In case you were wondering, I am still frothing mad about the officiating yesterday in the Steelers/Colts game. How bad was that overturned interception? This is how the Indianapolis sports writers are describing it:
They benefited from the Steelers’ decision to go conservative in the fourth quarter. They benefited from the Immaculate Deception, an inexplicable overturned call that should have resulted in a Troy Polamalu interception. And they got the mother of all breaks when Jerome Bettis, who never fumbles, lost the ball as he was heading in for the game-ending touchdown.
Again, this is really out of character for me, because I generally think people bitching about the refs throwing games are paranoid shut-ins, but after the display I saw yesterday (the safety that was called back, the no-off-sides call, the no-call on the Pass Interference, the overturned interception, the five minutes Manning and company had to waive the punt team off and run another play without a timeout or a delay of game, etc.), and I am hard-pressed to disagree with Joey Porter:
The Steelers were incensed by the call.
“The world wanted Indy to win so bad, they were going to do whatever they had to do, man,” Porter claimed. “It was like the 9-1-1 year, when they wanted the [New England] Patriots to win it for the world … At a point, I didn’t think the refs were going to let us get out of here with a victory.”
I know what you mean, Joey.
Uh, John? I’ve been a football fan many years longer than you have. A word of advice:
This kind of complaining looks best after you’ve lost the game.
As the years go by, you’ll find your team on the plus side and the minus side of these things to just about equal measure. It really is more seemly when you bitch and moan after losing the game.
You won. Enjoy it. It might only last a week.
I care about the game, and would be just as livid if this happened to another team, or had it caused us to lose the game.
It needs to be fixed. Someone who may not care as much about the NFL may not know where I am coming from, but I am sure there are others who do.
Heh. Nice putdown …. you care about the NFL more than I do. Good one. I’ll await the measures and standards by which we arrive at such conclusions.
All I can tell you is, I’ve seen a lot worse, and in postseason play, than yesterday. You win some, you lose some.
It’s a game, not the practice of brain surgery.
Excluding the Panthers/Bears game, which i didn’t watch that close, there were horrible calls in every game, but i agree that it was the worst in the Steelers game and the Steelers were on the receiving end of almost all the bad calls (although i think you’re off about the safety. He was out of the endzone when hit and was driven back).
I was perfectly happy to see the Redskins lose, but they got hit with an offensive pass interference call where the defender never turned around and looked for the ball. There was definitely some contact, but i’ve never before seen a receiver get hit with offenisve PI when the defender makes no effort to turn around and go for the ball.
I always thought it was the cream of the crop that gets to officate the playoffs, which either means the lesser crews REALLY SUCK, or that all the crews are equally bad.
I think we overestimate the capacity of the officials to control a game with 22 players spread out over an acre of ground, running around in different directions and engaging in violent interactions … while enforcing a complex, sophisticated and thick set of rules which change from year to year and whose interpretations by officials also change from year to year, sometimes from game to game, as they try to adjust.
What you see in the postseason is no worse than what you see every week, it’s just that the stakes are higher.
How was that call bad officiating? His knee was on the ground and the ball was loose. The rule is pretty darned clear. In every case, that’s ought to be an incomplete pass.
If you don’t like the rulle, change it, but don’t jump the officials for following the rules.
I have seen countless games where a team is gamely fighting to keep it competitive, and the refs make terrible calls because they, consciously or unconsciously, want to see a thrilling finish.
You will almost never see the refs make a call this horrible when it results in cutting off the chances of the trailing team.
I don’t think it has anything to do with Colts worship, wanting the Patriots to win after 9/11, or any of that conspiracy stuff. It’s just that these type of bad calls almost always favor the team trying to mount a comeback.
I’m still mad about the Polamalu call, though the froth atop the cappuccino of my rage has lost its airy effervescence, if you’ll allow me the metaphor. Actually, you probably shouldn’t allow it.
If the ruling on the field had been an incompletion, I would’ve expected the review to overturn it and say that Troy caught the ball. To have the play called a pick, and then have it reversed on reply, is outrageous, and I’m waiting for the league to comment on it. Every commentator I’ve heard from so far has said the call was obvious, yet the ref made a call that changed the course of the game. Silence is not an option here.
I don’t think there was some sort of conspiracy against the Steelers (or for the Colts). A ref could’ve queered the outcome with a few opportune holding penalties against the Steelers and left himself with less room for criticism. This was right out there, and I think he just completely blew it. He should be sanctioned by the league in some way for making a huge error, but let’s cancel the Congressional inquiry.
Tho there is also the extra time the Colts got on their 4th and 2 play, which I’d forgotten about. We thought for sure Manning took a good minute chicken-flapping before that play. Maybe you’re right, maybe we need our intrepid and courageous Congress to get to the bottom of this. They’ll know what to do!
It’s a joke statement, and I thought it was beneath Porter to say this. I then remember some of the quotes from the Steelers right after they got beat by the 2001 Patriots, and I realize I’m giving the Steelers too much credit.
I recall the run up to the Super Bowl quite well. It was very pro Rams. No one gave the Patriots a shot, and there wasn’t anyone really calling for the Patriots to win because of some September 11th symbolism. It only came up for serious discussion afterwards (and I cringed at it then because it was stupid) when the brainless columnists and pundits were looking for something to write about since all their Rams crap just got shoved back down their throats. It is kind of similar to how now all these pundits and columnists that have been hyping the hell out of the Colts now need to find something new to write about.
You’re whole thesis is nullified by the fact that they did NOT call pass interference on that bobbled pass into the endzone in the last seconds right before the Colts botched the tying field goal.
I’m not saying it was intereference, but if the refs REALLY wanted to hand it to Indy that was the time and place.
Jimmie – um, both knees were down, he rolled over, and as he stood up the ball came loose with one knee still down. What if he had layed there for 2 minutes? Based on how the ref explained the call, if he dropped it while standing up under those circumstances (assuming no whistle was blown and he wasn’t touched by a Colt player), it would still be an incompletion. Uh, right.
Bad calls happen, and this is not another tuck rule. I don’t go to the level of conspiracy, but as a ruling, it sucked. Interception, fumble and recovery, plain as day.
And on a somewhat related point, any grading system that says Jeff Tripplet is one of the top refs proves all by itself the system is flawed.
I don’t disagree with what you say, but the reasons you’ve given are even more of a reason for the NFL to re-evaluate everything.
I don’t wanna be accused of age-ism here, but there is no way about half the refs are either young enough, in shape enough, or both to keep up with the current players and the current game.
There should be at least a minimal amount of conditioning testing or physical testing before these guys are allowed to go another season.
Porter claimed. “It was like the 9-1-1 year, when they wanted the [New England] Patriots to win it for the world …”
Oh, Mercy! I missed this one. Was this another one of those hidden clauses in the (oh, now I get it) Patriot Act?
This goes into the Jock-Talk Hall of Fame. Yeah, that 9-11 year, Joey, the one where the Steelers blew home field advantage yet again…all in the cause of letting the Patriots win one for the world. Your countrymen will not soon forget the sacrifice you made that day.
You’re not paranoid. It was the worst call ever. To think that the “best” team in the NFL needed that kind of assistance – let alone the Bus’ goal line fumble – to be in the game at all… Dungy should have just walked up to the ref after the review and said, “thanks for the help, but you must be f*cking kidding me. he clearly intercepted it. pittsburgh ball – give it to them.”
And then just go back to the sideline with grace and dignity.
It’s not Dungy’s fault that the refs were trying to giftwrap him another opportunity, but I hope he at least felt dirty.
My favorite running sub plot of the playoffs is trying to watch all the pundits and columnists get around Peyton “It’s not my fault, it was the O-line” Manning’s little show. Especially the ones that got all over Tiki Barber for his “outcoached” comments, and other players that have said similar stuff. “It’s so anti-Peyton because he’s such a great stand up guy.”
The “I don’t want to be a bad teammate, but…” line is a perfect example of why Manning is going to find it hard to win the big game. Who’s going to bust their ass, go the extra mile, etc if you know that if things don’t workout the legend that is Peyton “Marino” Manning is going to blame you for it?
Good back and look at their losses in the playoffs, and you’ll notice that of the two sides of the ball it’s the offense that never lives up to its end of the bargain, but it’s the defense that always got blamed. Now it’s the O-line’s fault.
John, you’re really sounding a bit delusional here. The Palomalu play is debateable, but when you have a rule that *requires personal interpretation* (i.e. what constitutes a “football move”) then you’re going to get *personal interpretations.* The ref explained why he called it an incomplete pass, and outside of the rubric of emotional bias due to extreme fandom, that explanation is rational. Perhaps not perfectly convincing, but it is rational. If you want to be incensed about something, get worked up to change the rule. Bad law renders bad judgements, you know. Get rid of the lit-theory interpretive dance of “and makes a football move” and you have a rule that can be enforced without much controversy.
When you dip into the “safety” play, you’re just ranting. Manning was *clearly* not in the end zone when he was tackled. The force of the tackle took him into the paint, but his feet were planted between the 1 and the goal line when he was taken down. There is no way whatsoever that was a safety.
The no-call on the missed false start? If the linesman blew the play dead before a Colt touched a Steeler, no-call is the right call. In the meantime, what does it do for your conspiracy theory when the refs missed an obvious false start on that play? 4th and 6 is a little different that 4th and 1, no?
Seriously, man. Your tribe won. This ranting sort of makes you look a bit unhinged.
Exactly. By Jimmie’s interpretation, as well as
Archie Manning’sPete Morelli’s interpretation, if you catch the ball, lie on the ground for an hour, and drop the ball in the process of getting up, it is an incomplete pass. Sheer silliness.
To illustrate how absurd that interpretation is, let me ask you this- would it have been an interception if rather than getting up, Troy just stayed where he was and a Colt came over and touched him down? Of course it would have been, and to claim otherwise makes you look absurd.
It was an interception, followed by the recognition that he was not down by contact, so he got up and tried to make another football move, knocked the ball out of his own hands, and recovered his own fumble. Pretending it was anything other than that is not going to gain you any credibility in my book.
>His knee was on the ground and the ball was loose.
That’s a lie. The ball came out after he got up. We only saw the replay thirty-seven times, and we saw the same thing every time.
I don’t know what the referee thought he saw. He must have been watching a different game.
Gold Star for Robot Boy
The Patriots? If the objective is to raise post-9/11 sympathy, wouldn’t the NFL find the Jets and/or Giants to better beneficiaries of its largesse?
So then I guess you’re just as upset at the phantom pass interference call on Assante Samuels?
For the Polamula catch it seems they were actually applying a rule correctly its just that as with the ‘tuck’ rule the rule is just odd. I saw a catch , a fumble and a recovery. By rule its not even a catch. They must have a good reason for the knee down aspect of that call, I can’t imagine what that reason would be but its got to be there.
The Pats and Steeler had the same gameplan going except the stupid Pats kept kicking the ball away. Denver couldn’t move on offense so the Pats gave them the ball in great field position. Kill me now.
Bob In Pacifica
They won the game. Jeez, you’re sounding like a Raiders fan.
There have been suggestions that the NFL is fixed, there have been a lot of owners who have dirty pasts. Murchison, the Hunts. I heard somewhere that Eddie DeBartolo SENIOR (who bought for Niners for his son, and I believe also owned the Pittsburgh Penguins at one time) was the Mafia banker who took over after Meyer Lansky. How true it is, I don’t know. I grew up in New Jersey, I never worried beyond who owned the pizza place down the street.
Bob In Pacifica
What I am getting tired of are these jackasses who, after they win, claim that everyone disrespected them because they didn’t think that they were going to win. It’s borderline psychotic posturing. People who didn’t share these chumps’ vision for the future somehow disrespect them.
This is the same rule that took away an apparent TD by Edell Shepherd of the Bucs last week against the Redskins. I grumbled about it but accepted the interpretation as it was a borderline call.
There was nothing borderline about Polamalu’s pick.
Also, while the refs blew the false start penalty on Faneca on 4th and 1, how can you have all kinds of contact on the play and not call something? It would be like having all kinds of contact in basketball with a guard driving the lane and a defender trying to draw a charge and deciding not to call anything because you’re not sure who the foul should be on.
You can’t have that. You’ve got to make a call one way or the other.
JOhn, did you name your cat after the Steelers color man?
My high-school basketball coach forbade us from speaking ill of the refs during games. Trying to run the “the damn refs are screwing me!” excuse bought you a seat on the bench. And after a loss, you were similarly forbidden from saying anything to the effect of “the refs cost us the game!” “Refs don’t lose games,” he told us. “Players and coaches lose games.” It was an admirable, if occasionally frustrating, stance.
Then came The Crap Game. Some of the most atrocious officiating I’ve ever been around. We’d get hit going to the hoops–the skin-on-skin slap would echo throughout the gym…no call. Any contact on the other end? Automatic whistle. It was pretty much impossible to play basketball. The fact that we lost by less than 10 was something of a victory. On the ride back to our school, after several minutes of silence, coach said, “If you guys want to blame the refs for this one, go right ahead. That was the biggest display of bullshit officiating I’ve ever seen.”
I thought about that as I was watching the Steelers yesterday. And Joey Porter may be an asshole (actually, there’s no “may be” about it–he’s an asshole, but he’s still one of the good guys), but he has a point.
(Still, John, I too beg to differ about the safety call. I thought it was a safety at first, but upon replay, the refs got it right. Manning’s feet were outside the end zone, and even his knee went down outside the end zone as well. Close, but not quite.)
Yes. I named him after former lineman now color man Tunch Ilkin.
B. Minich, PI
I listened to the play by play from both the Steelers and Colts perspective. The Steelers guys were about ready to pack it up – Tunch kept calling reservations to Denver on and off. The Colts guys were holding out slim hopes, but were pretty resigned as well going into the Bettis fumble (they DID say, “Hey, a fumble still could happen” prior to the snap where a fumble did happen, though – gotta give em credit for that). The Colts play-by-play guy was a homer through and through (nothing wrong with that), seeing some calls in a light I could not agree with, but even he thought Troy had that interception – in fact, the Colts box mused over it longer than the Steelers box (the Steelers taking the approach that “there’s nothing we can do, call the rest of this game”, while the Colts, who had their game given back to them, were able to speculate on that a bit more without getting mad). When the opposing team’s play by play guy tells the refs that, no, that was an interception, well you may want to listen.
John Cole invents yet another new Weltanschauung:
The “Sore Winner.”
This PROVES he is a Republican by temperment.
I want the game fixed. We can;t have games ruined by all these pass interference calls, idiotic calls by refs. Something needs to be done- rules clarified, full time officials- something.
“Exactly. By Jimmie’s interpretation, as well as Archie Manning’s Pete Morelli’s interpretation, if you catch the ball, lie on the ground for an hour, and drop the ball in the process of getting up, it is an incomplete pass. Sheer silliness.”
It’s not a matter of interpretation, it’s a matter of rule.
It’d work the same way if it had been a receiver that had done the same thing – and, in fact, I saw a very similar call made last weekend (I honestly don’t remember which game. It might have been the Carolina game). The receiver clearly caught the football, had definite possession of it, and was hit as he was trying to stand up. The ball came loose and the other team argued that it was a fumble. The referees ruled, quite correctly, that the pass was incomplete because the receiver did not make a “football move”. It’s also the rule that zapped the Buccaneers late touchdown.
Honestly, you may want to the rule to be different, as do I, but that doesn’t change what exists now. It is what it is. If you don’t like it, petition the NFL to change the rule to remove that silly “football move” inanity. As long as that exists, you’re going to get rulings exactly like the one yesterday.
Oh, and while you’re at it, get them to strike that barely-enforced “yoke tacke” rule, too. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a rule so heavily hyped and so little enforced.
Anyway, on to Denver (with hopefully a totally different officiating crew).
Agreed that there was some piss-poor reffing, but on replay, the showed that a Steelers offensive lineman flinched on that no call offsides…
Doesn’t matter. They ruled no Steeler moved so it is therfore defensive offsides since they broke the neutral zone and nade contact with the offensive players. They can’t just say nothing happened. The Indy players were right about te flinch but in pointing it out they comitted a penalty that was somehow wasn’t called.
John, there was no safety ‘called back’. The call on the field was Manning was down at about the one-foot line, and it was the correct call. Manning was initially hit while he was still (barely) out of the end zone. The correct call was made (IMHO, natch). I mean, they were bound to make one or two correct calls.
As for the pick, I only think Jimmie is wrong, but I’m sure he should be wrong, i.e., if it would have been a catch if he was touched down by contact, the it should have been a catch. He does identify the problem correctly, in that the term ‘football move’ is horribly vague. What if a guy catches a pass, then remains absolutely motionless, then gets hit and drops the ball? Clearly he did not make a football move, he didn’t move at all!
BTW, when I say I think Jimmie is wrong, I don’t mean about the rule, I mean about his interpretation to this situation. I think falling to the ground and rolling is a ‘football move’. Of course, who knows what that actually means? (If somebody can find the rulebook definition, that would be good). I don’t think the ref actually used the ‘football move’ rationale, at least not explicitly. As I understood his explanation, had Polamalu’s knee had been off the field when he lost the ball, then it would have been a fumble. I don’t understand why that makes a difference, but I won’t claim an intimate relationship with the rulebook.
I agree with those that say, Just be happy that you won.
And we are (the football nuts) happy here in the Burgh.
But like Boomer said after the game ” THe Steelers deserved to win”.
And that’s jus what they did.
Ha Ha Ha…………
IIRC he was within the one yard line but he was facing the end zone and the ball, at the time of contact, was breaking the plane of the endzone. Does that make any difference?
If it had been an offensive player attempting to score a touchdown, rather than a safety, I think the officials would have called it a touchdown for exactly that reason – the ball had crossed the plane of the goal line (and did not come back out of the endzone) before the manning’s knee (or other body part that counts as “down”) was down.
It’s unclear to me why – if at all – the rule for a safety is (or should be) different.
That’s a good point, about crossing the plane with the ball. I recall the commentators saying that Manning’s feet were outside the endzone, but I don’t remember where the ball was. Sadly the official NFL rulebook is not online, only a digest of the rules, which for a safety says:
That doesn’t really help resolve things in this situation. I guess it’s a matter of where the spot should be, which isn’t covered in the digest. I suppose th argument could go that Manning’s forward progress was to the one-foot line, so that’s where the ball is spotted. I wonder what the spot would have been if he was one foot over the 20-yard line.
The interception was a close thing, but as a purely technical matter, I believe it was the right call. Just as was the case in the Tampa game last week, the receiver is required to maintain possession throughout the process of going to the ground. Hence the concentration on his knee being down. Had he been down by contact, he would have done so. Instead, he tried to get up and knocked the ball loose before leaving the ground. Had he held on for another half a tick and gotten the knee up, then it would indeed have been a fumble. As he did not, he did not satisfy the requirement for possession.
That may be a bad rule, but it is the rule. Much more so than, say, ruling that a quarterback with both hands on the ball is still in the process of attempting a forward pass. :-)
As for the Indy sportswriters, they’re just being silly. Everyone knows the Immaculate Deception was a Franco Harris play. :-P
SoCal: I think the deciding factor is “forward progress.” The rules do tilt in favor of the offense, as the ball is spotted according to forward progress. For a runner lunging into the end zone, the ball he extends ahead of his body is forward progress. In the case of Peyton trying to get out of the end zone, his forward progress is his feet, not the lean/fall backward.
I could be completely wrong about that, though.
the ball had crossed the plane of the goal line (and did not come back out of the endzone) before the manning’s knee (or other body part that counts as “down”) was down. It’s unclear to me why – if at all – the rule for a safety is (or should be) different.
Manning was facing downfield, though he was turned a bit to his right. The ball was level with his body and he buckled under the pass rush, at which point he went to the ground. That the ball ‘crossed the plane’ before his knees went down is ir-relevant as the ‘impetus’ that drove it back came from the Steelers, not himself. That ruling was also correct.
Well, the refs DO favor and the game CAN be INFLUENCED by bad/biased “judgement” calls by the officials. Are you going to tell me that NO official has NEVER EVER been underhanded?? None ever? And that we don’t live in a corrupt world and where everybody is honest and good?
I remember the “9-1-1” year, and teams all over the league that played New England complained about how the Patriots were not being called for bumping the receivers after the first 10 yards, how they weren’t being called for holding… All season teams complained about this. All season, and yet it continued week after week….no, the game won’t be BLATANTLY handed to a team, but little things to help out here and there is what officials will do to give an EDGE to a team they may favor. 9-1-1, Patriots. See the connection? They undoubetdly won their last two championships outright, but in 2001 it was handed to them, and I have discussed this scenario in chat rooms past and had many a non-New Englander agree. Many.
Polumalu had an interception taken away. I was saying to my friends as they were reviewing it and the official was taking an astronomical amount of time beyond the alloted 30 seconds for review “they’re trying to figure out an excuse to take it away from them (Steelers)”, and lo and behold, the official comes out and overturns it with some bull when it was CLEAR Polumalu had possession and knocked it loose with his knee as he was getting up to run. I could go on about the bad miscues by the officials. There were soooooo many, and just by coincidence the Colts were recipients of ALL of them. Not most, ALL. I’m 44 years old, and I’m not naive about all the goodness in this non-corruptable “officials will never cheat” world.
I was in the car at the time of the phantom offsides.
Was contact made by a defensive player?
Procedural question: If no referee was able to see with certainty whether an offensive player moved, is it then okay for the ref team to agree that the play has to be done over?
If the ref doesn’t see an offensive player move then the ball is snapped and the play goes on. In this case the play didn’t happen because the defense jumped around pointing and some crossed into the neutral jone and caused the officials to blow the whistle. Then the officials huddled and called a do over. If a defensive player jumps into the neutral jone and the refs don’t believe an offensive player moved to goad him, its offsides. Otherwise they’d do it all the time.
That’s what really bugged me about that offsides play; not that the penalty wasn’t called, but that the refs decided that there should be a ‘do-over’. This is the playoffs, not some sand lot game.
Has anybody posted the language of the rule that the official and the league are relying on?
None of those shitty calls cost the Steelers the game. Might have, could have don’t count. I look to calls that have cost teams games as being the most egregious examples of officiating incompetence. One such call, the @$$%^%& tuck call, NE vs Raiders in the 2002 playoffs cost the Raiders the game.
You are perfectly justified in complaining about crappy officiating but put your righteous indignation on hold until a shitty call costs your team a playoff game.
Yeah, they screwed the pooch on that one. Since no defensive player touched an offensive player, they should not have blown the play dead. If they didn’t see the false start, they should’ve allowed the play to continue and let the Steelers choose whether or not to accept the penalty. I guess they decided that the play had to be done over because they blew the play dead when they shouldn’t have.
Dodd’s explanation of the rule makes the most sense of anything I’ve seen so far, but I still don’t think it ‘makes sense’. I mean, if a player that is not down by contact has not finished the process of going to the ground until he gets up, then if Polamalu had of kept rolling toward the sidelines for another 5-10 seconds and gone out of bounds, it would have been incomplete. I can’t imagine the letter or spirit of the rules considers this. However, I’m not completely closed to the idea that this interpretation could be correct. As I remember (and I could be quite wrong) the tuck rule was correctly applied in that game, however stupid it seemed, and the rule was subsequently changed. Maybe this is a similar situation, but I still don’t think so.
I think you all make great points but the bottom line is that the refs sucked in this game. They blew too many calls to have been the best of the best. The false start call was horrific. WHAT IN THE WIDE, WIDE World of sports was that call? I agree with Dodd. Let the play continue on or call offsides, and TROY DID intercetp that pass. Have we also forgotten the rule, “THE GROUND CAN NOT CAUSE A FUMBLING of the football.” THEY JUST PLAIN BLEW IT…almost. GO STEELERS!!!!
The call was right. The rule is up for debate but the call was correct. How about that hands to the QB’s helmet call they missed on the same play? 15 yards and a first down right? Would you feel better if that was the call that kept the drive alive? Oakland still had opportunity to win that game but they chose to lay down because the refs were against them. Pittsburgh continued the game yesterday after a questionable call.
I think that’s the logical explanation. A whistle was blown, either too soon or by mistake, and at that point, after conferring, they decided that the blown whistle meant a do-over regardless of what actually happened in the neutral zone.
This is also the simplest explanation.
I’m saying all of this having been in the car at the time and hearing on the radio broadcast, listening to what I presume was the Steelers’ play by play (they were so partisan, I made this assumption).
I don’t think there’s any other way to make sense of it, Dave. The NFL’s official statement is that
Given Morelli’s specific statement about the importance of the knee, the incident with the TD in the Tampa game, and the NFL statement above, the only possible explanation is that he was considered to be still in the process of going to the ground.
I think this illustrates why so many defensive coaches preach staying down and not trying to be more of a hero than you already are. How many times do we see great plays like this turn bad because of a fumble or other mistake after the turnover. Palamalu is a terrific player, but he is still a rookie. I’d bet my bottom dollar that his Defensive Co-ordinator commisserated with him a bit and then told him to stay on the friggin’ ground next time.
“hearing only the radio broadcast”
Please tell me if I am wrong, but does a catch not mean possession, and the touching of two feet inbounds? UM if you all have seen the replay, FIRST DOWN STEELERS!!! Simple as that.
And TROY Polamalu is in his second year of play.
I saw the statement from th eleague, but it’s very carefully worded. “The ball came loose when he was getting up” is correct. “Pete Morelli determined it wasn’t a catch” is also true. Note that the second doesn’t necessarily follow from the first. Also from that NFL wire piece:
So we still don’t know whether or not Morelli made the correct call. I have a feeling we never will know since they almost never make the results of the reviews public (with the exception of the SF-NYG game three years ago, as the story also mentions).
Also, Polamalu is not a rookie; he’s in his third year, just like his good pal (and former roommate) Carson Palmer. Which makes his mistake all the worse. Yes, Polamalu made a mistake. With five minutes left in the game he should have stayed the hell down.
Dodd- All of your post hoc justifications are just that- post hoc justifications for a bad call. The real question is-
“Would you have called that an incomplete pass were you the official?”
And neither you nor damned well 99% of the rest of the football watching planet would have said that was anything other than an interception followed by a fumble. That is the only reason Morelli had to watch it for 5 minutes- to come up with a justification for overturning it, because it CLEARLY wass an interception.
Is it possible to finesse the rulebooks, or to lawyer up an interpretation of the rule books that sounds plausible enough to cover Morelli’s ass? Sure, I bet there is, and I have no doubt the NFL wil find just such a way to do that. But quoting Aiello’s limp response about Morelli’s judgement isn’t convincing me of anything. As far as I am concerned, Aiello might as well have come out and said the following:
“Morelli- You are doing a heckuva job.”
BTW- The NFL is not clinging to the claim it was a correct call. They are calling it a judgement call.
Let’s get a couple things straight. The official in the NE Raiders game said Brady was attempting to throw a pass. Did that look like a pass attempt to you? They ruled it a fumble on the field and OVER-FUCKING-TURNED because they said Brady was attemting a pass.
Forget that penalty crap. On the play that NE scored their first TD in that game, there was offensive holding and it wasn’t called. A penaltly can be called on virtually any play. Penalties are called, and they’re not called. Replay has nothing to do with penalties. On that particular replay, the official studied and concluded that Brady was throwing a pass.
So don’t give me this “there was a penalty on the play”. Bottom line is that a call on the field was overruled by replay because Brady was “attempting a pass”.
Bar none, that call was the worst in NFL history because it cost the Raiders a playoff game a gave NE a free ticket the the AFC championship game.
And I say again any grading system that puts Jeff Tripplet in the top tier of referees is totally whacked.
I already said the rule is goofy but the refs made the right call according to the rule. They said he was attempting to make a pass because until he does something other than bring his arm forward thats what he is doing. He has to stop that motion and start another or he is still performing the original motion. You seem to want officials to have discretion to determine at what point the arm angle means he’s no longer attempting a pass. Thats unworkable since every ref will have his own opinion. The tuck rule, as odd as it is, handles this situation. Until you do something else with your arm you are continuing the last motion. The ball was knocked out before Brady did what we all knew he was going to do, pull the ball back in. Therefore he was still attempting a pass. You want the rule to be that when he breaks the 90 degree angle its no longer a pass? Maybe 120 degrees? We should have refs taking protractors to the replay booth to measure arm angle.
The Raiders lost, get over it. Considering the Pats went on to beat heavily favored Pittsburgh and St Louis and then 2 more Super Bowls maybe, just maybe the better team won and it had nothing to do with the refs.
That is the only reason Morelli had to watch it for 5 minutes- to come up with a justification for overturning it, because it CLEARLY wass an interception.
You’re off in Kooksville on this, John. Conspiracy theories are for nutjobs, buddy.
Ever read Eight Men Out?
The NFL already announced today the reversal was WRONG according to the rule book. So all of you who argued the reversal was RIGHT are WRONG too and you should examine deeply your reasons for arguing this point.
As for the tuck rule, it actually does say that you can tuck, run around for 1/2 an hour, and if you lose the ball the tuck rule still applies. Go figure!
I saw the movie.
Bob In Pacifica
When John Cole says, “I want the game fixed,” does that have any relevance to the last two national elections?
I am familiar with the Black Sox, John. Are you honestly suggesting that the NFL of 2006 is analogous to the Finley cartel MLB days of the teens and 20s? Because that’s pretty much absurd.
If the game were thrown, there’s no way those two fourth down plays go off without a holding or false start call.
Do you do anything but argue with strawmen. I never said the current NFL was analagous to the 1919 Black Sox, I weas responding to your comment that conspiracy theories are for nutjobs.
And I responded by showing at least one conspiracy theory. Would you like me to show you some more recent point-fixing conspiracies?
I ain’t talkin arm angles or penalties that were or weren’t called. I’m talking about overuling a call on the field through replay. Most followers of the NFL, including Raider haters, called it a clear fumble.
I think you can make an argument that if New England doesn’t get the call on the tuck rule they could have easily disappeared into oblivion. Consider this:
* They obviously don’t win the 2002 Super Bowl.
* They didn’t even make the playoffs then next season. That year, the Raiders won the AFC and made it to the super bowl. So don’t give me that stuff that New England was clearly the better team during that time. The Raiders had the Pats beat on the Pats home field that year and went on to the Super Bowl the next.
All in all, I quit watching the NFL for the first two months of the season following the tuck game. Remember, that call cost the Raiders the game. The Steelers won so quit complaining.
Do you do anything but argue with strawmen. I never said the current NFL was analagous to the 1919 Black Sox, I weas responding to your comment that conspiracy theories are for nutjobs.
I apparently argue with you. Does that count?
You most certainly did imply that the current embroglio is analogous to the Black Sox scandal. Else why would you bring up Eight Men Out? Maybe you didn’t mean to make that connection, but you did.
If you want me to take seriously your three day rant session on an NFL ref’s unsuccessful apparent attempt to throw a playoff game in order to get Peyton Manning to a Superbowl, you’re going to have to provide a more recent example of game fixing at this level than the 1919 World Series. Paul Tagliabue is not Charles Finley. This ain’t “Eight Men Out” (which was, by the way, fiction.)
It was a bad call, the worst I’ve seen in a while. But that’s life. There’s nothing you can do about it, unless you can steal the election for the commissioner’s office, call everyone who opposes the commissioner a traitor, and then stack the officiating crews with Steeler’s fans who claim to be “strict constructionists” as regards the NFL rule book.
The only qustion is was Morelli fixing the game because he had monwy on it or was he told to get Manning to the Superbowl?
I too mock all conspiracy theorists – that was until I watched the Sunday game.
Morelli had 3 decisions to make.
1. The non-safety – OK that is a judegement call – under normal circumstances I would not even mention this – except that it leads to points 2 and 3.
2. The non-penalty – that was the worst call and PROOF that the game was fixed. Morelli is talking to the line judge (? I think that is the official???) asking him if a Steeler twitched – that is that official’s job. No twitch – then it MUST be encroachment or because there was no contact (I would like to no-contact Morelli) you must declare that Steelers moved when the entire line got up (you would llikely say becasue they were drawn by the Colts) but NO CALL????? Made up rule number 1.
3. The non-catch – so I have a few questions – if his knee was down how did he kick the ball out of his hand. Also I guess you can’t make a diving catch anymore. Can you make a catch near the sideline?
Fat MAdden told us one knee = 2 feet which to complete the equation = 2 knees, a rear end, a forearm, a ponytail, and two legs off the ground and a partrige in a pear tree I guess
I didn’t even see Vanderjadt miss – I was sooo pissed.
Fixed – luckily Peyton Manning and friends are such a pussy team they couldn’t even win then
Viva Los Steelers!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The call was overturned because replay showed his arm was still going forward, was still in the motion of attempting a pass. If Woodson had hit him a second later the tuck rule wouldn’t apply because Brady’s arm would’ve been doing something else by then.
All the Raiders fans and haters in the world can get together and shout that they see it as a fumble and it won’t matter. It wasn’t a fumble. The ball was knocked loose while a pass was being attempted. Not a fumble.
How can you not be talking about arm angles? If you think it was a fumble you’re saying he wasn’t attempting a pass. To say he wasn’t attempting a pass you can only be basing that on the fact that his arm was past the point where you release the ball yet he was still holding it. Yet you’re not discussing arm angles? You DON’T think it should be up to a ref to determine at what point a QB is no longer attempting a pass? How would you determine it without looking at where his arm is when he lost the ball?