*** Complain about the officials thread *** (2 Viewers)

[Tau837]

1. DJax PI, questionable/bad call

You can't stiff arm to create seperation. It's a penalty, and was called. Blame DJax, not the refs.

2. the "phantom" holding call

It's holding if you get your arms outside your frame to hold back the defender. It was unmistakeble holding. Do people get away w/ it sometimes? Sure do. But that doesn't mean you should want them to make the wrong call.

3. the offsides defender on the phantom holding play

4. the SAME EXACT DEFENDER offsides on the next play (the sack)

I appeared to me that Hass was in a pattern w/ his snap counts, and they were getting jumped. If the defender is off on the count, he will appear offsides, because he's on the tackle when Hass gets the ball and can start moving. He wasn't off sides on either. Blame Hass for getting into a pattern, allowing the jump.

5. Roeth's TD

It was a TD. Nose of the ball broke the plane. I will say that it was inconclusive on replay. Whatever the call on the field was, it would stay. People are acting like he wasn't even close. On replay, it looks like the nose breaks the plane. That's a TD.

6. the fumble/catch ruled incomplete

He did catch the ball, and get two feet down, but he did NOT make a 'football move'. That's the rule. If it had been ruled a catch, and Pitt recovered, you'd be saying, "But, he didn't make a football move. It was no catch". They made the right call. Just because you don't like the outcome, doesn't make it a bad call.

7. the Hass chop block (that was a tackle)

Bad call. Horrendous call, and I don't know how they made it.

8. the non-calls on the Pitt line that were called on teh SEA line

There are non-calls in every game. There were more holding calls on Seattle that I saw that went uncalled. I saw the same on Pitts side. There is not a game, heck, there's not a series in a game, where you can't look in slo-mo and see holding. That's just the way the game is. Keep in mind though that Seattle only had 7 penalties for 70 yards. Take away the holding discussed here, the Hass 15 yarder, and the DJax 15 yarder, and we have 4 for 30. These are just the ones being discussed, but you're alluding to an avalanche of anti-Seattle calls. So, we have 4 for 30 yards. Pitt had 3 for 20. WEre the 'Hawks really getting a lot of line calls against them that Pitt wasn't? It's an empty argument.

9. the non-calls on Roeth for low tackles/blocks that were called on Hass (and Roeth was actually blocking one of the time, not tackling

I'll even give you this one. Are you talking about the Herndon return? What difference would it have made if he gets called for it? Didn't they get the Stevens TD on that drive?

 

[P Boy]

so Seattle deserved to get jobbed by the refs because they made a couple bad plays???

1 bad call that didn't affect the game (the Hasselbeck call after the INT that waas closely followed by the Randle-El/Ward TD) doesn't mean they got jobbed.Making a few bad plays does mean that you'red much more likely to end up whiny losers in a big game like this rather than SB champions. PIT made some bad plays, and Roethlisberger's play was atrocious - but they found a way to overcome. Grow up & deal with the loss. SEA has no one to blame but themselves.

 

[Fumbleweed]

Steeler fan here, so my opinions may demonstrate a bias, but I will try to be as objective as possible:

1. The push-off on Darrell Jackson was a questionable call, but I don't feel it was called late. The ref was trying to get the flag out of his pocket and couldn't, but he made his mind up pretty quick after it happened. Seemed like a decent call, although I wouldn't have been upset about it not being called.

2. Roethlisberger's TD could have gone either way. It was less than definitive. The only weird thing about it was the ref coming down the line to signal 4th down and then suddenly raising his hands for a TD. Not sure about that. I think from the 1 inch line, though, it's highly likely Pittsburgh punches it in on 4th down regardless.

3. Seattle had better offensive rhythm the entire game. No question about it. Does that make them the better team? Not necessarily. I thought their WRs kind of lost it for them. Hasselbeck, minus the INT, was by far the superior QB on Sunday. He looked very good.

4. Roethlisberger seemed nervous and showed his youth....but his contributions in the first three playoff games were enormous. He was due for a bad game after his tremendous 3-game run. Good thing for the Steelers that other playmakers made big plays.

5. The one drive that I think the refs were truly quesitonable on was the drive that would have put Seattle in front. The hold was very questionable and the call on Hasselbeck on the tackle was idiotic. Plus, the Steelers were blatantly offsides on one of the plays and it was not called. I am a lifelong Steelers fan, but I would have liked for the calls to be a little more fair on that one drive. Seemed the Seahawks got jobbed a little. They were about to take the lead and Pittsburgh's demeanor was sagging. I think Pittsburgh still would have won after that, but it was an unfortunate drive.

6. The Steelers did make big plays when it counted. Seattle didn't. The Seattle WRs and TE in particular failed to make plays. The Seahawks appeared to have the better game plan and moved the ball better all game long....but sometimes it just comes down to a few plays. Such is football.

Just some observations. I'm thrilled for the Steelers organization and I'm very excited about their winning of the title.....and I do think the better team won....but I was disappointed with the officiating on that one drive for sure.

 

[Native]

The refs didn't lose the game for Seattle, but they made it more difficult to win.

 

[Bobcat10]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

 

[PsychoMan]

Steeler fan here, so my opinions may demonstrate a bias, but I will try to be as objective as possible:

1. The push-off on Darrell Jackson was a questionable call, but I don't feel it was called late. The ref was trying to get the flag out of his pocket and couldn't, but he made his mind up pretty quick after it happened. Seemed like a decent call, although I wouldn't have been upset about it not being called.

2. Roethlisberger's TD could have gone either way. It was less than definitive. The only weird thing about it was the ref coming down the line to signal 4th down and then suddenly raising his hands for a TD. Not sure about that. I think from the 1 inch line, though, it's highly likely Pittsburgh punches it in on 4th down regardless.

3. Seattle had better offensive rhythm the entire game. No question about it. Does that make them the better team? Not necessarily. I thought their WRs kind of lost it for them. Hasselbeck, minus the INT, was by far the superior QB on Sunday. He looked very good.

4. Roethlisberger seemed nervous and showed his youth....but his contributions in the first three playoff games were enormous. He was due for a bad game after his tremendous 3-game run. Good thing for the Steelers that other playmakers made big plays.

5. The one drive that I think the refs were truly quesitonable on was the drive that would have put Seattle in front. The hold was very questionable and the call on Hasselbeck on the tackle was idiotic. Plus, the Steelers were blatantly offsides on one of the plays and it was not called. I am a lifelong Steelers fan, but I would have liked for the calls to be a little more fair on that one drive. Seemed the Seahawks got jobbed a little. They were about to take the lead and Pittsburgh's demeanor was sagging. I think Pittsburgh still would have won after that, but it was an unfortunate drive.

6. The Steelers did make big plays when it counted. Seattle didn't. The Seattle WRs and TE in particular failed to make plays. The Seahawks appeared to have the better game plan and moved the ball better all game long....but sometimes it just comes down to a few plays. Such is football.

Just some observations. I'm thrilled for the Steelers organization and I'm very excited about their winning of the title.....and I do think the better team won....but I was disappointed with the officiating on that one drive for sure.

I think you have some very good points here ... I think that Seattle, for the most part outplayed Pittsburg, but yes, Pittsburg made the plays when it counted, and won the game.

 

[3C's]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

He held his right arm up with fingers extended. If he held his arm up while making a fist, that's fourth down. Not sure why he didn't raise his left arm initially.

 

[larry_boy_44]

1. DJax PI, questionable/bad call

2. the "phantom" holding call

3. the offsides defender on the phantom holding play

4. the SAME EXACT DEFENDER offsides on the next play (the sack)

5. Roeth's TD

6. the fumble/catch ruled incomplete

7. the Hass chop block (that was a tackle)

8. the non-calls on the Pitt line that were called on teh SEA line

9. the non-calls on Roeth for low tackles/blocks that were called on Hass (and Roeth was actually blocking one of the time, not tackling)

10.

ok, so I can't think of 10 off the top of my head, 9 is bad enough, though...

1. It was PI. Plain and simple.2. It was holding.

3. Looked like a well timed jump to me, but could have been called.

4. See 3.

5. It was a td. With the glory of tivo I went frame by frame. Ben was wearing a white elbow pad. The entire pad, which would include part of his forearm, went over the goalline. The ball was tucked in his elbow. Hard not to imagine that the ball didn't cross the goalline.

6. Whistle shouldn't have been blown. Should have been allowed to go to replay.

7. Bad call.

8. Any specifics? I know someone said there was a hold on Randle El's td pass to Ward. That's incorrect. There were no holds on that play. I just watched it again.

9. That's ridiculous. Ben's block was totally legal.

1. its PI that is done in almost every game and is never EVER called... then suddenly they call it in the biggest game? you call less in the Super Bowl, you don't suddenly start calling ignored rules...2. maybe, but it was definately borderline (which is kind of the point, every close call went Pittsburgh's way)

3 & 4. those were either offsides or the best-times jumps in the history of football (not likely).

5. no, it wasn't, the only reason it was called a TD on the replay is because he rolled into the endzone after he was tackled and the ref called it a TD because Roeth rolled into the endzone.

6. I agree with this thought every single time the whistle is blown.

7. I agree, this is by far the most blatant of all the bad calls.

8. just in general, were there any holding calls on Pitt's line? With the ticky-tack way they were calling penalties on Seattle, surely they were calling penalties on Pitt, too...

9. not if you compare it to Hass' penalty... which is my point, they called the game completely differently for Seattle than they did for Pitt...

 

[larry_boy_44]

The Steelers had some terrible and very obvious poor calls go against them in the Indy game. Polamalu's INT comes to mind. Despite being in the den of the lion against a team that was a foregone conclusion to crush them - they were able to overcome some bad bounces and WON.

The Seahawks had some marginal calls go against them. Certainly nothing as obvious as the Polamalu INT or as mismanaged as the entire Indy-Pitt or NE-DEN games were. Despite being in the den of the lion against a team that was a foregone conclusion to crush them - they were NOT able to overcome some bad bounces and therefore LOST.

I would have loved to be a reporter in the Pitt lockerroom after the game and asked Porter "so, are you as angry about the refs screwing Seattle out of the game as you were about them trying to screw you out of the Indy game?"

 

[larry_boy_44]

Did the officiating cause Seattle to lose the game?  Absolutely not.

A sane voice of reason from Cleveland. How refreshing.

While that's 100% true, It's also true that those calls could have gone the other way with a lot less criticsm and made it A LOT easier on Seattle.- NOT a Seattle fan.

I think there would have been just as much criticism on the PI call if the flag had not been thrown. Seattle lost because they couldn't catch the ball (Stevens), couldn't catch the ball inbounds (Jackson), poor clock management (Hass/Holmgren) and the Steelers converted a couple of big plays.

Michael Irvin made a CAREER of making the same exact play that D-Jax made... and there isn't all tha tmuch complaining going on about it...

Stuff like that could be called all the time. The ref chose a very bad time to call a petty foul. If you watched closely, the defender actually made contact with his hands on the receiver before the penalty.

I agree... I'm just saying that the Super Bowl is not the time to suddenly start calling that penalty...

 

[Elway Lives]

The Steelers had some terrible and very obvious poor calls go against them in the Indy game. Polamalu's INT comes to mind. Despite being in the den of the lion against a team that was a foregone conclusion to crush them - they were able to overcome some bad bounces and WON.

The Seahawks had some marginal calls go against them. Certainly nothing as obvious as the Polamalu INT or as mismanaged as the entire Indy-Pitt or NE-DEN games were. Despite being in the den of the lion against a team that was a foregone conclusion to crush them - they were NOT able to overcome some bad bounces and therefore LOST.

I would have loved to be a reporter in the Pitt lockerroom after the game and asked Porter "so, are you as angry about the refs screwing Seattle out of the game as you were about them trying to screw you out of the Indy game?"

Actually, THAT woulda been kinda funny. An untrue statement, but would have been funny to see Porter's reaction.

 

[Bobcat10]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

He held his right arm up with fingers extended. If he held his arm up while making a fist, that's fourth down. Not sure why he didn't raise his left arm initially.

I'm not so sure you can assume he meant TD even if his fingers were extended. I thought an open hand (fingers extended as you say) meant the play was dead. I don't think a ref has to put up what down it will be. Half the time they probably don't even know.

 

[larry_boy_44]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

 

[3C's]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

He held his right arm up with fingers extended. If he held his arm up while making a fist, that's fourth down. Not sure why he didn't raise his left arm initially.

I'm not so sure you can assume he meant TD even if his fingers were extended. I thought an open hand (fingers extended as you say) meant the play was dead. I don't think a ref has to put up what down it will be. Half the time they probably don't even know.

But you said he was signaling 4th down, which he wasn't. They definitely better know what down it is.

 

[larry_boy_44]

The Steelers had some terrible and very obvious poor calls go against them in the Indy game.  Polamalu's INT comes to mind.  Despite being in the den of the lion against a team that was a foregone conclusion to crush them - they were able to overcome some bad bounces and WON.

The Seahawks had some marginal calls go against them.  Certainly nothing as obvious as the Polamalu INT or as mismanaged as the entire Indy-Pitt or NE-DEN games were.  Despite being in the den of the lion against a team that was a foregone conclusion to crush them - they were NOT able to overcome some bad bounces and therefore LOST.

I would have loved to be a reporter in the Pitt lockerroom after the game and asked Porter "so, are you as angry about the refs screwing Seattle out of the game as you were about them trying to screw you out of the Indy game?"

Actually, THAT woulda been kinda funny. An untrue statement, but would have been funny to see Porter's reaction.

its not totally untrue... possible overstated a bit, but definately not untrue... The refs made bad calls, and all of them were against Seattle, the only question is exactly how many...

 

[FFFIEND]

You aren't the better team if your receivers keep F'c'K'n up!

I can't stand the BUS story, but the Steelers deserved to win by default. All you need to do in ANY game is be better than your opposition. Pittsburgh did that.

 

[Koya]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

 

[Elway Lives]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

The ref told you this? Put me in the camp of people who believe the nose of the ball crossed the goalline before he was pushed back, but that it was extremely close and coulda gone either way. Oh and I don't buy the conspiracy theories either.

 

[larry_boy_44]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

 

[Bobcat10]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

He held his right arm up with fingers extended. If he held his arm up while making a fist, that's fourth down. Not sure why he didn't raise his left arm initially.

I'm not so sure you can assume he meant TD even if his fingers were extended. I thought an open hand (fingers extended as you say) meant the play was dead. I don't think a ref has to put up what down it will be. Half the time they probably don't even know.

But you said he was signaling 4th down, which he wasn't. They definitely better know what down it is.

I thought he did have his fist closed.Based on reading some of your posts this morning, you've looked over all the important plays many times. So I'll go with you that his hand was open.

Still, to me, that means he called the play down initially, then gave the TD signal very very late. Refs don't forget how to make a TD call in a pressure situation, but they may forget to close their hand when calling a 3rd down play down. I think this happens alot more than you think, on any down.

It's not like he had an obstructed view. It was very clear that nobody was in front of the ref that made that call. The one replay angle clearly showed that.

 

[Elway Lives]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

 

[larry_boy_44]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

The ref told you this? Put me in the camp of people who believe the nose of the ball crossed the goalline before he was pushed back, but that it was extremely close and coulda gone either way. Oh and I don't buy the conspiracy theories either.

you could tell... the ref called Roeth down at the one 'til he saw Roeth laying halfway in the endzone.

 

[Banger]

The Steelers have to be given credit for taking DJax totally out of the game in the 2nd half. He was killing them in the 1st half and got some key catches/first downs. In the 2nd half I don't believe he had a catch and maybe only a couple targets.

The Steelers played a bend don't break defense and didn't give up the big play. Seattle played a good game, good enough to win if a few plays go a different way but the Steelers have been dealing with that for years. Seattle will be back, especially considering the strength of the NFC.

 

[Elway Lives]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

The ref told you this? Put me in the camp of people who believe the nose of the ball crossed the goalline before he was pushed back, but that it was extremely close and coulda gone either way. Oh and I don't buy the conspiracy theories either.

you could tell... the ref called Roeth down at the one 'til he saw Roeth laying halfway in the endzone.

After, yes. Because of, very questionable.

 

[larry_boy_44]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

 

[Bobcat10]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I think if they called the play down it would not have been reversed to a TD. It was that close, nothing definitive.

 

[trader jake]

i believe the seahawks are a better team than the steelers this season, but i voted NO because the steelers were the better team during the super bowl. obviously the seahawks got jobbed on some calls, but the steelers played better than the seahawks during the game overall. how much of that was a result of those calls we'll never know

scoreboard

 

[Elway Lives]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

 

[larry_boy_44]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

 

[FFFIEND]

The Steelers have to be given credit for taking DJax totally out of the game in the 2nd half. He was killing them in the 1st half and got some key catches/first downs. In the 2nd half I don't believe he had a catch and maybe only a couple targets.

The Steelers played a bend don't break defense and didn't give up the big play. Seattle played a good game, good enough to win if a few plays go a different way but the Steelers have been dealing with that for years. Seattle will be back, especially considering the strength of the NFC.

Seattle may be back, but I don't think it will be next year. The losing team in the SB has been terrible the next season (In the recent history of the game). I think a healthy D. McNabb will have something to say about who makes it to the big game next season. Who knows. The Rams might even be able to win a game or two next season now that Martz and his ego are out of town. Until the Seahawks get some new WRs that actually catch the ball, they will have a tough time getting back to the big one.

 

[PMENFAN]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

I thought he got in live. And, I wasn't looking down the line, with a virtually unobstructed view. I thought he was still in on the replay. Maybe we can now stop calling Pats fans the Whiny Tools? Seems we have a new set of candidates for the title.

 

[Elway Lives]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

Yes, there were several questionable calls, and Seattle came up short most of the time. It happens. Doesn't show bias in the least. Things just didn't go Seattle's way yesterday.

 

[Reaper]

i believe the seahawks are a better team than the steelers this season, but i voted NO because the steelers were the better team during the super bowl. obviously the seahawks got jobbed on some calls, but the steelers played better than the seahawks during the game overall. how much of that was a result of those calls we'll never know

scoreboard

Well said - I agree, I think the Seahawks are better than Pitt...Line them up again with refs leaning the other way and I say Seattle wins hands down.

 

[larry_boy_44]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

Yes, there were several questionable calls, and Seattle came up short most of the time. It happens. Doesn't show bias in the least. Things just didn't go Seattle's way yesterday.

most of the time? Was there one bad call that went Seattle's way?I mean, seriously, they called a "CHOP BLOCK" on a TACKLER!!! give me a break...

 

[Elway Lives]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

Yes, there were several questionable calls, and Seattle came up short most of the time. It happens. Doesn't show bias in the least. Things just didn't go Seattle's way yesterday.

most of the time? Was there one bad call that went Seattle's way?I mean, seriously, they called a "CHOP BLOCK" on a TACKLER!!! give me a break...

So your point is the refs cheated? That's the only conclusion I can draw from your line of reasoning. We can agree to disagree then.

 

[PMENFAN]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

Sheer number? There were 7 calls against Seattle. We've discussed the PI, which was PI. That gets us to 6 for 55. We know the Hass call was bad, we're down to 5 for 40 yards. There was the holding on the edge, for the Stevens catch. That's 5 for 30 yards. Um, that's not a big sheer number of calls. YOu're looking for reasons. The reason is that Seattle couldn't get it going offensivele against the Steelers. Just like Cinci, Denver and Indy couldn't. Pitt played their game, and won. They are the Champions.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit.

There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

Yes, there were several questionable calls, and Seattle came up short most of the time. It happens. Doesn't show bias in the least. Things just didn't go Seattle's way yesterday.

most of the time? Was there one bad call that went Seattle's way?I mean, seriously, they called a "CHOP BLOCK" on a TACKLER!!! give me a break...

So your point is the refs cheated? That's the only conclusion I can draw from your line of reasoning. We can agree to disagree then.

I think that they officiated the game bad enough that the refs cheating needs to be a possiblity that we don't dismiss...I really think it was that bad...

 

[Reaper]

Maybe we can now stop calling Pats fans the Whiny Tools? Seems we have a new set of candidates for the title.

Totally different - I think More NON-Seattle fans are debating this than Seattle fans... Unfortunately we are left with a game with a lot of Questionable calls and that's THAT - Seattle fans or not.- These boards don't even have a lot of Seattle fans.

Leave the Whiny Tool moniker where it belongs

 

[JohnnyU]

Is it baseball season yet?

 

[Jeremy]

It's really too bad we'll never know for sure. Say what you will about Seattle failing to make plays when it counted, but they shouldn't have to play at a disadvantage like that.

That being said, neither team played like champions today.

 

[larry_boy_44]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD.  If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play.  It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned.  This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

Sheer number? There were 7 calls against Seattle. We've discussed the PI, which was PI. That gets us to 6 for 55. We know the Hass call was bad, we're down to 5 for 40 yards. There was the holding on the edge, for the Stevens catch. That's 5 for 30 yards. Um, that's not a big sheer number of calls. YOu're looking for reasons. The reason is that Seattle couldn't get it going offensivele against the Steelers. Just like Cinci, Denver and Indy couldn't. Pitt played their game, and won. They are the Champions.

really? Seattle couldn't get thier offense going?They don't take 2 TDs away (that shouldn't have been taken away) and they won the game...

sorry, Seattle should have won that game, and if it were called like every other NFL game this year was, they would have won...

 

[PMENFAN]

i believe the seahawks are a better team than the steelers this season, but i voted NO because the steelers were the better team during the super bowl. obviously the seahawks got jobbed on some calls, but the steelers played better than the seahawks during the game overall. how much of that was a result of those calls we'll never know

scoreboard

Well said - I agree, I think the Seahawks are better than Pitt...Line them up again with refs leaning the other way and I say Seattle wins hands down.

I thought they were 2 evenly matched teams going in. Stevens makes catches that he usually makes, and we have a different game. Heck, if we play this game 10 times, it's probably 5 each. Bad calls? Seven total penalties for Seattle, discussed ad nauseum, for 70 yards. That doesn't define a game, no matter how bogus they are.

 

[Reaper]

So your point is the refs cheated? That's the only conclusion I can draw from your line of reasoning. We can agree to disagree then.

No - I think the point is, It's unfortunate and it sucks to be Seattle or a Seattle fan today and as a FOOTBALL fan you should understand how it SUCKS to lose that way and if it were your team you'd feel a little cheated.

 

[Reaper]

It's really too bad we'll never know for sure. Say what you will about Seattle failing to make plays when it counted, but they shouldn't have to play at a disadvantage like that.

That being said, neither team played like champions today.

CHECK MATE.

 

[PMENFAN]

To help the Seahawks fans a bit...

The problem with the Roeth TD was not that the TD call was upheld, it was that the ref was signaling 4th down running towards Roeth, and then for some strange reason decided to give Pitt the TD. If he would have stood with his first call (4th down), that would ALSO HAVE BEEN UPHELD by the ref reviewing the play. It was really too close to call to have anything called on the field overturned. This would have either made Pitt go for it on 4th down, maybe to get stuffed again or to score a TD, or kick a FG to tie the game.

I was saying that all day yesterday... the ONLY REASON Roeth got the TD is 'cuz the ref called it a touchdown based on Roeth crawling into the endzone after the play... only way Seattle's D could have stopped that TD was getting called for a personal foul and picking Roeth up and throwing him backwards after the tackle...

Regardless, ball crossed the line. It was fairly clear to me. BARELY, but all that ball has to do is TOUCH the beginning of the white line for the endzone, and it did before Roeths was pushed back a bit. There were a lot of f'd up calls but this wasn't one of them (although it was curious that the linesman did hesitate, but in the end they got that call correct)

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

Sheer number? There were 7 calls against Seattle. We've discussed the PI, which was PI. That gets us to 6 for 55. We know the Hass call was bad, we're down to 5 for 40 yards. There was the holding on the edge, for the Stevens catch. That's 5 for 30 yards. Um, that's not a big sheer number of calls. YOu're looking for reasons. The reason is that Seattle couldn't get it going offensivele against the Steelers. Just like Cinci, Denver and Indy couldn't. Pitt played their game, and won. They are the Champions.

really? Seattle couldn't get thier offense going?They don't take 2 TDs away (that shouldn't have been taken away) and they won the game...

sorry, Seattle should have won that game, and if it were called like every other NFL game this year was, they would have won...

Now you're giving them 2 TD's taken away? One, they did have taken away. DJax pushed off. It's not even debatable. Yes, it happens a lot and doesn't get called, but it's a penalty. You can't complain about it getting called. The second? I guess you're giving them a TD on the Stevens catch at the 1? Again, it was holding.

Your premise is based on the refs not making calls on penalties to give Seattle the win. So, you wanted the refs to cheat in your favor to allow the win? Is that what I'm getting?

 

[larry_boy_44]

So your point is the refs cheated?  That's the only conclusion I can draw from your line of reasoning.  We can agree to disagree then.

No - I think the point is, It's unfortunate and it sucks to be Seattle or a Seattle fan today and as a FOOTBALL fan you should understand how it SUCKS to lose that way and if it were your team you'd feel a little cheated.

and it sucks that there is now an asterix next to the Steelers' win in many people's eyes...

 

[Hamstring]

The evidence starts at the Polamalu interception, when the NFL didn't fine Porter for his comments because they knew he was right.  Then the Super Bowl looks like its fixed in favor of the more liked and more marketable Pittsburgh Steelers.

1. The Darrell Jackson "pushoff" - yes, technically it was a pushoff and I want the NFL to start being more strict on this, but in every other game of the season receivers could easily get away with this, and now that its looking good for Seattle they start making this call?  If it was Hines Ward on that pass, it would have been a no call

2. The "holding" call on the punt return - Are you kidding me? 

3. The Roethlisberger touchdown - There was no conclusive evidence so it shouldn't have been overturned in replay, but did you see the ref when he called it?  He ran almost the whole way looking like he's going to spot the ball, then all of a sudden he pauses a little bit, and decides to put his hands up  very very suspicious to me

4. The phantom holding call on Locklear - you've got to be freaking kidding me that's not a hold.  On TV, it seemed like the flag was late, I'm guessing the flag didn't get thrown until it looked like a sure thing that Seattle would take the lead with first and goal on the one.

5. A huge no call on Jeff Hartings' blatant and obvious hold - If you have the game on TIVO, go back and look at Roethlisberger's quarterback draw on 3rd and 2.  This was probably the biggest conversion of the game.  When I was watching it, I was sure that it was coming back, and became shocked when there was no flag.  The center for the Steelers, I think it was Jeff Hartings, swung his guy around with both hands by the jersey.  If Locklear was holding, then there was no doubt that Hartings was holding.

The only other time I have blamed a football game on the refs was the Miami/Ohio State Nationial Championship game.  I usually go by the fact that bad calls even out and that winners make plays, losers make excuses.  However, this game is an exception.  EVERY single questionable call went in favor of the much more marketable Steelers.  This just flat out reeks of a fix.  I haven't seen something this bad since Kobe and Shaq were both in LA.

The refs sucked in the SB. Too bad Miami cheated in the title game and didn't get away with it. Go Bucks

 

[jkruppe]

Clearly the officiating does a disservice to the Steelers as well. Instead of enjoying their super bowl win and Cowher getting the monkey off his back and the Bettis love-in, et al, they're forced to defend what amounts to an indefensible position...that they deserved to win this game.

It's almost like Barry Bonds winning the Home Run title. (*) It's quite possible the Steelers would have won Super Bowl XL on their own. Unfortunately, due to sloppy officiating, we'll never know and it will always be debated.

 

[Gargoylez]

really? Seattle couldn't get thier offense going?

They don't take 2 TDs away (that shouldn't have been taken away) and they won the game...

sorry, Seattle should have won that game, and if it were called like every other NFL game this year was, they would have won...

Now you're giving them 2 TD's taken away? One, they did have taken away. DJax pushed off. It's not even debatable. Yes, it happens a lot and doesn't get called, but it's a penalty. You can't complain about it getting called.

The second? I guess you're giving them a TD on the Stevens catch at the 1? Again, it was holding.

Your premise is based on the refs not making calls on penalties to give Seattle the win. So, you wanted the refs to cheat in your favor to allow the win? Is that what I'm getting?

But don't call the 6-8 holding calls on Seattle on the many blitzes the Steelers brought.

So Seattle can win and then their fans can shut up.

Bad calls or not, Seattle had a chance to come back and win. An INT and a Sack ended those hopes. No blown calls, just a better team beating them.

LIVE WITH IT.

 

[larry_boy_44]

I don't think so... I think the fact it was called a TD on the field shows the bias the officials had...

there is absolutely no way that someone can see that that was a TD at game speed, in a replay? Maybe, but even that was microscopically close... now ay did they see it live...

So, b/c he can't possibly see that at game speed, the fact that he just by 50-50 chance happened to make the right call means he is biased???

no, the fact that at game speed, Roeth didn't get in, but it was called a TD shows the bias... at game speed, Roeth is down at the 1-inch line... the only argumnet you could possibly make for him being in is based on the replay...

At game speed, he still got in (in my and several other opinions). The speed of the replay does not change that fact. It isn't as cut and dried as you are making it out to be Larry.

the biggest problem I have is the sheer number of very, very close calls (and some bad/questionable calls) that ALL went in the favor of Pittsburgh...sure, there was only one blatantly horrid call, but one blatantly bad call and a number or questionably bad calls is enough to ruin a game that should have been good...

Sheer number? There were 7 calls against Seattle. We've discussed the PI, which was PI. That gets us to 6 for 55. We know the Hass call was bad, we're down to 5 for 40 yards. There was the holding on the edge, for the Stevens catch. That's 5 for 30 yards. Um, that's not a big sheer number of calls. YOu're looking for reasons. The reason is that Seattle couldn't get it going offensivele against the Steelers. Just like Cinci, Denver and Indy couldn't. Pitt played their game, and won. They are the Champions.

really? Seattle couldn't get thier offense going?They don't take 2 TDs away (that shouldn't have been taken away) and they won the game...

sorry, Seattle should have won that game, and if it were called like every other NFL game this year was, they would have won...

Now you're giving them 2 TD's taken away? One, they did have taken away. DJax pushed off. It's not even debatable. Yes, it happens a lot and doesn't get called, but it's a penalty. You can't complain about it getting called. The second? I guess you're giving them a TD on the Stevens catch at the 1? Again, it was holding.

Your premise is based on the refs not making calls on penalties to give Seattle the win. So, you wanted the refs to cheat in your favor to allow the win? Is that what I'm getting?

like I've siad... the Super Bowl is NOT the time to start making calls that hadn't been amde all year/decade/the entire history of football... did D-Jax push off? Yeah... But, more importantly, is it EVER called? and the answer to that more important question is "no", it is NEVER EVER called...and that holding was extremely ticky-tack and if they are going to call that they needed to call dozens of other holding calls the whole game through (none of which were called)...