downed the ball was clearly on the goal line, The late touchdown that was reviewed late...
NU commenters say the punt spot is determined by the location of the ball, not the player's foot. For what it's worth, the entire late night crew at EDSBS wanted OSU to collectively die in a fire, and they thought the TD review got it right.

I dumped the Dope

October 6th, 2013 at 7:47 PM ^

Part of this is the "breaks" of football.  The general idea is to play well enough that the "breaks" don't influence the game.  But for a hundred years + it has been that way.

Technologically speaking my guess is what has to be placed inside the football to wirelessly communicate is too big not to influence the mass and flight of the ball...at this point.  Also have to have several footballs in play and read the correct one.

My guess is someone is already working on this and we will see it demonstrated in our lifetimes (next 30-40yrs).  Whether its cost effective and accepted is another issue.

Chuck Norris

October 7th, 2013 at 12:38 AM ^

One thing I never understood was why, while reviewing, all of the angles are viewed "separately." By that, I mean why is it that they'll say, "Oh, from this angle we can tell when the ball is over the plane but we can't tell when his knee is down, and vice versa with another angle." There's got to be some way to sync up the camera angles (a time stamp, or setting them to the same pace from the snap, etc.) so that we know what time they happen in relation to each other.

bacon

October 7th, 2013 at 6:16 AM ^

You guys are thinking too fancy. GPS balls, camera synchronization all sound great, but expensive. The NCAA doesn't have money for that kind of stuff. I think we need those sensors that they have by the exits of department stores along with the tags they put on clothing. They can even hook the alarm up to the stadium loudspeaker. That technology has been around forever and never fails.

saveferris

October 7th, 2013 at 9:34 AM ^

In the case of the Northwestern / Ohio game, we can argue about the spot of the football on the deciding 4th down play all we want, but Cats fans should really be upset about is the fact that their team couldn't execute a simple under center ball snap at a critical moment.  Northwestern blew the snap and everyone wants to bitch about the spot of the football?  Snap it cleanly, have the QB dive forward over the tackle and leave no doubt as to whether the ball advanced past the first down marker.

Speaking as someone who is just as tired of hearing the media praise Urban Meyer for being undefeated as the OSU Head Coach and was pulling hard for NW to pull out the upset on Saturday; to watch them choke at the critical moment, just highlighted the fact that Northwestern is still Northwestern in some capacity.

TampaJake

October 7th, 2013 at 9:54 AM ^

I'm an official, so take it easy on me.  So, the concept is what we all know.  The spot of the ball is the most forward portion of the ball when the player becomes down.  So sometimes you have a fast whistle and the ball is spotted as soon as the pile moves backward.  Other times you have a slow whistle and the ball comes out "after" momentum is stopped.

In your case you refer to officials mis-identifing the spot.  Sometimes this is very hard as you have other responsibilites at the same time. The wing official is moving downfield to cover the deep reciever, the ball is dumped to the flat, now the offical has to work back to this spot after running his ass of to get downfield..so, not making excuses, but sometimes it's hard to get the correct spot.

On a scrimmage or free kick, I ALWAYS spot the ball on yard marker (no factional spots), so we start a series on a marker, unless the ball is inside the 5..then an exact spot is preferred.

Many Umpires do this on a first down as well.  Also, the wing is encouraged to spot the ball in an unambiguos psoition if it is close.  So, let's say the wing determines the runner made the first down, he is ENCOURAGED to spot the ball as foward as possible to eliminate controversy and if the runner is short, spot it well short, unfortunately this sometimes looks really bad on TV.  The rule of thumb is, if he earned it, give it.

 

mgobaran

October 7th, 2013 at 10:17 AM ^

http://www.techspot.com/news/53455-following-up-on-the-360-degree-replay-system-coming-to-sunday-night-football.html

But the new 360 degree replay that they are starting to use on NBC and they already use on the YES network would help these types of plays out emencely. The replay booth should have an official line that is 100% accurate for every play. This cannot be that hard to accomplish based on where the official sticks are. You can make the line the exact thickness of the bottom of the sticks.

Most plays are based on where the refs spot it. But if something is that questionable, it should be worth just as much as a replay on a goaline touchdown.