Replays are still bad idea

Just so there's no confusion, let's get something out of the way.

The people in Cleveland and New Orleans who threw bottles, batteries, coins, cans and at least one portable radio down from the stands are fools. There is no excuse. None. And with a little luck and a lot of cameras, the authorities will see they get what's coming to them.

But why stop the housecleaning there?

If NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue is serious about having games end on time, ordering up more of those beefy security guards in windbreakers would be a good place to start.

Making an example of Browns owner Al Lerner and team president Carmen Policy with a stiff fine wouldn't hurt, but that isn't going to happen. He could lean on his owners to cut off the sale of beer earlier, or altogether, but one glance at the signage plastered across every stadium in America tells you that definitely isn't going to happen.

A few stadiums, including those of the Rams, Giants and Jets, announced they would not sell beer in plastic bottles, although it will continue to be poured into cups. That won't solve the problem either. Fans will find something else to throw.

So what's next?

Getting rid of instant replay in time for next season.

The original arguments against replay haven't changed: It's not foolproof, it delays games unnecessarily and it intimidates referees. There's not always a decisive camera angle. And the league's own studies of replay's first go-round, from 1986-91, confirmed the calls on the field were almost always right. That's the way things will always be, whether humans make the first call or the last one.

But the mayhem in Cleveland and the monkey-see, monkey-do episode in New Orleans argues that inserting a long, unwieldy videotape review only makes a bad situation worse.

The play that preceded the ugliness in Browns Stadium was a pass from Cleveland quarterback Tim Couch to Quincy Morgan in the final minute. The Browns were trailing Jacksonville 15-10, watching their already slim playoff hopes evaporate and facing fourth-and-2.

Morgan's apparent catch, just inside the Jaguars' 10 and beyond the first-down stake, was followed quickly by another play during which Couch spiked the ball to stop the clock. That's when the real confusion began.

One television replay showed the official in the backfield behind Couch clearly -- and correctly -- signaling incomplete pass. Naturally, he was ignored the second the instant-replay process was set in motion.

There are too many all-too-human failings to properly assess blame from that point forward. The replay official in the booth claimed he buzzed rookie referee Terry McAuley before the play on which Couch spiked the ball. McAuley claimed he got the message in time, but couldn't move fast enough to wave the play off. The funny thing is that another replay shows him standing motionless while the Browns line up for the snap.

"We are in the middle of playing football," McAuley told reporters afterward, "and that is an unnatural thing."

According to NFL rules, a challenge is invalid if the next play -- the spike by Couch -- has been run. But there have been several instances in the three years the new system has been in effect where replays have taken place after the next play because of confusion in signaling the officials. Sunday was another.

At the rate things are going, maybe Tagliabue will instruct referees to keep their buzzers turned on until all the film from the weekend's games has been reviewed by the league office on Monday.

Once the replay decision voiding Morgan's catch was announced, the stadium went up for grabs. The replay technology worked -- replays showed Morgan dropped the ball before he hit the ground -- but the humans in charge of administering justice couldn't have messed things up any worse. Unless, of course, you count the fools in the stands who pounced on the mistake by hurling whatever they could grab onto the field.

Owners voted to bring replay back in 1999 after a series of outrageous calls the season before. Part of the argument for doing so was that technology had improved to the point where most arguments would be rendered moot.

As anybody who bought a VCR in the last few years can attest, the machines are easier to operate. But even though the league spent $10 million on men and machines when it revived instant replay, it faced the same dilemma people face at home, one that former NFL broadcasting head Val Pinchbeck raised during an interview at the time: "Can humans do it properly?"

After further review, the answer is still no.

Jim Litke is the national sports columnist for The Associated Press.