NFL had replay, it didn't work, they got rid of it, that didn't work, so they fixed the previous system and brought back replay. (The commercial breaks for replays are no different than the ridiculous and numerous breaks for changing pitchers late in the game) Every year, the NFL's Competition Committee is making changes to enhance the product on the field. MLB has a grand tradition of being very slow to make similar changes. I highly recommend the book "Veeck as in Wreck" to get a feel for this. Bill Veeck dared to try to sell the game and offer ideas to improve it. He was met time and time again with scorn and disdain from his fellow owners. Many of his ideas have since been incorporated, 30, 40, 50 years later. MLB continues at that glacial pace. I certainly agree that the nature of the NLF schedule greatly benefits the sport. At the same time, I don't see that there should be such as wide a disparity as currently exists between the popularity of MLB and NFL.

As to the use of "active participants," I was not referring to physical contributions. My meaning was to be that umpires and referees should have, ideally, no impact on the outcome of a game. I'm sure as an umpire, your goal is to call them as you see them and let the teams decide the outcome. That's what I expect from an umpire or referee. When I say I want to eventually see automated ball and strike calling, it's because I would love to see the margin for error diminished to as close to a level of zero as possible. As good as professional umpires and referees are, none are going to get every call right.

Baseball, clearly, is the better sport.