I didn't get to see any of that game. Got to the stadium just as the game was finishing.

There was an INT returned for a touchdown in the Div 1 game that apparently was not a touchdown and should have been a touchback. More reason for replay!!!

I kid...sort of...

If you "didn't see the play" and agree that the officiating crew was competent to be working this particular game, why would you presume there was, "More reason for replay!!!".

Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to give the benefit of whatever doubt to the officials working the game, than to whatever source led you to believe,
"There was an INT returned for a touchdown in the Div 1 game that apparently was not a touchdown and should have been a touchback"?

The replay, based on multiple accounts, was clear that the ball was out well before he crossed the goal line.

<iframe src='http://www.snappytv.com/snap/arrowhead-s-charlie-reuteman-int-return-for-td-vs-franklin-about-wiaa-football-div-1-arrowhead-vs-franklin-on-fox-sports-wisconsin-tv_0a?w=640&h=390' width='640' height='390' frameborder='0' scrolling='no' webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe>

You decide for yourself what the call should have been. The score was 23-17 in favor of red before the INT. They converted the 2PC, so now it's 31-17 when it should have been 23-17 still with white taking over at the 20. Who knows what would have happened from there, but that's a huge swing that could have been corrected with replay.

While it may not give a reason to impose instant replay, as the only good angle would have been a goal line camera and assuming that most states are only going to be able to use a live tv feed- as it would be mega-expensive to do otherwise-would it not be cheaper to use a 7 man crew and thus have a better chance the wing is able to cover the pylon?

For this particular play, there are a couple of replays that show the ball clearly out well before the goal line.

But you're right...that wouldn't be the case for every play. Not sure whether or not the state would pay the TV crew to add a couple of goal line cameras to review scoring plays or whatever they would need.

If it's a choice between a couple $hundred to add 2 officials or a couple $thousand to add a couple cameras, which do you suppose they would choose?

The problem with switching to 7 for playoffs is that most HS officials don't know those mechanics and have few opportunities to work them during the season. It's risky to switch during the tournament.

Keeping in mind High School Football, even at the State Championship level, is an interscholastic athletic event, if better coverage is the actual objective there are other far more consistent ways to achieve the goal.

Some areas still provide coverage for HS games with 4 man crews, many have expanded coverage to 5 man configurations with some recognizing the significant improvements in the talent and complexity levels of the current era game itself, and now assign 6, or even in some circumstances, 7 man crews.

The one factor all 3 major rule codes are in total agreement on is the size of the field football is played on.

It would seem far more productive, as well as cost effective and consistent, to increase the size of the officiating crew than inject an inconsistent external review mechanism there are currently no specific rule guidelines to follow.

Television replay is a cat, when let out of a bag without a lot of careful planning and control, can cause a lot of consequences nobody is capable of handling.

Went through it last year- we did 7 man for the regionals with little to no "show prep" for which it was obvious. By the following week's final, we did much better.

I had downloaded the CCA 7 man manual and think I looked at the GHSA manual online too.

Our state now mandates 7-man crews for all playoff games after the first round. In the first round, 7-man is the default unless both coaches agree to use only 5.

The last regular-season week here has no playoff implications, so many associations will use that week as a "practice week" for their playoff-eligible officials to get some 7-man experience.

I know baseball (at least in Illinois) adds an extra umpire at some point in the postseason.

In Wisconsin, not every conference uses three officials for regular season varsity basketball games. That changes at a certain point in the playoffs.

Seems to only make sense for football to do the same. I get it's a money issue, but someone, somewhere is going to look really bad one day because a missed call could have been prevented by having more officials on the field. It's a small price to pay to get more calls right, IMO.

As someone who's worked as a college deep wing the past two years, it's not a position you can just throw someone on and expect they'll do more good than harm.

In PA most leagues use 6 regular season, and 7 for post season. We dont usually have any hiccups when going to 7. Every playoff official has to go to a 7 man mechanics meeting prior to playoffs.


Having worked deep wing at the HS and College level. I dont want to belittle the position, but it is not the hardest of them to pick up if you apply a ounce of thought to it, and you are a good official to begin with.

I disagree that you could just throw someone in those positions. It takes a lot of discipline to work those positions as when you have a play, you have to be ready for it and know what your responsiblities are. That is the reason I think adding more officials could be a problem. I am not saying with the right training you could not work the position, but many newer deep wings have no idea how to move or what to look at if they are used to working a short wing or a back judge.

Peace

I've seen a lot of deep wings not do the right things when "thrown in" at the college JV level. Proper ball rotation, keeping a proper cushion, knowing their responsibilities on spots, goal line, etc. Pylon plays. Communication and working well with short wings. Proper punt coverage and reverse mechanics.

I'd been working football for a long time and it took me a while to feel comfortable back there. Now if I'm not working R, I actually like it back there (although I'd rather be a B).

We work 5 in the regular season. Going from 6 to 7 *should* be trivial -- you already have two deep wings. Going from 5 to 7 is a whole different story. Throwing people back there with no experience? They will (trust me) try to step up and get spots instead of keeping the cushion and letting the short wing come downfield and do his job.

I generally agree going to 7-man with guys who don't know 7-man mechanics can lead to problems. Someone mentioned to me once that if you did by having the other 5 guys work their mechanics and having the 2 deep wings stay deep/wide would still be better than having only 5 guys. There's some truth to that. They won't worked a perfect 7-man game, but they still may be better than a 5-man crew.