Super Bowl XL

[tha_con]

Problems I saw...the touchdown(wasn't a touchdown)..
The Offensive pass interferance...Wasn't that...And the Low block...Was complete BS....

the out of bounds were all legitament calls..

It seemed a very very very one sided flagged game..And those calls were the difference between the w and the l........

but then again you think about it..

The Steelers GM probably isn't going to be around much longer, and has probably contributed an AZZ load of $$$ so they might have pulled some strings so his team can be up there with the 49'ers(best team ever in the world Ever...GOOOOOO 9'ERS!!!)

You're kidding!? you mean you're just as stupid when it relates to football!!!

Do you even understand the RULES of pass interference? Or the RULES behind the review of a play?

It doesn't matter if he was in or out. If the referee cannot determine otherwise based in visual evidence that is UNDENIABLE, then there is no way for him to overturn what another referee has said.

Pulled strings? Give me a break, just because your niners suck balls this year, doesn't mean you need to make this crap up. The NFL has much more integrity than that, and so does our organization.

Go read an NFL rule book and quit trying to sound like you know so much, every where I see you running around this forum you're just baiting people and talking out of your ass, you don't know anything, I'm surprised you know how to read write and spell.

 

[tha_con]

I think this sums up quite nicely your position on the ref calls. You'd be on the other side of the fence if Pitt has lost due to bad ref calls and you know it.

Give me a break, I can go dig up TWICE as many bad calls that went against us through all of our playoff games.

Fact is, there is much more than bad calls (ONE, holding) that did the seahawks wrong.

FOUR dropped 3rd down passes that resulted in punts. Otherwise would have been 1st and 10 and put them closer to field goal range (we're talking over the 45yd line here).

And interception that later led to a TD pass. It doesn't matter WHAT the reason prior to that, NO ref can make ANY QB throw an INT, that is on HIS shoulders, and HIS fault.

The Seattle D let Willie Parker run SEVENTY FIVE yards UNTOUCHED. TD. Their fault, not the ref's.

TWO MISSED FIELD GOALS. THEIR FAULT.

Tell me why YOU fail to assume THOSE had anything to do with thier loss n00b? Please, explain to me how ALL of those factors are so "insignificant" that ONE bad call overshadows them?

 

[Omnis]

You're missing the point, conny.

It was clear that there was no evidence to justify the refs' calls in the first place. I was objective towards both teams-- still am-- but, the Seahawks just got damn cheated. That one umpire is the fault in the officiating jenga tower. The rest of them did a good job. The endzone ump was the one who came in with the 8 second-late flags and TD proclaimations.

 

[Famine]

Did someone just call danoff a "n00b"?

Blimey.

 

[tha_con]

You're missing the point, conny.

It was clear that there was no evidence to justify the refs' calls in the first place. I was objective towards both teams-- still am-- but, the Seahawks just got damn cheated. That one umpire is the fault in the officiating jenga tower. The rest of them did a good job. The endzone ump was the one who came in with the 8 second-late flags and TD proclaimations.

No, that is not the case.

If you can tell me that from 20 feet away you would have been able to tell if Ben made a TD with that stock pile of people around/on him, then I'll call you for BS. Ref's are human, but rules are rules. Do you expect the NFL to bend the rules in favor of any team? No.

Do you think had it been Hassleback making the TD that Seattle would be singing a different tune? Yes. Or even if it got called back for that matter. Point is, rules are there for a reason, and you stick with them through thick and thin.

Also, PI was not a late flag, neither was the holding call, both were tossed fairly quickly. In fact, the only flag that I recall that was "late" was when Hassleback went low on a defender to get him for the block, which is illegal, and the flag came late.

And yes, I called danoff a noob, because if he doesn't understand the RULES of football, then he, and everyone else for that matter, has no place arguing about any calls. Rules speak louder than anyone else, and the replay significantly backs those rules, and the flags (minus the holding flag, which was BS, as I"ve stated).

 

[Danoff]

And yes, I called danoff a noob, because if he doesn't understand the RULES of football, then he, and everyone else for that matter, has no place arguing about any calls.

...and exactly what evidence do you have that I don't understand the rules?

If you can tell me that from 20 feet away you would have been able to tell if Ben made a TD with that stock pile of people around/on him, then I'll call you for BS. Ref's are human, but rules are rules. Do you expect the NFL to bend the rules in favor of any team? No.

Did you watch the game? That call was reviewed - the same way we all did.

Give me a break, I can go dig up TWICE as many bad calls that went against us through all of our playoff games.

Go for it. I'd like to see you dig up twice as many bad calls (important ones like the 3-4 bad calls people are discussing here) for each Steeler's playoff game. Let's call it 3 important bad calls for each game. So, 12 total (including the superbowl).

Take your time, try to make a fair number of them TDs that were called back on 3rd down if you can ok?

Fact is, there is much more than bad calls (ONE, holding) that did the seahawks wrong.

Captain obvious.

FOUR dropped 3rd down passes that resulted in punts. Otherwise would have been 1st and 10 and put them closer to field goal range (we're talking over the 45yd line here).

And interception that later led to a TD pass. It doesn't matter WHAT the reason prior to that, NO ref can make ANY QB throw an INT, that is on HIS shoulders, and HIS fault.

The Seattle D let Willie Parker run SEVENTY FIVE yards UNTOUCHED. TD. Their fault, not the ref's.

TWO MISSED FIELD GOALS. THEIR FAULT.

Totally beside the point. Here was my original question statement.

You'd be on the other side of the fence if Pitt has lost due to bad ref calls and you know it.

 

[Famine]

Not to mention the psychological effect of having a TD ruled out they thought they'd scored, and having one ruled good that they thought they'd stopped.

 

[Kylehnat]

Okay, I'm an embittered Seahawks fan, of course, but I'm not here to say that the refs put up 21 points for Pittsburgh and only let us score 10...

Consider this, though: Would the game have been different if Hines Ward were called for pass interference on that 3rd and 28, if Willie Parker's run had been called back on offensive holding, and the planned trick play blown dead on a false start by Jerome Bettis?

By my count, Pittsburgh had 3 big plays that won the game, and the Seahawks had at least 3 big plays taken back on phantom penalties.

Pittsburgh fans, you won the damn Superbowl. Now let us crusty, bitter Seahawks fans ***** about it, because we have a legitimate reason to. No one is going to take away your Lombardi trophy just because we're pissed off.

 

[Omnis]

No, that is not the case.

If you can tell me that from 20 feet away you would have been able to tell if Ben made a TD with that stock pile of people around/on him, then I'll call you for BS. Ref's are human, but rules are rules. Do you expect the NFL to bend the rules in favor of any team? No..

That's not the point. You just proved me right in the case of a miscall. If you can't tell from a nice crispy clean zoomed in shot of big Ben whether he made the touchdown, how the hell can the ref who is viewing from the same angle come to that conclusion? He shouldn't have ruled the TD, because it obviously didn't happen. He screwed up big time. He saw Ben move the ball from way the hell below his navel foward and over the goal line. If he were paying attention, that should not have been a touchdown, as stated 5 or 6 times already.

Pittsburgh should've been the one challenging that play FOR the touchdown, because, obviously, there is more evidence against the touchdown than for it.

edit: Way to pull a Solid Lifters with the insult blended into the argument.



...Anyway,

Dolphins for 2007.. .

Believe in the infinite wisdom, folks. That now tallies up to a cumulative infinity^2.

 

[tha_con]

Jesus you people don't understand the rules.

1) The ref, from 20ft away, ruled it a TD, he did the best he could, you canont blame him for that.

2) REVIEWS DON"T MATTER IF YOU CAN'T CONCLUDE THAT IT WAS A BAD PLAY. IF THERE IS NO EVIDENCE YOU CANNOT TURN THE CALL OVER.


Those are the rules for the ENTIRE NFL. Not just the Steelers.

And I didn't insult you omnis, I simply said I would call you on BS if you honestly think you could do a better job to see it. Because I know I sure as hell couldn't, not from the angle and distance he was.

All I'm saying is you guy's are "complaining" about htings youshouldn't be, as if the Ref's swayed in the way of pittsburgh. NO.

Seattle made mistakes, that is NOT beside the point.

We made big plays. When WE had a 3rd and long, we got to the 5 yard line and then followed with a TD.

When SEATTLE was set up with a 3rd and long, they threw and interception.

DO YOU NOT SEE THIS?!?!?!

 

[Omnis]

No, I was talking about danoff.

You still don't see what I'm saying, though. If, according to you, he can't tell that it isn't a touchdown, then how can he tell it IS a touchdown? Things shouldn't be ruled a TD if there is no concrete evidence, but, because he was blind and "did the best he could", this principle is violated. That's bad officiating. It kind of works like the court system. Innocent until proven guilty...No score until a proven touchdown. In this case, it should've been pittsburgh's obligation to challenge the play for the touchdown, not seattle's to challenge against the TD.

I'm not complaining that the hawks lost....I'm complaining about a bad umpire.

 

[Danoff]

Jesus you people don't understand the rules.

1) The ref, from 20ft away, ruled it a TD, he did the best he could, you canont blame him for that.

2) REVIEWS DON"T MATTER IF YOU CAN'T CONCLUDE THAT IT WAS A BAD PLAY. IF THERE IS NO EVIDENCE YOU CANNOT TURN THE CALL OVER.


Those are the rules for the ENTIRE NFL. Not just the Steelers.

And I didn't insult you omnis, I simply said I would call you on BS if you honestly think you could do a better job to see it. Because I know I sure as hell couldn't, not from the angle and distance he was.

All I'm saying is you guy's are "complaining" about htings youshouldn't be, as if the Ref's swayed in the way of pittsburgh. NO.

Seattle made mistakes, that is NOT beside the point.

We made big plays. When WE had a 3rd and long, we got to the 5 yard line and then followed with a TD.

When SEATTLE was set up with a 3rd and long, they threw and interception.

DO YOU NOT SEE THIS?!?!?!

Take your time. I'm still looking for a response to my original statement:

You'd be on the other side of the fence if Pitt has lost due to bad ref calls and you know it.

...and you've still got to give me 3 critical bad calls for each of the Steelers playoff games.

 

[Driftster]

Those rules are the entire NFL...they just so happened to work/not work(however you want to see it) in YOUR teams favor....In other words..No wonder you're defending the moron in the striped uniform who made the call...Your team got the long end of the stick.

 

[tha_con]

No, I was talking about danoff.

You still don't see what I'm saying, though. If, according to you, he can't tell that it isn't a touchdown, then how can he tell it IS a touchdown? Things shouldn't be ruled a TD if there is no concrete evidence, but, because he was blind and "did the best he could", this principle is violated. That's bad officiating. It kind of works like the court system. Innocent until proven guilty...No score until a proven touchdown. In this case, it should've been pittsburgh's obligation to challenge the play for the touchdown, not seattle's to challenge against the TD.

I'm not complaining that the hawks lost....I'm complaining about a bad umpire.

Bad ref, he's not an umpire.

Anyway, you're not hearing me.

The Line Ref (He's the guy responsible for standing on the 1 yardline to determine if it's a TD or not) saw and thought that it was a TD.

When the officials upstairs (because there are) saw that it was questionable, they sent it under review, not a coach. This is why we have box ref's.

When the play went under review, there was no possible way for them to overturn it, because from the video you cannot tell, it can swing either way, so you can't overturn it, and the ref who saw it happen in real time, thought it was in, ruled it a TD, end of story.

danoff - No, I wouldn't be on the "other side of the fence" because I've been watching football for 18 concious years (the other 4 were yenno, childs play). I played little league, middle school and highschool football. I know the rules of the game, and to me, there was ONE bad call, and it was NOT the deciding factor. If we were to simply "trade logos" for the teams, I'd be pissed at my players, and NOT the ref's. There were more points lost by player mistakes and failures on 3rd down conversions than there were bad calls.

Also, I didn't say I was going to find you calls from each game, twist my words to make me look stupid, amusing, but no. I said I could find you twice as many bad calls throughout the playoffs. Hell, even situations where they WEREN'T bad calls, and we STILL produced.

Like, for instance, the Denver game, here's the scenario, should be familiar to Seattle fans.

We were on the 7 yardline, and it's 3rd goal. We fake the playaction, and toss it to the Bus, he runs 7 yards untouched and get's a TD. But wait! Flag on the play! Holding, TD is GONE. So what now? We're 3rd and 17, and we STILL manage to produce a TD off of it.

Now, please explain to me, if Seattle were "truely" champions, how they could not accomplish the same, but instead threw an INT to Ike Taylor? I mean, NO amount of officials are going to force a Quarterback to throw an interception, that was his fault, why is HE not to blame? Do you see where I'm getting? Fans are being to petty and blaming their first superbowl loss ever on the ref's because they are afraid to take the brunt of the beating.

There are so many more reasons besides officiating that lost this game for Seattle, plain and simple.

Drifster - You don't have anything to say anyway, Ref's do the best they can, they are only human. I'd like to see you do something similar and be that "good" at it. Go out there and watch all those linemen tangle up, each one of them, and find holding calls, or illegal penalties. Yea....

 

[Driftster]

Ok..i'll do something similar..and be better at it..

I mean you'd think the fact that they're all in their breaking senile late 40's should mean one of two things..

their vision is going...or they're just losing their minds...

Oh and BTW given the opportunity...

I'd probably wave a banner saying the Con is a flamer or something and be as bias as i could towards your team....and not in their favor...whatever that sport may be.

 

[tha_con]

Ok..i'll do something similar..and be better at it..

I mean you'd think the fact that they're all in their breaking senile late 40's should mean one of two things..

their vision is going...or they're just losing their minds...

Oh and BTW given the opportunity...

I'd probably wave a banner saying the Con is a flamer or something and be as bias as i could towards your team....and not in their favor...whatever that sport may be.

Again a direct reflection of your knowledge of the sport.

Ref's under go hearing and sight tests quarterly during the football season. I believe once in August and again in December / January. IIRC.

And there is no "bias" coming from me about my team, at all, we played a very poor game, but we didn't make nearly as many critical mistakes as seattle. But we played horrible. There is no reason for a team like seattle to get 2 interceptions and not score on those drives. None.

 

[Kylehnat]

danoff - No, I wouldn't be on the "other side of the fence" because I've been watching football for 18 concious years

Judging by how upset you are over our *****ing, I'm guessing if the shoe were on the other foot, you'd be the one petitioning the NFL office to have the game re-played.

 

[tha_con]

Judging by how upset you are over our *****ing, I'm guessing if the shoe were on the other foot, you'd be the one petitioning the NFL office to have the game re-played.

Not at all, I'm upset because I wouldn't be whining, and I see no reason for anyone too.

Again, everyone is ignoring ALL of the other factors in the loss and only focusing on the officiating. It's rediculous.

 

[Danoff]

Not at all, I'm upset because I wouldn't be whining, and I see no reason for anyone too.

For just a moment, pretend that the big-ben TD call had gone the other way (which I think we can all agree easily could have happened, especially since the line judge was running in with one hand up at first). Assume (for just a moment) that instead of going for it on 4th and milimeters, Pitt had played it safe and kicked a FG. Assume as well that the refs made a terrible call during the willie parker run and called it back for offensive holding. That would have made the game 10-10 at the end and it would have gone to overtime. Now assume the Seahawks won it in overtime.

Are you telling me that you wouldn't be pissed off at the refs? The above scenario could VERY easily have happened. Offensive linemen get called for holding a LOT, and when they aren't called, it usually could have been called. Ben's TD was as tenuous as a play gets. It would have been cake for those two things to go the other way.

Again, everyone is ignoring ALL of the other factors in the loss and only focusing on the officiating. It's rediculous.

That's because if you leave all of those other factors alone but change a few ref calls - the game comes out differently.

 

[tha_con]

For just a moment, pretend that the big-ben TD call had gone the other way (which I think we can all agree easily could have happened, especially since the line judge was running in with one hand up at first). Assume (for just a moment) that instead of going for it on 4th and milimeters, Pitt had played it safe and kicked a FG. Assume as well that the refs made a terrible call during the willie parker run and called it back for offensive holding. That would have made the game 10-10 at the end and it would have gone to overtime. Now assume the Seahawks won it in overtime.

Are you telling me that you wouldn't be pissed off at the refs? The above scenario could VERY easily have happened. Offensive linemen get called for holding a LOT, and when they aren't called, it usually could have been called. Ben's TD was as tenuous as a play gets. It would have been cake for those two things to go the other way.



That's because if you leave all of those other factors alone but change a few ref calls - the game comes out differently.

I would have been dissappointed, but I wouldn't be pissed, wine, complain, and blame the game soley on the ref's. Because obviously we would have played a worse game.

And to say "that's because if you leave all those other factors alone but change a few ref calls - the game comes out differently" is RETARDED. (BTW, incase you aren't catching it from caps, that's an insult).

IF YOU CHANCE ANYTHING the game comes out differently stupid. If you give them their 2 field goals, make Jerramy Stevens catch those 3rd down dropped passes, take away Matt's interception at the 5 yardline, that ALL changes the game, what are you stupid? Again, you're being objective and ignoring everything else.

LEARN THE SPORT. I HATE THIS.

Have you even PLAYED football? It is not an "if" game, it HAPPENS. There are no "what if's" you overcome things and WIN. Thats what CHAMPIONS do.

 

[Kylehnat]

You're really not helping your stance at all with insulting tirades.

 

[Omnis]

Con-head, you're still not hearing ME. The ump (and, yes, the line ref is called an umpire. There is only one referee.) made a bad call that should not have happened. I'm not talking about upstairs, downstairs, or sidewaystairs. I'm talking about Mr. Umpy Ump on the field. He should've let the box refs/pittsburgh make the call, because he obviously had no clue as to what he was doing. Especially since he's blind from 20 feet away.

 

[tha_con]

Omnis - http://www.allfootballbettinglines.com/NFL/rules_nfl.htm Read it. please. He is not an umpire. Umpires watch for holding/illegal blocking, etc. also pass interference and such.

Primary responsibility to rule on players' equipment, as well as their conduct and actions on scrimmage line. Lines up approximately four to five yards downfield, varying position from in front of weakside tackle to strongside guard. Looks for possible false start by offensive linemen. Observes legality of contact by both offensive linemen while blocking and by defensive players while they attempt to ward off blockers. Is prepared to call rule infractions if they occur on offense or defense. Moves forward to line of scrimmage when pass play develops in order to insure that interior linemen do not move illegally downfield. If offensive linemen indicate screen pass is to be attempted, Umpire shifts his attention toward screen side, picks up potential receiver in order to insure that he will legally be permitted to run his pattern and continues to rule on action of blockers. Umpire is to assist in ruling on incomplete or trapped passes when ball is thrown overhead or short. On punt plays, Umpire positions himself opposite Referee in offensive backfield-5 yards from kicker and parallel.

Line Judges are different.

And again, he can only call what he see's. When he runs up, at first he does not see if it is in or not, but when he get's closer, his opinion is that he was in, there were people on top and in front of ben, so he couldn't tell. It was challanege, and you can't tell. But to him, it was, and the Ref's say is final.

Again, this mattered a lot less than all of the other mistakes seattle made.

I.E. Pass interference, dropped passes, missed field goals, thrown interceptions, missed blockers (that allowed for a 75 yard TD). And most of all, the inability to convert 3rd downs in crucial situations.

If you are all giong to play the "what if game" I'm going to insult your debate skills, because you do not debate like that. If you're going to hit me with a topic, make sure your facts are straight and you're not playing "what if". Look at the whole picture, not just the poitns you want to hit to make your arguement better.

 

[Bones Brigade]

my post is gone!!!!

:sad face:

anyway. seahawks lost. i didnt expect them to win.

a few things did surprise me though. in the first half they pretty much dominated the steelers. the defense played very well until manuel and dyson went out. minus the 75 yard run and pruitt covering hines ward the defense did a great job.

the offense was bad and played very uncharacteristic of themselves. they moved the ball well, very well, for the most part, but it looked like last years team. had they been able to keep it together like they had all season (scoring in the final 2 minutes of either half in the first 8 games i think, including jacksonville, atlanta, dallas and washington) i think the outcome would have been different.

stevens is a good player. he had a bad game. i dont know what was up with him.

alexander had a a very good game. i dont caare if 95 yards and no tds arent good numbers, but pittsburgh hadnt given up that many yards to one back all season (to my knowledge, i could be worng.)

the calls hurt us, and i think some of them were really bad calls. i dont think roethlisberger got it, i dont think locklear held. i dont think the calls made us lose the game though. it was a factor, but we didnt play well enough as a whole to win.

the steelers on the ohter hand didnt play well either. other than a few good scramble plays from roethlisberger and the run by they did nothing. i dont consider the randle el pass a good play. pruit blew the coverage and trufant took a bad route to the ball.

all in all i was impressed with some things and disgusted by others. better officiating would have made a close game. pittsburgh played a little better through out so who knows.

now i have an offseason to hope the seahawks break the streak of super bowl losers not finishing above .500 the next season. i think they can do it.

people who still think seattle is a mediocre team are morons.

 

[Bones Brigade]

oh and tha_con, please dont tell people how to debate, when you dont know how to. insults aren't part of good debating, regardless on how well your opponents debate. and your argument of "I wouldn't whine" is null. You're team didn't lose. You can speculate that you wouldn't whine but speculation isn't a prediction of the future.

plus, its "ridiculous."

plus, you think the call on hasselbecks "low-block" was a good one.

 

[Danoff]

I would have been dissappointed, but I wouldn't be pissed, wine, complain, and blame the game soley on the ref's. Because obviously we would have played a worse game.

I don't think you read my post. Seriously, are you just reading every other word? Or are you reading the first and last sentence? What's the deal here? How can you possibly say the steelers would have played a worse game? You wouldn't say that if you understood what I was talking about. I was talking about changing ref calls, NOT changing a single thing the team did.

I'm about done trying to get through to you.

And to say "that's because if you leave all those other factors alone but change a few ref calls - the game comes out differently" is RETARDED. (BTW, incase you aren't catching it from caps, that's an insult).

IF YOU CHANCE ANYTHING the game comes out differently stupid.

I'm talking about the outcome - how did you miss that? I'm talking about win vs. lose.

If you give them their 2 field goals, make Jerramy Stevens catch those 3rd down dropped passes, take away Matt's interception at the 5 yardline, that ALL changes the game, what are you stupid? Again, you're being objective and ignoring everything else.

What the hell are you talking about?

LEARN THE SPORT. I HATE THIS.

At this point in the conversation I think I understand football quite a bit better than you do.

 

[xXSilencerXx]

Will you guys just give it break. The Steelers won the Seahawks lost. End of story. Let them ***** about calls, its bound to happen. When your team loses you always try to find an excuse why they lost. Big frickin deal.

 

[Omnis]

We have the right to complain.

These aren't what if situations...they're should have.

 

[Danoff]

Will you guys just give it break. The Steelers won the Seahawks lost. End of story. Let them ***** about calls, its bound to happen. When your team loses you always try to find an excuse why they lost. Big frickin deal.

That was my whole point - that the Steelers fans would be bi***ing if they'd been on the other side of the fence.

 

[Kylehnat]

And of course they say "no, we wouldn't!! we would accept the outcome!" Right.

I mean, if Seattle fans are this upset...