NFL believed it was "warranted" to place Walt Anderson in last night's broadcast
Last night's game between the Raiders and Lions included on the opening drive a questionable non-call of intentional grounding. The situation prompted the NFL to make a questionable move.
After ESPN rules analyst John Parry opined that the officials should have penalized Detroit quarterback Jared Goff for grounding and the game returned from a commercial break, ESPN brought in NFL senior V.P. of officiating Walt Anderson to explain that a non-call was the right call.
It was unprecedented. The league had its top authority on officiating defend a call during a game, on camera.
We asked the league how and why it happened, and how Anderson will be used in the future. The league says that it has officiating personnel on call to answer questions from broadcast partners in real time. The league typically asks the network rules analysts to share the NFL's perspective regarding officiating decisions.
For several years, the league has had the ability to join game broadcasts in order to communicate directly with the TV crew, if the NFL feels it's warranted. Last night, the league felt it was warranted.
Still, the decision to activate the Anderson option opens Pandora's box. Transparency can't be selective. Random bursts of pulling back the curtain won't suffice. Now, whenever there's a controversial call and the network rules analysts says the officials got it wrong, the failure to mobilize Walt Anderson can fairly be characterized as implicit agreement by the league with whatever the rules analyst has said.
It's better to use it not at all than sparingly.
If, of course, the NFL was willing to re-hire Dean Blandino (at an appropriate salary) and to have him provide as-needed reactions and feedback for stand-alone games, that would be great. Even if it would render the various current network rules analysts unnecessary.
