About 312 new rules ago, officiating a football game was not nearly as difficult as it is today.

Before all the new rules, 45 different camera angles, headsets and jumbotrons came into play, officials were allowed to use judgment in making their calls on the field. Officials were allowed to judge what was a fumble and not; catch and not; late hit, etc. And the game somehow managed to survive without help from the NSA's satellite surveillance program. It is true though, that every once in a great while the officials would miss a call and there was no instant replay to supposedly "get it right" and make the world whole again. But as TV replays became more advanced, fans were treated with various angles of slow-motion replay and still frames down to a gnat's behind to conclude: "The officials blew it!" Which was further concluded by the losing team's coaches, fans and favorable media hounds: "The officials cost us the game!" Never mind all the mistakes their team made on both offense and defense for four quarters, nope -- the officials cost them the game!

In order to appease the media, rabid coaches and fans who would use the officials as scapegoats for their team's failures, the NCAA set-out to try and technically define what constitutes a fumble, catch, late hit and all the rest. Of course trying to technically define those things are about as impossible as defining how to ride a bicycle or what makes a good golf swing -- but that's what they did.

All the technical rule definitions put officials in the unenviable position of trying to stand in the middle of a swarm of twenty-two speedy hulksters (and trying to stay out of their way) to discern whether or not a runner's left knee-pad came in contact with at least one blade of grass 1.035 milliseconds before the ball came loose. There's no way they could accurately do that at full speed, nor could we from the comfort of our couch and is why the networks had to show it to us in slow motion -- ten times.

The replays showed that the officials got it right most of the time -- which is pretty amazing considering that commentators in the booth would sometimes have to see the play fourteen times on slow-motion replay to finally agree with them. But on the rare occasion that the microscopic evidence went against the official's call on the field, well, that clearly meant to many onlookers that: The officials suck!" Which obviously then meant: "We need instant replay!"

So here we are today. At times I feel as though I am not actually watching a football game but rather a televised three hour critique of an officiating crew. Seemingly every third play on the field we're treated with multiple replays to see if there really was holding; if someone really did move early; should there have been a late hit call; did a defender get away with pass interference and oh no...that was a terrible spot of the ball! If a potential fumble is involved and we're real quick about it, we've enough time to go out and change the oil in the car and be back before it's resolved. A fumble wasn't a problem back in the day when a ball-carrier had to actually hold on to the football after he hit the ground and until the play was blown dead. We weren't technologically advanced enough back in the day to disrupt play every five minutes while the surveillance team viewed the sky-cam. But with the microscopic evidence that has to be sifted through today, it can be quite time-consuming to find-out just exactly where the knee was when the ball carrier fumbled the ball. Which may not be a fumble at all if the detectives can sort through it all and find "conclusive evidence" that the runner's knee had hit the ground before he fumbled -- which isn't a fumble. So yeah, once a fumble has been called and the networks pan to the sideline to show us the frantic coaches yapping on headsets with that silly little red flag in their hand, and if they do in fact toss in on the field -- that's our clue to jump up and go take care of whatever chores we might have.

After having gone from a game with simple officiating that for the most part kept the officials in the background and where our focus was on the players and the game itself, to a game of technical rules, replays, replays, more replays, challenges, more replays, reviews, replays and delays -- to see if we can find anything the officials missed -- we're now taking it to a new level. We've now coaches, sports reporters, sports TV and radio hosts and blogging fans all across the country hinting and some outright suggesting: "Officials are conspiring to fix the game!" This is most recently noticed because of calls like the ones in the Florida vs. Arkansas and Florida vs. Mississippi St. game where the claims have been made: "The SEC officials are trying to help Florida go undefeated!" Of course this is so ridiculously preposterous that Forrest Gump has to be snickering at the naiveté in all of this.

Officials are not conspiring to "protect Florida" or anything of the sort as there are dozens of subtle rules in the game that they could use to sway an outcome of a game without making calls right out in the open and in the middle of the field. What we're seeing today,is officials so under the microscope of video-age surveillance and 24 x 7 media coverage, that the last thing in the world they want to have happen is to make a bad call and have the whole world come down on them for: "Costing a team a chance to play for the national championship!" A previously unknown official doesn't want his face popping-up on ESPN every thirty seconds and a color photo of his bad call splattered across the sports page of every newspaper in the country with the headline: "Gators Lose To Officials!" And so any call or non-call that might be marginal from the officials vantage point in a game with a top-ranked and undefeated team on the field, is going to go the way of that top-ranked and undefeated team. For the official's own self-preservation.

The officials aren't doing a bad job, nor does the game today need more technology to "get it right." The game needs far less "technology" and far more simplified rules to help the officials call the game. A runner needs to hold on to the ball until the play is blown dead, otherwise it's a fumble -- not the "knee" stuff. A player needs to actually get in the end zone to score a touchdown -- not diving with the ball outstretched towards an imaginary plane. When a pass is thrown so close to a boundary that a telephoto lens is needed, let's live with the official's live call one way or the other. If a team wants to protect their quarterback, they should do it with good blocking and not with rules requiring a defender to be a contortionist to avoid contact with him a half-millisecond after he's released the ball. Everyone knows what a real late hit out of bounds is and it's not the ridiculous definition of it today either. An "unnecessary roughness" call used to mean UNNECESSARY roughness -- not a crushing hit on a receiver a split-second after he drops a pass. Why can't a tackler "lead with his helmet" or a blocker "block below the waist" -- they were actually taught to do these things for decades and both the game and players survived just fine? Can't we discern the difference between a 300 lb. bear deliberately taking a forceful swipe at the quarterback's head, than that of a hand tapping the quarterback's face gear while trying to make a play -- do they both have to be "hands to the face of the quarterback" and a fifteen yard penalty that keeps a drive alive?

Penalties have always played a part in the game. Nowadays though, penalties are a major part of the game. So much so, that week in and out another ticky-tack call overshadows the play on the field. Football players and officials are not computer chips with a uniform on. Football players are not capable of recalling a dozen or more technical rules violations in the nano second before a block or tackle in the heat of battle, nor are the officials capable of calling a game that has been so saturated with ticky-tack rules. And so we are seeing more and more flags for ticky-tack and more and more missed calls on plays that matter -- leading to more and more arguments about the officiating and calls for more and more technology to supposedly "get it right." Just picture a cat chasing its tail and that's where we are today.

We don't need more replays, challenges and reviews to supposedly "get it right." What we need in college football is to off-load all the technical rules violations that have been put in place and allow the officials to use judgment in calling the game. And in my opinion, if we don't do this and rather keep harassing officials who've been put in an impossible situation, we're going to find that good quality folks are no longer going to want to take part in officiating the game. It's not as if the officials are making tons of money to put-up with this kind of abuse anyway. And the game would be so much better with the officials once again in the background and fans spending their time talking about the play on the field, rather than calls on the field.