I was watching the game on an non HD tv and saw clearly two feet were in. If this is there reason for not seeing as good a picture as the rest of America doesn't it make sense to get the best possible replay equipment there is. There I go assuming there is honest, intelligent officials working in the SEC. That includes the main office and the commissioner. I can see why they claim not to need HD. If your gonna screw over a team you don't really need to see it happen in HD.
Folks, remember what kind of replay system we're dealing with in college football. Years before the lack of HD was even a consideration, it was discovered that the replay booth didn't even have all of the camera angles provided by the TV broadcaster. Once again, you and I are in a better position to make a call than the replay official.
I watched the replay of the interception last night on my blackberry phone off of youtube. Still saw that it was a pick. Gibberish. Blah. :hihi:
Having an HD monitor to view a replay does nothing if the signal fed to it is not HD. In fact, as most of you know, watching a standard definition signal on an HD monitor is actually worse from a visual acuity perspective than watching that signal on a standard def monitor. Unless every replay angle fed into a replay monitor is HD, I'd actually rather the refs have a standard def monitor. Where I'd rather see more money spent is having more and better camera angles for the refs to use.
I was at my in-law's in the "other" room. I watched the game on one of the ooollllldddd wood box TV sets...you know, the one folks used to sit the new TV on top of when that set finally went out. Well they still have one and it works, except the color is almost gone on it. I saw two feet in...