Lamar Jackson can think Isaiah Likely's feet were in bounds and that the Baltimore Ravens earned a potentially game-saving touchdown at the end of regulation but he is, of course, wrong. The grab, which would have shaved the Kansas City Chiefs' lead to one point and set the stage for a two-point conversion with everything riding on it, was ruled a score on the field. Then it was properly adjudicated upon review, ending the NFL's spectacular debut, thankfully without too much controversy.
The early rematch of last year's AFC Championship Game suggested we could be seeing these two teams playing in late-January once again. Jackson was insanely good with his arm and legs, Patrick Mahomes did Patrick Mahomes things and those who blinked may have missed rookie Xavier Worthy's coming-out party. As far as storylines go, there are plenty.
So it's perfectly reasonable no one is talking about camera operators and production trucks this morning. But perhaps they should. Because we just saw a perfect example of how the NFL, a league of inches, can be shaped by the existence—or non-existence—of the defining shot. Or pure, random luck based on the quality of the matchup and empirical presence of cameras on hand.
The Ravens were THIS CLOSE to scoring the game-tying touchdown 👀#Kickoff2024 pic.twitter.com/08KjTVFHQZ
— NFL (@NFL) September 6, 2024
Mike Florio at Pro Football Talk just posted a piece exploring that second angle, writing:
Based on the initial replays of the Likely catch, it arguably wasn’t “clear and obvious” that his toe landed out of bounds. It looked like it probably did, but it wasn’t clear and obvious. Only when the last angle came through — with the “NB See It” brand on the screen — was it clear and obvious that the toe hit the white stripe.
That’s one of the realities of playing in a prime-time, standalone game. If this had happened in the No. 5 game on CBS in the 1:00 p.m. ET window, that last, definitive look probably would not have been available. Lesser games have fewer cameras. And thus reduced chances of having the kind of “clear and obvious” evidence to overturn a ruling on the field.
Which certainly seems true—even more so in college football. Many of us supporting teams relegated to fringe channels have felt the pain of seeing an injustice but never getting video evidence to rectify the situation. To the point where it'd be reasonable to have different expectations for razor-thin calls based on the "bigness" of the contest. And really, that's okay. That's sports.
Inside a lot of people exist two wolves. One that kind of thinks instant replay and intense auditing take away some of the real-time joy and anguish of watching because the result could always be changed a few minutes later. Then, the other one, which more than anything just wants to see the officials get it right.
To put a positive spin on this, they more often than not do exactly that. Certainly not alone, though. Impressive advancements in technology have helped officials a ton. So too has standardizing and centralizing a lot of this stuff. Yet none of it would be possible without legitimately impressive work by best-in-class camera operators and forward-thinking production crews planning for every eventuality.
If the person in best position doesn't get the defining shot, then none of it works. Those who captured Likely's feet last night were arguably as big of a factor in the game as any player. It's worth considering that they are also operating under immense pressure and stakes. And deserve their flowers—even if their work goes against one's favored team.
More of the Latest Around the NFL
This article was originally published on www.si.com as Chiefs-Ravens Thriller Was a Game of Inches and Camera Angles.
