Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
clayj said:
1. Either everyone who thinks the officiating was OK is WRONG.
No, they just saw something different and/or have a different interpretation of the rules. Have you ever read an NFL rule book? It's vague at best and written almost like a confusing legal document.

2. Or, the talking heads are all agreeing that the officiating was bad even though many of them do not really believe this in private.
I don't see why these "talking heads" wouldn't believe what they say. There are some very football knowledgeable guys out there. Even John Clayton, who I think is the most informative guy on ESPN when it comes to football, believes that the officiating wasn't as good as it should have been.
 
clayj said:
Weeeeelll... OK, let's think about this for a second. The percentage of "civilians" who think the officiating was bad is, from what I've gathered, MUCH lower than the percentage of talking heads who've expressed the opinion that the officiating was bad (said percentage being virtually 100%, from what I've seen).

The percentage of civilians that are Steelers fans is much higher. 'nuff said.

Also, on your earlier suggestion that cameras be placed over the pylons -- this would only be useful for kickoffs and punts. The ball does not have to go over the pylon to be a touchdown.
 
I thought that after the alamo bowl this year, I had seen as bad officiating as possible, then lo a behold Superbowl XL comes along. Now I didn't give a rip about either team, but made to choose, I would have wanted the Steelers to win. That said, It was a homered game. How the hell can you have a low block on the ball carrier? When the ref called that, I was in complete disbelief. You can't "block" the ball carrier... it's called a freaking tackle.
 
saunders45 said:
How the hell can you have a low block on the ball carrier? When the ref called that, I was in complete disbelief. You can't "block" the ball carrier... it's called a freaking tackle.
again, hasselbeck wasn't called for a low block on the ball carrier, he hit another steeler while tackling the ball carrier. that was the call.

it was a crappy call, imo.
 
wordmunger said:
Also, on your earlier suggestion that cameras be placed over the pylons -- this would only be useful for kickoffs and punts. The ball does not have to go over the pylon to be a touchdown.
Not true... during one of the playoff games (I think it was Patriots / Broncos), there was a LONG interception return and the guy carrying the ball got WHACKED just before he crossed the goal line... the ball went out of bounds, and suddenly it was very important as to whether the ball crossed into the end zone before it went out of bounds (which would have resulted in a touchback). That call was VERY vague since no one could tell for sure where the ball went out. A pylon cam shooting straight down at the pylon would have been able to tell for sure.
 
grapes911 said:
I don't see why these "talking heads" wouldn't believe what they say. There are some very football knowledgeable guys out there. Even John Clayton, who I think is the most informative guy on ESPN when it comes to football, believes that the officiating wasn't as good as it should have been.
Talking heads change their minds on things all the time. Terry Bradshaw will sing the praises of Jake Delhomme one week and then absolutely slam him the next. A lot of these guys are masters of doublethink... the ability to believe two contradictory ideas simultaneously.
 
Well, apparently, this thread has come to one conclussion:

We, including the public, professional sports analysts, and NFL players themselves, are all wrong, and ESPN is utterly useless without the expert analysis of clayj - who, if ESPN knows anything about sports, will be replacing the "talking heads" who don't know what they are talking about.

No matter what is said, the above is what is being implied time and time again, so it must be true.
 
clayj said:
it was very important as to whether the ball crossed into the end zone before it went out of bounds (which would have resulted in a touchback).
yep. it's also important for other touchback concerns, like punting and kicking off. also, though it is true that a ball carrier doesn't have to get the ball over the pylon for a TD, but at least part of his body must (plus the rules centered around the goal line extending forever).
 
clayj said:
Not true... during one of the playoff games (I think it was Patriots / Broncos), there was a LONG interception return and the guy carrying the ball got WHACKED just before he crossed the goal line... the ball went out of bounds, and suddenly it was very important as to whether the ball crossed into the end zone before it went out of bounds (which would have resulted in a touchback). That call was VERY vague since no one could tell for sure where the ball went out. A pylon cam shooting straight down at the pylon would have been able to tell for sure.

Yes, this was a Patriots game. That play gave me an aneurism. But I can't even believe he got back to catch the guy at all.
 
zimv20 said:
yep. it's also important for other touchback concerns, like punting and kicking off. also, though it is true that a ball carrier doesn't have to get the ball over the pylon for a TD, but at least part of his body must (plus the rules centered around the goal line extending forever).

That's right. I guess a pylon-cam would help there. You wouldn't have to suspend a camera above, either. Just mount a little camera inside the pylon, pointing up! (though there could be a problem if the pylon was knocked over by, say, a defender, before the player got there)
 
zimv20 said:
again, hasselbeck wasn't called for a low block on the ball carrier, he hit another steeler while tackling the ball carrier. that was the call.

it was a crappy call, imo.

"Replays showed Hasselbeck never made contact with the player he was supposed to have hit illegally, instead going straight to Taylor to make the tackle."

Except that he never made contact.
 
saunders45 said:
"Replays showed Hasselbeck never made contact with the player he was supposed to have hit illegally, instead going straight to Taylor to make the tackle."
please link to your source.

Except that he never made contact.
regardless, the call wasn't made because of the hit on taylor, but because of contact, real or perceived, on another player. i'm not defending the call, i'm merely pointing out that it's not correct to say that hasselbeck was called for a low block on the ball carrier.
 
king kaufman of salon.com wrote this column about the officiating. in part:

The biggest tall tale from Sunday's game involves the offensive interference penalty in the end zone against Seattle's Darrell Jackson. That call negated an apparent touchdown with two minutes left in the first quarter. The Seahawks eventually settled for a field goal and a 3-0 lead.

It's become gospel that back judge Bob Waggoner only threw his flag after Steelers safety Chris Hope turned to him and begged for it. I've read descriptions of Waggoner looking hesitant, confused, as though he had made up his mind to not call anything, but changed it on seeing the result of the play.

Jackson's clear pushoff is also being described variously as ticky-tack, slight or, in some circles, nonexistent. Jackson claims he never even touched Hope.

Never touched him!

Here's what happened: Hope was covering Jackson as he tried to get open in the end zone while quarterback Matt Hasselbeck scrambled. They ended up momentarily standing still, facing the line of scrimmage. After a little hand fighting -- perfectly legitimate by both men -- Jackson reacted to the throw by planting his right hand on the front of Hope's shoulder pads and extending his arm.

Hope was straightened up by the push, and actually took a little hop in the opposite direction from the force of it. That allowed Jackson to get separation -- the very definition of a pushoff.

Waggoner, far from looking hesitant, far from waiting for Hope's protest, was already reaching for his flag as Jackson hit the ground with the football, having made the catch while going down. The replay from behind the end zone clearly shows that. There was no hesitation. Waggoner whiffed on the flag, looked down to find it in his belt, then reached for it again and threw it. Hope's protest didn't start till after the first whiff.

Should it have been called? Was it ticky-tack? I don't think so. Does that kind of thing go uncalled in the NFL? Sure. Everything does, but I think those who say that penalty never gets called are exaggerating wildly. If Waggoner had called touchdown, Steelers fans would have gone out of their minds, and they would have been right.

Receivers often push off and get away with it when they and the defender are both moving. But standing still -- they were bouncing on their toes but otherwise not moving around -- five feet in front of an official? No. I keep hearing people say they see this play several times a game with no flag ever flying.

Send me links, folks, send me video clips. Burn a DVD of these plays and send it to Salon's San Francisco office.

The Jackson play was just one of the complaints of Seahawks fans. Another was the holding penalty on Sean Locklear early in the fourth quarter that wiped out a completion to Jerramy Stevens that would have set up first-and-goal at the 1 for Seattle, then down 14-10.

Was that holding? Well, with apologies to John Madden, who said he didn't see Locklear clamping down on Clark Haggans' arm, yeah. Was it the kind of holding penalty that gets ignored all the time? Absolutely. It was also the kind that gets called all the time. Haggans had beaten Locklear to the outside, and had a clear path to the quarterback when he was pulled off-balance by the blocker.

Holding calls are pretty random. If I were a Seahawks fan I'd be steamed about that one. If I were a Steelers fan and that penalty hadn't been called, I'd have been steamed too.

There were other bad and disputable calls. One of them was on that very same play, when Locklear was flagged for holding. Haggans appeared to be offside, and Seattle center Robbie Tobeck has said he thought so.

I've slowed the replay down over and over, and I can't decide. Haggans definitely moved before his teammates did, and may have been moving before the snap, but I can't tell if he was in the neutral zone at the snap. But it's the kind of thing that usually earns an offside flag, deserved or not.

The same thing happened on the next play, when Casey Hampton sacked Hasselbeck. Haggans again moved early, though on this one I'm pretty sure he stayed on the defensive side of the ball before the snap. Again, most of the time, that early movement draws a flag.

The illegal cut-block penalty on Hasselbeck during an interception return was clearly a mistake, since Hasselbeck was making a play on the ballcarrier, in which case hitting low is legal.

On the other hand, Seahawks defensive lineman Bryce Fisher ran down Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger on an interception return and sent him sprawling with an illegal block in the back, which went uncalled.

The Seahawks scored their only touchdown with a short field following that interception return. If they'd have been backed up to the 50, they might not have. Remember that when you hear Seahawks fans confidently saying their team was robbed of exactly 11 points -- the exact margin of victory -- by the calls against Jackson and Locklear.

Seahawks fans are also complaining about Roethlisberger's touchdown run, when he may or may not have broken the plane of the goal line with the ball. Replay upheld the touchdown call. I think the replay showed the call was correct, but I could be convinced otherwise. Anyone who says he sees definitive proof of touchdown or no on any of the angles we've seen so far is either partisan or a liar.
 
hmm I keep seeing people complain about the back blocking call and how that effect the game. Yeah I think it was a bad call but all it was was bonus to the steelers. The interception was the biggest part of that play. It was the turnover that the seahawks did that hurt the most. The extra yards what not as big of a thing.
 
It was poorly called, and everyone knows it, even Steelers players say they knew they didn't score on the first touchdown. And various other things.

What can happen though, replay the superbowl? That would be awesome.
 
jared_kipe said:
even Steelers players say they knew they didn't score on the first touchdown.
do you mean aside from roethlisberger saying that on letterman? if so, please provide sources.
 
Hmm I thinking back to a college football game this year at Texas Tech vs OU where the outcome of the game was based on the very last call of the game (last clock runs out. Tech has to score a touch down to win)

The entire last drive was 80 yards in under 1.5 mins like 5 or so plays went under review. (of which only 1 of them went agaist tech and of the others any one of those going agaist Tech and Tech would of lost). But the TV reviews agreed with all of those.

The big one was that last play. Tech make a drive for the touch down and piles of bodies and a ref calls it good. Goes undereview no good tape does not sure any good view to over turn the call. All the taking heads saying that tech should of lost the game because of some bad angles it did look the running back didnt make it. They kept saying bad reffing and so on. OU fans where very unhappy. Next day there was a picture in the paper. A picture taken from the goal line and it was clear that tech won that game.
The point of this store is the talking heads dont really care about truth or not. They only want rating and the best way to get rating is to trash talk something in the game. Like bad refs because they are easy targets. Just say if they threw the game like they did here. So take what they say with a grain of salt.
 
Holmgren Maxim's Girl of the Day

Congratulations to Mike Holmgren, Maxim's Girl of the day.

They introduced some of the Steelers at halftime of the Pitt-West Virginia game today. Awesome.

Oh and by the way, the quote from Letterman was Letterman asking Ben, during the play, did you think you got in? That drew the uncertain response. Not whether Ben thought he got in on the replay. No way he could tell for sure being in the play.

Steelers won. Beat the top three teams in the NFL, then they beat the top team in the NFC. And Ken Whisenhunt is coming back for some "unfinished business." Here's to superbowl win #6...

Dave
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.