Why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop (1 Viewer)

[Ghost Rider]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Apparently not. Marshall Faulk, who knows the NFL rulebook like the back of his hand, said after the game on the NFL Network that it should have been a penalty.

 

[sizzer55]

i'm pretty sure that the td celebration technically should have been a penalty, but i really don't have too big of a problem with the refs not calling the penalty. i wouldn't want the game to possibly be decided by such a stupid act/stupid rule, but i'm sure many will say that a rule is a rule. it was stupid of holmes to put his team in that situation. and about the celebration.......what was that? it's bad enough that lebron does it. that was jordan's thing (i don't know if he stole it from someone or not), but now lebron does it? doesn't kevin garnett (and probably many others) do it as well? what? do these guys not get enough attention as it is? i know it doesn't hurt anything and they're free to do it, but i just think it's kind of stupid. "hey, look everybody!! lebron is about to do his hand-chalk thing!!!" "whoa!! that was awesome!!!" i actually like lebron a lot despite this, though.

as far as the cardinals' last play of the game, i don't understand why it wasn't reviewed. were the officials flustered or something? it probably was the right call but i don't know the exact rule so i'm not sure. warner's arm kind of looked like it started flinching just as the defender's hand was getting there, and the ball came out a lot like the earlier play that was ruled an incomplete pass. the ball went forward 4 or 5 yards or whatever and it wasn't from the defender swatting it, i think it was from warner throwing it forward. but did he have control of it the whole time? again, i only saw the play a couple times and i don't know the exact specifics of the rule, but there seemed to be no reason for them not to review it.

 

[GregR_2]

i'm pretty sure that the td celebration technically should have been a penalty, but i really don't have too big of a problem with the refs not calling the penalty. i wouldn't want the game to possibly be decided by such a stupid act/stupid rule, but i'm sure many will say that a rule is a rule. it was stupid of holmes to put his team in that situation. and about the celebration.......what was that? it's bad enough that lebron does it. that was jordan's thing (i don't know if he stole it from someone or not), but now lebron does it? doesn't kevin garnett (and probably many others) do it as well? what? do these guys not get enough attention as it is? i know it doesn't hurt anything and they're free to do it, but i just think it's kind of stupid. "hey, look everybody!! lebron is about to do his hand-chalk thing!!!" "whoa!! that was awesome!!!" i actually like lebron a lot despite this, though.as far as the cardinals' last play of the game, i don't understand why it wasn't reviewed. were the officials flustered or something? it probably was the right call but i don't know the exact rule so i'm not sure. warner's arm kind of looked like it started flinching just as the defender's hand was getting there, and the ball came out a lot like the earlier play that was ruled an incomplete pass. the ball went forward 4 or 5 yards or whatever and it wasn't from the defender swatting it, i think it was from warner throwing it forward. but did he have control of it the whole time? again, i only saw the play a couple times and i don't know the exact specifics of the rule, but there seemed to be no reason for them not to review it.

The latter paragraph is sort of where I was at on it too. I thought it was close enough of a call that it should have been reviewed, and think we've seen calls that were a lot less questionable than this one get reviewed by the booth. I doubt that it would have changed the outcome of the game, but think it should have been reviewed anyway.

 

[treat88]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Apparently not. Marshall Faulk, who knows the NFL rulebook like the back of his hand, said after the game on the NFL Network that it should have been a penalty.

Not arguing the point, but this part made me laugh.

 

[Ghost Rider]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Apparently not. Marshall Faulk, who knows the NFL rulebook like the back of his hand, said after the game on the NFL Network that it should have been a penalty.

Not arguing the point, but this part made me laugh.

Why would it? Teammates of his used to talk about how he was like having a coach on the field because he knew the ins and outs of just about everything, rules included.

 

[Bankerguy]

Michaels said the replay booth took a look.

Michaels must have had the Cards and the points.

 

[KellysHeroes]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

You can use the football as a prop...everytime someone scores the use it...when you spike it, wouldnt that be considered a prop? Or when someone dunks it over the goal post? wouldnt that be considered a prop since they are using it as a basketball?

I thought the rule was put in because of Chad Johnson doing the CPR thing.

I don't think you can do something that appears to be pre-planned.

The No Call on Holmes was BS... he clearly knew what he was doing and he even threw the ball afterwards; should of been a foul and Cards should of had some extra field position. Maybe since it was the game winning TD in the SuperBowl the Refs let it go.They should of spent a little more time looking at the end of the game fumble, IMO it was a fumble; the ball was clearly out of the palm of his hand and warner pushed it forward. But still, they spend 3 minutes reviewing a meaningless TD during the SD game but they can't take one look at the end of the Super Bowl. And how did Al know that it was reviewed upstairs; doesn't the Ref make an announcement.But, good game, very exciting finish... both QBs played great games.

 

[duece2626]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Wasn't on the field of play

The end zone isn't considered the field of play?

 

[treat88]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Apparently not. Marshall Faulk, who knows the NFL rulebook like the back of his hand, said after the game on the NFL Network that it should have been a penalty.

Not arguing the point, but this part made me laugh.

Why would it? Teammates of his used to talk about how he was like having a coach on the field because he knew the ins and outs of just about everything, rules included.

I have nothing but respect for Faulk as a player.As an announcer, he is sorely lacking and borders on being a complete buffoon. He is wrong far more often than he is right. The guy is far from a definitive source for anything football related, let alone an accurate interpretation of the rules.

 

[3C's]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Wasn't on the field of play

The end zone isn't considered the field of play?

you can tell definitively from the one shot (from the waist up) they showed where he was on the field?

 

[renesauz]

Am I the only one who think s the ref WAS trying to stop the play when Big Ben knelt down? It appeared to me he was waving his arms to stop it (for review) as Ben took the snap.

But the second Ben's knee hit, the noice, the thousand people rushing on the field, the fireworks and the confetti were everywhere.

I honestly think he was...and had this been a regular season game without all the fanfare...it would have been reviewed.

That said...I doubt it would have mattered. The play was so close I don't know how they overturn it. And even if they had, a 45 yd hail mary TD was obviously highly unlikely. It's just not worth getting up in arms about.

 

[McBokonon]

I didn't read any replies here, but the answer is because there is a high-level and widespread conspiracy to fix the games so the Steelers win.

 

[treat88]

Am I the only one who think s the ref WAS trying to stop the play when Big Ben knelt down? It appeared to me he was waving his arms to stop it (for review) as Ben took the snap.

But the second Ben's knee hit, the noice, the thousand people rushing on the field, the fireworks and the confetti were everywhere.

I honestly think he was...and had this been a regular season game without all the fanfare...it would have been reviewed.

That said...I doubt it would have mattered. The play was so close I don't know how they overturn it. And even if they had, a 45 yd hail mary TD was obviously highly unlikely. It's just not worth getting up in arms about.

Again, the play was reviewed. There was no need to buzz the field. It was an obvious fumble.http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/28971640/

 

[twr]

The last play was reviewed upstairs and it was determined that it was a fumble. Just because they didn't stop the game, doesn't mean the play wasn't reviewed.

Come on? Seriously? They had like 30 seconds tops before the Steelers snapped the ball. Wouldn't you think that the waning moments of the biggest game of the season would probably be a good time to be extra careful with the review?

They had 30 seconds but somehow they had enough time to broadcast several replays for all of us to see at home? Come on now. If we all had time to see it several times, I'm sure they did too.

They showed it once.

I recall seeing it from at least 2 angles so it had to be more than once.

There was the original shot, the replay, and then Pitt snapped.

no no.... they showed at least 3 replays... because they had to exchange from defense to offense, and kurt warner was saying " I WAS THROWING " to the ref for a while before he jogged off the field.

 

[duece2626]

The last play was reviewed upstairs and it was determined that it was a fumble. Just because they didn't stop the game, doesn't mean the play wasn't reviewed.

Come on? Seriously? They had like 30 seconds tops before the Steelers snapped the ball. Wouldn't you think that the waning moments of the biggest game of the season would probably be a good time to be extra careful with the review?

They had 30 seconds but somehow they had enough time to broadcast several replays for all of us to see at home? Come on now. If we all had time to see it several times, I'm sure they did too.

They showed it once.

I recall seeing it from at least 2 angles so it had to be more than once.

There was the original shot, the replay, and then Pitt snapped.

no no.... they showed at least 3 replays... because they had to exchange from defense to offense, and kurt warner was saying " I WAS THROWING " to the ref for a while before he jogged off the field.

That wasn' the last play when Warner was saying that. It was the one that they over turned.

 

[renesauz]

Am I the only one who think s the ref WAS trying to stop the play when Big Ben knelt down? It appeared to me he was waving his arms to stop it (for review) as Ben took the snap.

But the second Ben's knee hit, the noice, the thousand people rushing on the field, the fireworks and the confetti were everywhere.

I honestly think he was...and had this been a regular season game without all the fanfare...it would have been reviewed.

That said...I doubt it would have mattered. The play was so close I don't know how they overturn it. And even if they had, a 45 yd hail mary TD was obviously highly unlikely. It's just not worth getting up in arms about.

Again, the play was reviewed. There was no need to buzz the field. It was an obvious fumble.http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/28971640/

You might be right...but youtube the last play...and watch the ref.

 

[treat88]

Am I the only one who think s the ref WAS trying to stop the play when Big Ben knelt down? It appeared to me he was waving his arms to stop it (for review) as Ben took the snap.

But the second Ben's knee hit, the noice, the thousand people rushing on the field, the fireworks and the confetti were everywhere.

I honestly think he was...and had this been a regular season game without all the fanfare...it would have been reviewed.

That said...I doubt it would have mattered. The play was so close I don't know how they overturn it. And even if they had, a 45 yd hail mary TD was obviously highly unlikely. It's just not worth getting up in arms about.

Again, the play was reviewed. There was no need to buzz the field. It was an obvious fumble.http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/28971640/

You might be right...but youtube the last play...and watch the ref.

Do you have a link?I don't see a thing on the ones I could find.

 

[GregR_2]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

You can use the football as a prop...everytime someone scores the use it...when you spike it, wouldnt that be considered a prop? Or when someone dunks it over the goal post? wouldnt that be considered a prop since they are using it as a basketball?

I thought the rule was put in because of Chad Johnson doing the CPR thing.

I don't think you can do something that appears to be pre-planned.

The No Call on Holmes was BS... he clearly knew what he was doing and he even threw the ball afterwards; should of been a foul and Cards should of had some extra field position. Maybe since it was the game winning TD in the SuperBowl the Refs let it go.They should of spent a little more time looking at the end of the game fumble, IMO it was a fumble; the ball was clearly out of the palm of his hand and warner pushed it forward. But still, they spend 3 minutes reviewing a meaningless TD during the SD game but they can't take one look at the end of the Super Bowl. And how did Al know that it was reviewed upstairs; doesn't the Ref make an announcement.

But, good game, very exciting finish... both QBs played great games.

Al is saying the replay assistant in the booth checked the replay to see if a Review was warranted. He is not saying that an Official Review took place. The Ref only makes an announcement when an Official Review is going to happen, and the Ref is the only guy who does that review.Al would know that the replay assistant reviewed it (i.e. checked to see if a Replay Review should be done) because the network broadcast truck is the one that feeds the replays to the review system. If the replay assistant asked for camera angles showing Warner's fumble, the NBC broadcast team in the truck would know it because they were the ones supplying the video to them.

 

[renesauz]

Am I the only one who think s the ref WAS trying to stop the play when Big Ben knelt down? It appeared to me he was waving his arms to stop it (for review) as Ben took the snap.

But the second Ben's knee hit, the noice, the thousand people rushing on the field, the fireworks and the confetti were everywhere.

I honestly think he was...and had this been a regular season game without all the fanfare...it would have been reviewed.

That said...I doubt it would have mattered. The play was so close I don't know how they overturn it. And even if they had, a 45 yd hail mary TD was obviously highly unlikely. It's just not worth getting up in arms about.

Again, the play was reviewed. There was no need to buzz the field. It was an obvious fumble.http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/28971640/

You might be right...but youtube the last play...and watch the ref.

Do you have a link?I don't see a thing on the ones I could find.

I'm having trouble finding it too. Seems like the whole world considers the Warner fumble as the last play of the game...LMAOI'll try to find it again later.

 

[3C's]

Am I the only one who think s the ref WAS trying to stop the play when Big Ben knelt down? It appeared to me he was waving his arms to stop it (for review) as Ben took the snap.

But the second Ben's knee hit, the noice, the thousand people rushing on the field, the fireworks and the confetti were everywhere.

I honestly think he was...and had this been a regular season game without all the fanfare...it would have been reviewed.

That said...I doubt it would have mattered. The play was so close I don't know how they overturn it. And even if they had, a 45 yd hail mary TD was obviously highly unlikely. It's just not worth getting up in arms about.

Again, the play was reviewed. There was no need to buzz the field. It was an obvious fumble.http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/28971640/

You might be right...but youtube the last play...and watch the ref.

There are three officials in the picture. The referee, line judge and umpire. ref is the one who would have been buzzed by the booth. The only official who moved before the snap was the umpire. After the ball was snapped the line judge moved in and waved his arm to wind the clock.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

Good Lord there's a lot of #####ing here about two non-issues. I couldn't care less about either team yesterday, but the refs got both right.

* Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.

* The call on the field of a fumble was correct. Probably 95% of us believe that. Why are the refs getting skewered for MAKING THE CORRECT CALL? The booth said it wasn't close, so they didn't review it.

 

[duece2626]

Good Lord there's a lot of #####ing here about two non-issues. I couldn't care less about either team yesterday, but the refs got both right. * Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.

He would of been flagged most likely if it were a regular season game.

 

[Ghost Rider]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Apparently not. Marshall Faulk, who knows the NFL rulebook like the back of his hand, said after the game on the NFL Network that it should have been a penalty.

Not arguing the point, but this part made me laugh.

Why would it? Teammates of his used to talk about how he was like having a coach on the field because he knew the ins and outs of just about everything, rules included.

I have nothing but respect for Faulk as a player.As an announcer, he is sorely lacking and borders on being a complete buffoon. He is wrong far more often than he is right. The guy is far from a definitive source for anything football related, let alone an accurate interpretation of the rules.

This was discussed on ESPN earlier, too, and it was agreed that it should have been a penalty on Holmes.

* Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.

It doesn't matter what you think is worse. According to the rules, what did Holmes should have been a penalty.

 

[treat88]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Apparently not. Marshall Faulk, who knows the NFL rulebook like the back of his hand, said after the game on the NFL Network that it should have been a penalty.

Not arguing the point, but this part made me laugh.

Why would it? Teammates of his used to talk about how he was like having a coach on the field because he knew the ins and outs of just about everything, rules included.

I have nothing but respect for Faulk as a player.As an announcer, he is sorely lacking and borders on being a complete buffoon. He is wrong far more often than he is right. The guy is far from a definitive source for anything football related, let alone an accurate interpretation of the rules.

This was discussed on ESPN earlier, too, and it was agreed that it should have been a penalty on Holmes.

* Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.

It doesn't matter what you think is worse. According to the rules, what did Holmes should have been a penalty.

As I mentioned, I am not debating the merit of the call or lack thereof.I was simply laughing about using Faulk as a definitive source.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

Good Lord there's a lot of #####ing here about two non-issues. I couldn't care less about either team yesterday, but the refs got both right. * Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.

He would of been flagged most likely if it were a regular season game.

If you get a hard-### ref, than maybe. That being said, I think that's a non-call by most refs out there.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

So back to the OP's question, why wasn't Holmes penalized for using the ball as a prop? Is that permitted?

Apparently not. Marshall Faulk, who knows the NFL rulebook like the back of his hand, said after the game on the NFL Network that it should have been a penalty.

Not arguing the point, but this part made me laugh.

Why would it? Teammates of his used to talk about how he was like having a coach on the field because he knew the ins and outs of just about everything, rules included.

I have nothing but respect for Faulk as a player.As an announcer, he is sorely lacking and borders on being a complete buffoon. He is wrong far more often than he is right. The guy is far from a definitive source for anything football related, let alone an accurate interpretation of the rules.

This was discussed on ESPN earlier, too, and it was agreed that it should have been a penalty on Holmes.

* Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.

It doesn't matter what you think is worse. According to the rules, what did Holmes should have been a penalty.

Yeah, and according to the rules holding and illegal contact can be called every play as well. Lets call offsetting penalities every play and really speed up the gameSome rules are selectively called and this is one of them.

 

[Sheriff66]

Good Lord there's a lot of #####ing here about two non-issues. I couldn't care less about either team yesterday, but the refs got both right. * Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.* The call on the field of a fumble was correct. Probably 95% of us believe that. Why are the refs getting skewered for MAKING THE CORRECT CALL? The booth said it wasn't close, so they didn't review it.

He was shaking it like it was a salt shaker into his other hand before he threw it up in the air, and it should have been a penalty, but I think the refs had walked away by the time he did it and didn't see it.

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

I have no dog in this fight. Couldn't care less.

But -- I do not think that was a fumble at all. Also, it was not reviewed. McCauley is the only one that can review it in the little peep show. I think it was inexcusable to not review it.

 

[Sheriff66]

I have no dog in this fight. Couldn't care less.But -- I do not think that was a fumble at all. Also, it was not reviewed. McCauley is the only one that can review it in the little peep show. I think it was inexcusable to not review it.

Yes, it was reviewed, enough already.

 

[CanadianNFLJunkie]

Good Lord there's a lot of #####ing here about two non-issues. I couldn't care less about either team yesterday, but the refs got both right. * Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.

He would of been flagged most likely if it were a regular season game.

He used the ball as a prop, as in sprinkling talcum (baby) powder aka LeBron, hence he should have been penaltized. That would have given Arizona GREAT field position on the kick-off at the end of the game.Also I'd like to add, on one of the challenges in the game involving Kurt Warner, he took off his helmet on the field arguing about the call. THAT should have been another unsportsmanlike penalty but wasn't call. Bottom line call it one way or another, be consistent.

 

[PranksterJD]

I have no dog in this fight. Couldn't care less.But -- I do not think that was a fumble at all. Also, it was not reviewed. McCauley is the only one that can review it in the little peep show. I think it was inexcusable to not review it.

Yes, it was reviewed, enough already.

Seems like there are three separate options here. 1) It was not reviewed.2) It was booth reviewed and not sent to the officials.3) It was booth reviewed and sent to the officials.Whether it was (1) or (2), it doesn't matter. In any case, we can all agree that it didn't get to the officials on the field. The booth officials probably could have looked at it three or four times. I've seen it about 50 times since the game, and I STILL can't say with 100% certainty that it was a fumble. I **think** it was, but I'm not positive.I guess what I'm trying to say is that there was ZERO downside to sending this to the officials for a full, under-the-hood review. NOTHING would have been bad about that. I personally think it was a fumble, but it was close enough to take another look, especially in the Super Bowl.

 

[ditka...mike ditka]

Why is everyone saying he is copying Lebron? Jordan started all this!!!!!!!!!

 

[PranksterJD]

I have no dog in this fight. Couldn't care less.But -- I do not think that was a fumble at all. Also, it was not reviewed. McCauley is the only one that can review it in the little peep show. I think it was inexcusable to not review it.

Yes, it was reviewed, enough already.

2) It was booth reviewed and not sent to the officials.

Only viable option. They already stated it was reviewed and they concluded with call on the field.Thus by rule... no stoppage of play and no instant replay.

It wasn't the only viable option. Another perfectly viable option was to do the full instant replay. I'm not saying they were wrong, I'm just saying that there was very little reason NOT to take the extra time.At minimum it would have shut everybody up and precluded the controversy.

 

[Weapon of Mass Instruction]

I have no dog in this fight. Couldn't care less.But -- I do not think that was a fumble at all. Also, it was not reviewed. McCauley is the only one that can review it in the little peep show. I think it was inexcusable to not review it.

Yes, it was reviewed, enough already.

2) It was booth reviewed and not sent to the officials.

Only viable option. They already stated it was reviewed and they concluded with call on the field.Thus by rule... no stoppage of play and no instant replay.

It was not reviewed.The booth does not review. The booth only signals to the ref to review when inside 2:00. The chief is the only one that reviews and he does it on the field.There is not another answer.

 

[Sheriff66]

Santonio pays homage to LeBron

 

[mbuehner]

Its inexplicable that the booth wouldn't signal that play to be looked at. There are plays much less close and certainly of less implication that the booth calls to be reviewed in the last 2 mins every game. There is no downside in that situation. Note- its not the booths job to determine if the play should be overturned, its their job to decide if its close enough to look at. CLEARLY it was close enough to look at, or we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I can't believe Whisenhunt didn't run out on the field and throw his flag at the eyeballs of the nearest ref- do anything to stop that next play. That's not classy, thats bush league. Get out there and fight for that last gasp of opportunity. Whats the worst that can happen? They penalize you?

 

[Steelers4Life]

It probably should have been a penalty on Holmes. Maybe they didn't see it, maybe they let it slide in the Superbowl... don't know.

To me, the most telling thing about the fumble at the end of the game in ALL was Warner's reaction.

The first time, he followed the ref telling him he was throwing it. He screamed at the sideline for them to challenge the play.

This time, he slowly walked off the field without saying a word. He knew it was a fumble because he knew when his arm was hit. The ball was knocked loose and he pushed the ball forward, but he didn't have the full control of the ball he needed to have when he pushed it. That's a fumble, and Kurt knew it.

Could it have been reviewed? Sure, it could have. And under 2 minutes it's the job of the BOOTH to make that call. The booth calls down to the ref to stop play if it's under 2 minutes, and in this case, by all accounts they looked at it and immediately determined it was a fumble with no need for further review.

It was the right call, and almost everyone sees it that way. It's a non-issue.

 

[T Bell]

Michaels said the replay booth took a look.

Xyou know..the great thing about dvr's is you can go back and look at stuff. NBC showed the fumble 3 times and Michaels said, and I quote "indeed, they looked upstairs and it's confirmed a fumble"

If it was a formal review, why didn't the ref call timeout and announce both the review, and then the results of the review?

 

[Ghost Rider]

To me, the most telling thing about the fumble at the end of the game in ALL was Warner's reaction.The first time, he followed the ref telling him he was throwing it. He screamed at the sideline for them to challenge the play.This time, he slowly walked off the field without saying a word. He knew it was a fumble because he knew when his arm was hit. The ball was knocked loose and he pushed the ball forward, but he didn't have the full control of the ball he needed to have when he pushed it. That's a fumble, and Kurt knew it.

Actually, a brief shot of Warner following that play (not the first time you see him) shows him looking around and moving his arm forward, as if to say, "My arm was going forward." And after the game, Warner said he thought his arm might have been going forward and that a review would have been nice, while also adding that things happen and you gotta roll with it. It was a classy interview, as always with Kurt Warner, so it is not like he was out to make excuses. He was simply saying that an on-the-field review would have been nice.

 

[Kai's Hero]

Good Lord there's a lot of #####ing here about two non-issues. I couldn't care less about either team yesterday, but the refs got both right. * Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.* The call on the field of a fumble was correct. Probably 95% of us believe that. Why are the refs getting skewered for MAKING THE CORRECT CALL? The booth said it wasn't close, so they didn't review it.

Wrong on both counts. Holmes didn't just throw the ball in the air. He grabbed the ball lifted it up and simulated like he was shaking something out of the ball downwards (about 3-4 times) and then he threw the ball up like it was exploding. Clearly, against the rules.Secondly, most people here are asking WHY? there wasn't a review done like it's done in just about every game when there is a questionable call in the last two minutes of a game. I've watched the replay maybe 5-6 times and it is so close that I could see it both ways. The reason people are questioning it is because both plays were not handled the way the NFL defoines the rules on these two issues. If Holmes was assessed the fould correctly the Cardinals would have been given an extra 15 yards of possession and if the Warner call would have been overturned the Cardinals now have the ball on the Pittsburgh 14 yard line with 5 seconds left. I'm not saying the game would have been won by the Cardinals just that it left a bad taste in most fans mouth that didn't have a dog in the fight. IMO, the game was won on the 10-14 point turnaround on Harrison's interception return for a TD. Which by the way if you watch the replay the score shouldn't have counted because Warner was clearly held during the return. I felt that Arizona was the better team after the 1st quarter and outplayed Pittsburgh for most of the game. Their offense moved the ball at will against the vaunted Steeler defense most of the night.With all that being said, Congratulations Pittsburgh for winning your 6th Super Bowl which is a great accomplishment!

 

[DropKick]

It probably should have been a penalty on Holmes. Maybe they didn't see it, maybe they let it slide in the Superbowl... don't know. To me, the most telling thing about the fumble at the end of the game in ALL was Warner's reaction.The first time, he followed the ref telling him he was throwing it. He screamed at the sideline for them to challenge the play.This time, he slowly walked off the field without saying a word. He knew it was a fumble because he knew when his arm was hit. The ball was knocked loose and he pushed the ball forward, but he didn't have the full control of the ball he needed to have when he pushed it. That's a fumble, and Kurt knew it.Could it have been reviewed? Sure, it could have. And under 2 minutes it's the job of the BOOTH to make that call. The booth calls down to the ref to stop play if it's under 2 minutes, and in this case, by all accounts they looked at it and immediately determined it was a fumble with no need for further review.It was the right call, and almost everyone sees it that way. It's a non-issue.

Not sure that "almost everyone sees it that way" or its a non-issue. Decisive play of the SB (and season) and they don't even take a look? Lame.If that gets overturned Arizona has a shot from the 29...

 

[belljr]

Good Lord there's a lot of #####ing here about two non-issues. I couldn't care less about either team yesterday, but the refs got both right. * Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.* The call on the field of a fumble was correct. Probably 95% of us believe that. Why are the refs getting skewered for MAKING THE CORRECT CALL? The booth said it wasn't close, so they didn't review it.

Wrong on both counts. Holmes didn't just throw the ball in the air. He grabbed the ball lifted it up and simulated like he was shaking something out of the ball downwards (about 3-4 times) and then he threw the ball up like it was exploding. Clearly, against the rules.Secondly, most people here are asking WHY? there wasn't a review done like it's done in just about every game when there is a questionable call in the last two minutes of a game. I've watched the replay maybe 5-6 times and it is so close that I could see it both ways. The reason people are questioning it is because both plays were not handled the way the NFL defoines the rules on these two issues. If Holmes was assessed the fould correctly the Cardinals would have been given an extra 15 yards of possession and if the Warner call would have been overturned the Cardinals now have the ball on the Pittsburgh 14 yard line with 5 seconds left. I'm not saying the game would have been won by the Cardinals just that it left a bad taste in most fans mouth that didn't have a dog in the fight. IMO, the game was won on the 10-14 point turnaround on Harrison's interception return for a TD. Which by the way if you watch the replay the score shouldn't have counted because Warner was clearly held during the return. I felt that Arizona was the better team after the 1st quarter and outplayed Pittsburgh for most of the game. Their offense moved the ball at will against the vaunted Steeler defense most of the night.With all that being said, Congratulations Pittsburgh for winning your 6th Super Bowl which is a great accomplishment!

Where does the penalty come into play for an illegal touching? Since IF it was a pass it hit his lineman in the back of the leg?

 

[Irish]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2389062

Chad Johnson of the Bengals gave CPR to a football after a touchdown, went down on a knee after a touchdown and proposed marriage to a cheerleader and pulled out an end zone pylon and pretended to hit a golf shot with it. Steve Smith of the Panthers did an end zone Snow Angel, went to the ground and did a rowboat celebration and cradled a football like a baby and wiped its bottom as if it needed more diapers.

In a vote of 29-3, the owners gave officials power to penalize a team 15 yards on the ensuing kickoff for excessive celebrations anywhere on the field. Spikes, dunks, Lambeau Leaps, spins, dances and simple celebrations will be allowed. But penalties will be given for any celebration other than that.

Correct no call

 

[Duke1948]

if one can be penalized for a "snow angel"..... one can be penalized for the actions yesterday. and i'm a steeler fan.

 

[thatguy]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2389062

Chad Johnson of the Bengals gave CPR to a football after a touchdown, went down on a knee after a touchdown and proposed marriage to a cheerleader and pulled out an end zone pylon and pretended to hit a golf shot with it. Steve Smith of the Panthers did an end zone Snow Angel, went to the ground and did a rowboat celebration and cradled a football like a baby and wiped its bottom as if it needed more diapers.

In a vote of 29-3, the owners gave officials power to penalize a team 15 yards on the ensuing kickoff for excessive celebrations anywhere on the field. Spikes, dunks, Lambeau Leaps, spins, dances and simple celebrations will be allowed. But penalties will be given for any celebration other than that.

Correct no call

Excluded from simple celebrations are celebrations in which the ball is used as a prop.

 

[H8fulHuck]

i'm pretty sure that the td celebration technically should have been a penalty, but i really don't have too big of a problem with the refs not calling the penalty. i wouldn't want the game to possibly be decided by such a stupid act/stupid rule, but i'm sure many will say that a rule is a rule. it was stupid of holmes to put his team in that situation. and about the celebration.......what was that? it's bad enough that lebron does it. that was jordan's thing (i don't know if he stole it from someone or not), but now lebron does it? doesn't kevin garnett (and probably many others) do it as well? what? do these guys not get enough attention as it is? i know it doesn't hurt anything and they're free to do it, but i just think it's kind of stupid. "hey, look everybody!! lebron is about to do his hand-chalk thing!!!" "whoa!! that was awesome!!!" i actually like lebron a lot despite this, though.

as far as the cardinals' last play of the game, i don't understand why it wasn't reviewed. were the officials flustered or something? it probably was the right call but i don't know the exact rule so i'm not sure. warner's arm kind of looked like it started flinching just as the defender's hand was getting there, and the ball came out a lot like the earlier play that was ruled an incomplete pass. the ball went forward 4 or 5 yards or whatever and it wasn't from the defender swatting it, i think it was from warner throwing it forward. but did he have control of it the whole time? again, i only saw the play a couple times and i don't know the exact specifics of the rule, but there seemed to be no reason for them not to review it.

It's obvious. The guy doing the booth review has a prop bet in Vegas for Woodley to get 2+ sacks in the game. jkI am a Steeler Fan and was expecting a review on that play. My best guess is the booth review person took a look at it closely while the teams were changing sides and determined in that time the play was a fumble recovered by Pgh. Why stop the game when you've already taken a close look and determined the outcome.

Santonio's LeBron tribute looked pre-planned and penalty worthy to me. VERY FOOLISH HOLMES!!! If the refs saw it, they probably should have thrown a flag. My best guess is that it was so long after the TD, that the refs were off getting ready for the extra point. SH sat on the ground holding the ball for a long time before getting up to do his thing. That is the kind of play that could turn the Super Bowl MVP into the goat if AZ would have won the game.

 

[Steelers4Life]

It probably should have been a penalty on Holmes. Maybe they didn't see it, maybe they let it slide in the Superbowl... don't know. To me, the most telling thing about the fumble at the end of the game in ALL was Warner's reaction.The first time, he followed the ref telling him he was throwing it. He screamed at the sideline for them to challenge the play.This time, he slowly walked off the field without saying a word. He knew it was a fumble because he knew when his arm was hit. The ball was knocked loose and he pushed the ball forward, but he didn't have the full control of the ball he needed to have when he pushed it. That's a fumble, and Kurt knew it.Could it have been reviewed? Sure, it could have. And under 2 minutes it's the job of the BOOTH to make that call. The booth calls down to the ref to stop play if it's under 2 minutes, and in this case, by all accounts they looked at it and immediately determined it was a fumble with no need for further review.It was the right call, and almost everyone sees it that way. It's a non-issue.

Not sure that "almost everyone sees it that way" or its a non-issue. Decisive play of the SB (and season) and they don't even take a look? Lame.If that gets overturned Arizona has a shot from the 29...

Again, the booth reportedly DID take a look and decided it was conclusive enough that a review wasn't necessary. If they thought it was close enough, they could have stopped the game and had the referree look at the replays. They considered what they saw conclusive enough that they let the play stand.And yes, most saw that play and consider it a fumble because Warner wasn't in control of the ball when he pushed it forward. He has to be in complete control of the ball when his arm moves forward, and he wasn't. Woodley hit the ball before Warner's arm begins to come forward, and even though Kurt does push the ball forward, he doesn't have control of it when he does it.Had it bit ruled incomplete, Arizona would've had one shot at a hail mary, and it was at the 44, not the 29.

 

[encaitar]

Good Lord there's a lot of #####ing here about two non-issues. I couldn't care less about either team yesterday, but the refs got both right. * Holmes just scored and threw the ball up into the air. OMG! Penalize him 15 yards! The fact that he imitated James was immaterial, he simply threw the ball into the air. Spiking the ball in someone's face is much worse IMO.* The call on the field of a fumble was correct. Probably 95% of us believe that. Why are the refs getting skewered for MAKING THE CORRECT CALL? The booth said it wasn't close, so they didn't review it.

Wrong on both counts. Holmes didn't just throw the ball in the air. He grabbed the ball lifted it up and simulated like he was shaking something out of the ball downwards (about 3-4 times) and then he threw the ball up like it was exploding. Clearly, against the rules.Secondly, most people here are asking WHY? there wasn't a review done like it's done in just about every game when there is a questionable call in the last two minutes of a game. I've watched the replay maybe 5-6 times and it is so close that I could see it both ways. The reason people are questioning it is because both plays were not handled the way the NFL defoines the rules on these two issues. If Holmes was assessed the fould correctly the Cardinals would have been given an extra 15 yards of possession and if the Warner call would have been overturned the Cardinals now have the ball on the Pittsburgh 14 yard line with 5 seconds left. I'm not saying the game would have been won by the Cardinals just that it left a bad taste in most fans mouth that didn't have a dog in the fight. IMO, the game was won on the 10-14 point turnaround on Harrison's interception return for a TD. Which by the way if you watch the replay the score shouldn't have counted because Warner was clearly held during the return. I felt that Arizona was the better team after the 1st quarter and outplayed Pittsburgh for most of the game. Their offense moved the ball at will against the vaunted Steeler defense most of the night.With all that being said, Congratulations Pittsburgh for winning your 6th Super Bowl which is a great accomplishment!

Where does the penalty come into play for an illegal touching? Since IF it was a pass it hit his lineman in the back of the leg?

There would be no penalty for illegal touching. Hitting a QB's hand or arm while he is in the throwing motion is considered a tipped pass, therefore anyone could legally catch it at that point.

 

[Synthesizer]

The "ball as a prop" penalty has been getting called all year. So when I saw the replay.... of Holmes using the ball as a prop, I figured he just gave the ball to Arizona at the 45 yard line. I guess the refs must have been looking the other way

 

[GregR_2]

It probably should have been a penalty on Holmes. Maybe they didn't see it, maybe they let it slide in the Superbowl... don't know.

To me, the most telling thing about the fumble at the end of the game in ALL was Warner's reaction.

The first time, he followed the ref telling him he was throwing it. He screamed at the sideline for them to challenge the play.

This time, he slowly walked off the field without saying a word. He knew it was a fumble because he knew when his arm was hit. The ball was knocked loose and he pushed the ball forward, but he didn't have the full control of the ball he needed to have when he pushed it. That's a fumble, and Kurt knew it.

Could it have been reviewed? Sure, it could have. And under 2 minutes it's the job of the BOOTH to make that call. The booth calls down to the ref to stop play if it's under 2 minutes, and in this case, by all accounts they looked at it and immediately determined it was a fumble with no need for further review.

It was the right call, and almost everyone sees it that way. It's a non-issue.

Before I deleted my Tivo of the game yesterday I watched this play one last time. Warner definitely did not just "walk off the field without saying a word". He can be seen in one shot waving his arm in a passing motion as he lobbied the ref that his arm was going forward.