That way there would be no need for a replay that clearly doesn't prove that he went in at all.
That would only undo football rules going back to the beginning of time. The plane of the goal has always been part of the goal and the euclidean break of that plane a touchdown. The rule is precise and so is the ruling in this case. The ball broke the plane. Period.
If you want wussie rules, go watch soccer.
This is ambiguous?
The goal line is actually in the end zone.
Seems pretty unambiguous to me. You believe, wrongly and stubbornly in counter to the NFL rulebook presented, that the goal line is in the playing field, that the end zone begins once one has completely crossed the line. This states, clearly, that the goal line is part of the end zone. That you score once you have breached the goal line.
The rules should be that in order to score the whole ball must enter the endzone past the goal line.
Why change the way football has always been and draw the lines differently?
That way there would be no need for a replay that clearly doesn't prove that he went in at all.
Huh? What are you talking about? The game was played under NFL rules, like always. If we re-drew the goal line to match your misconception, the goal line would be in a different place. Then we would be arguing about the exact same play, except instead of arguing whether the beginning of the ball touched the line, we'd argue whether the end of the ball cleared the other side of the line.
You don't eliminate close calls by moving the line. That's like saying you wouldn't need umpires in baseball if you just moved the bases 91 feet apart.
SD