Get it done Steelers!!!

[Reality]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPol...ge&pollId=35171

How did your state vote?

[Reality]

Just prior to the bogile Hassleback "blocking" foul was a SeaHawk reception giving Seattle 1st and goal at the 2. Negated by a holding call. Bogus? Or did ABC even show it?

The Hasselbeck "blocking" foul wasn't bogile, but the holding call negating the Seattle reception was.  Just one of those "Its the Superbowl....let them play!... type of calls."

2. Seattle reciever who caught ball with one foot down. Foot 2 then went right against and over the pylon. Is that not a touchdown? Foot 2 proceded to go out of bounds.

Darryl Jackson's right foot clearly stepped to the outside of the pylon and out of bounds.  No question about it.  Had his right foot gone directly over the pylon, it would have been a Touchdown reception.  Horrible, horrible sense of presence by Darrly Jackson.  Jimmy Smith made that catch in Week 2 to send the game into overtime.

1.  Okay on the blocking foul you are saying I should have known better then to take Jomals word for it?  I was channel surfing between DateLines "To catch a Predator III" from the Riverside CA stakeout with the staffers posing as 12 yr boy and 13 yr girl online.  50 predators showed up to their *house* and were arrested.  Required viewing.

2 If the holding call that nullifyed the SeaHawk 1st and goal was bogile, that sucks.

3.  Hmmn i thought his foot banged into the pylon, making it flop.
3a.  Even if his foot did hit the pylon, but in the air, would that not miss the requirement to have "two feet down".  (When his foot hit the pylon he was in midstep.  Foot came down well out of bounds yes.)

[Guest_Randy]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPol...ge&pollId=35171

How did your state vote?

Interesting poll -- unlike most who obviously noticed the lopsided officiating -- I don't think the lopsided officiating was the reason for the outcome of the game.  I think that Seattle just played more poorly than Pittsburg (neither team played great football -- although they both had moments).

There were three plays that stood out:
1) Offensive push-off (and it WAS a push-off) but it was following an illegal use of hands by the defensive player.  Should have been offsetting penalties -- it shouldn't have been a touchdown but it should have at least resulted in repeat of downs.

2) Roethlisburger's touchdown didn't break the plane of the inzone.  It was close but no cigar.  

3) Hasselbeck's illegal blocking call was lame.  He's a quarterback going after his opponent and is trying to protect himself while still trying to take out the player.  

Bottom-line is that the officials gave ALL the breaks to Pittsburg -- how many plays did Pittsburg have to call a review of?  And none of this even mentions the call that Seattle managed to get reversed.  

Personally, I don't think it changed the outcome of the game (I think it would have changed the score) -- at this point you begin to wonder if the NFL is making sure that Vegas is protecting it's line!

[Reality]

3a.  Even if his foot did hit the pylon, but in the air, would that not miss the requirement to have "two feet down".  (When his foot hit the pylon he was in midstep.  Foot came down well out of bounds yes.)

Skandelous, i will answer 3a from ex NFL head ref

Q.  Please explain the plane on the goal line and how it differs from the sidelines and yard lines and maybe the endline. Thanks. -- Bill Patton, Boiling Springs, S.C.

The goal line plane is unique under NFL rules. When a player breaks the plane of the goal line with the ball in his possession, it is a touchdown, even though the player's body may be in the field of play. This plane extends to infinity and if a player crosses the goal line with his body and the ball extended over the sideline, it is a touchdown because of the invisible plane. The sidelines and endlines do not have the same magic; however, if a player has the ball extended over the sideline or endline and his body is completely in the field of play or the end zone, the play is not ruled out of bounds in the field or the end zone.

In a recent game played in Atlanta, Michael Vick dove from the field toward the pylon in the corner of the end zone with the ball extended out-of-bounds. His hand passed over the pylon while the rest of his body and the ball continued out-of-bounds. The play was correctly ruled a touchdown because he had qualified under the goal line plane described above.


 

[JoMal]

Interesting poll -- unlike most who obviously noticed the lopsided officiating -- I don't think the lopsided officiating was the reason for the outcome of the game.  I think that Seattle just played more poorly than Pittsburg (neither team played great football -- although they both had moments).

 

Totally agree. The officiating certainly can come under scrutiny in this game.

But I think two missed field goals (giving Pittsburgh pretty good field position both times, I might add), Stevens three dropped passes, two of which would have given Seattle terrific field position, poor clock management at the end of both halves, Darrell Jackson's end zone shove, then missing two sideline catches that were ruled out-of-bounds, one of which could have been a touchdown if he had done his footwork, and having to play a back-up safety that got burned on the fleaflicker probably added up to the Seahawks losing more then the officiating did.    

There were three plays that stood out:
1) Offensive push-off (and it WAS a push-off) but it was following an illegal use of hands by the defensive player.  Should have been offsetting penalties -- it shouldn't have been a touchdown but it should have at least resulted in repeat of downs.

Prior to the shove, the contact was not that significant, but the shove was a bit obvious, especially to a ref standing about 8 yards away. Hard to miss, while the other stuff was as much mutual shoving, and not that much anyway.

2) Roethlisburger's touchdown didn't break the plane of the inzone.  It was close but no cigar. 

Roethlisburger's hand with the ball in it had cleared the plain when the Seattle linebacker came in and shoved the ball and his hand back into the playing field. As soon as the defender hit the ball, the forward momentum was ended. But it was after the ball had gone over the endzone line. It was the right call.

3) Hasselbeck's illegal blocking call was lame.  He's a quarterback going after his opponent and is trying to protect himself while still trying to take out the player

.

Have to agree with that. So what if Hasselbeck took out a blocker at the same time. His low dive was intended to upend the ball carrier. I see defenders do that play just like that way too often for any type of call to be made this time.

Bottom-line is that the officials gave ALL the breaks to Pittsburg -- how many plays did Pittsburg have to call a review of?  And none of this even mentions the call that Seattle managed to get reversed. 

Personally, I don't think it changed the outcome of the game (I think it would have changed the score) -- at this point you begin to wonder if the NFL is making sure that Vegas is protecting it's line!

Unlike the majority of the nation, apparently, who voted in that poll, would not agree that the officiating did as much to earn Pittsburgh the win as did the things I cited at the top of this post.

[Laker Fan]

A conspiracy to protect the Vegas line Randy? You're beginning to sound like... never mind.

The so-called illegal use of hands in the ENDZONE accompanied Jackson's also having his hands all over the defender as they jockeyed for position, this is normal and was PRIOR to Jackson's pushoff, good call even if somewhat ticky tack, it followed the rules.

Officials made the right call on Roethlisburger's touchdown, it was inconclusive whether or not the ball broke the plane of the ENDZONE prior to Ben's elbow hitting the ground and he tucked the ball further up under his body, (I personally felt that it did break the plane by a razor thin margin) and by the rules, if it is inconclusive, you can't overturn the ruling on the field.

Hasselbacks blocking WAS illegal, big deal he didn't "mean to" hit a different player from the ball carrier and that he's only a quarterback trying to protect himself, you don't reverse an illegal block because it wasn't his "intention" to hit the wrong man, save those sour grapes for Washington state wine.

Bottom line is Seattle, bad calls against them or not, still had Pittsburg by the throat through the entire first quarter, most of the way through the second, and simply did not have what it takes to deliver the knockout blow and thus they let a deadly second half team back in it, their mistake, no one else's. Seattle gave the game away to a very opportunistic Steeler team and made all the critical mistakes that in football will ALWAYS come back and bite you in the end, they choked.

I give you props for agreeing the outcome would have been the same but the yeah they won but.... jive is very uncharactersitic of you Randy, I'm a little surprised.

[Reality]

A conspiracy to protect the Vegas line Randy? You're beginning to sound like... never mind.

Begining to sound like residents of 48 of the 50 U.S. states and Jomal.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPol...ge&pollId=35171

Oh well, there is still Pennsyltucky, West Virginy and Dan.

Nevermind.

(concur Jomal and all that Sea had its chances irregarless)





 

[Guest_Randy]

A conspiracy to protect the Vegas line Randy? You're beginning to sound like... never mind.

The so-called illegal use of hands in the ENDZONE accompanied Jackson's also having his hands all over the defender as they jockeyed for position, this is normal and was PRIOR to Jackson's pushoff, good call even if somewhat ticky tack, it followed the rules.

Officials made the right call on Roethlisburger's touchdown, it was inconclusive whether or not the ball broke the plane of the ENDZONE prior to Ben's elbow hitting the ground and he tucked the ball further up under his body, (I personally felt that it did break the plane by a razor thin margin) and by the rules, if it is inconclusive, you can't overturn the ruling on the field.

Hasselbacks blocking WAS illegal, big deal he didn't "mean to" hit a different player from the ball carrier and that he's only a quarterback trying to protect himself, you don't reverse an illegal block because it wasn't his "intention" to hit the wrong man, save those sour grapes for Washington state wine.

Bottom line is Seattle, bad calls against them or not, still had Pittsburg by the throat through the entire first quarter, most of the way through the second, and simply did not have what it takes to deliver the knockout blow and thus they let a deadly second half team back in it, their mistake, no one else's. Seattle gave the game away to a very opportunistic Steeler team and made all the critical mistakes that in football will ALWAYS come back and bite you in the end, they choked.

I give you props for agreeing the outcome would have been the same but the yeah they won but.... jive is very uncharactersitic of you Randy, I'm a little surprised.

The so-called illegal use of hands in the ENDZONE accompanied Jackson's also having his hands all over the defender as they jockeyed for position, this is normal and was PRIOR to Jackson's pushoff, good call even if somewhat ticky tack, it followed the rules.

Hasselbacks blocking WAS illegal, big deal he didn't "mean to" hit a different player from the ball carrier and that he's only a quarterback trying to protect himself, you don't reverse an illegal block because it wasn't his "intention" to hit the wrong man, save those sour grapes for Washington state wine.

Interesting, Dan -- first you want to say "forget the fact that the defender can't use his hands on the offensive receiver" -- forget that this is a rule of the game because it's "normal" and was prior (of course it was prior -- they pushed each other and THEN Jackson extended his arm -- the arm extension was further "normal jockeying" -- but that went beyond the rules.

Then it's "stick to the rule book" stuff from Hasselback?  

Kind of funny, Dan -- you can't live by the rule book on one play and then forget the rules on the next play.

As for sour grapes, it's pretty obvious, no matter what you think that the ENTIRE nation felt pretty strongly that the officiating was horrendous -- it's your prerogative to choose to ignore the obvious onslaught of bad calls.  I HAVE stated, quite clearly, that I don't believe it would have affected the outcome of the game -- however, I DO believe it affected the score.
 

[Skandery]

The so-called illegal use of hands in the ENDZONE accompanied Jackson's also having his hands all over the defender as they jockeyed for position, this is normal and was PRIOR to Jackson's pushoff, good call even if somewhat ticky tack, it followed the rules.

Agreed

Officials made the right call on Roethlisburger's touchdown, it was inconclusive whether or not the ball broke the plane of the ENDZONE prior to Ben's elbow hitting the ground and he tucked the ball further up under his body, (I personally felt that it did break the plane by a razor thin margin) and by the rules, if it is inconclusive, you can't overturn the ruling on the field.

Can I get an "Amen".

My humble opinion is, also, that it crossed by the thinnest of margins.  Inconclusive evidence to overturn, the play stands as called on the field.

Hasselbacks blocking WAS illegal, big deal he didn't "mean to" hit a different player from the ball carrier and that he's only a quarterback trying to protect himself, you don't reverse an illegal block because it wasn't his "intention" to hit the wrong man, save those sour grapes for Washington state wine.

Hallelujah.  Wow Laker Fan...I just don't know what to say...I'm just so proud...  :cry:

I give you props for agreeing the outcome would have been the same but the yeah they won but.... jive is very uncharactersitic of you Randy, I'm a little surprised.

Randy WAS cheering for Seattle, so its pretty much in character.    :lol2:

The goal line plane is unique under NFL rules. When a player breaks the plane of the goal line with the ball in his possession, it is a touchdown, even though the player's body may be in the field of play. This plane extends to infinity and if a player crosses the goal line with his body and the ball extended over the sideline, it is a touchdown because of the invisible plane. The sidelines and endlines do not have the same magic; however, if a player has the ball extended over the sideline or endline and his body is completely in the field of play or the end zone, the play is not ruled out of bounds in the field or the end zone.

Reality, and by the definition quoted above, Darryl Jackson did not score the touchdown as he never technically crossed the goal line.  Had he had the presence to make sure his right foot passed directly above or to the left of the right-corner pylon...TOUCHDOWN.  By no means an easy play to make, but an elite receiver should make that catch.  

 

[Guest_Randy]

The so-called illegal use of hands in the ENDZONE accompanied Jackson's also having his hands all over the defender as they jockeyed for position, this is normal and was PRIOR to Jackson's pushoff, good call even if somewhat ticky tack, it followed the rules.

Agreed

Officials made the right call on Roethlisburger's touchdown, it was inconclusive whether or not the ball broke the plane of the ENDZONE prior to Ben's elbow hitting the ground and he tucked the ball further up under his body, (I personally felt that it did break the plane by a razor thin margin) and by the rules, if it is inconclusive, you can't overturn the ruling on the field.

Can I get an "Amen".

My humble opinion is, also, that it crossed by the thinnest of margins.  Inconclusive evidence to overturn, the play stands as called on the field.

Hasselbacks blocking WAS illegal, big deal he didn't "mean to" hit a different player from the ball carrier and that he's only a quarterback trying to protect himself, you don't reverse an illegal block because it wasn't his "intention" to hit the wrong man, save those sour grapes for Washington state wine.

Hallelujah.  Wow Laker Fan...I just don't know what to say...I'm just so proud...  :cry:

I give you props for agreeing the outcome would have been the same but the yeah they won but.... jive is very uncharactersitic of you Randy, I'm a little surprised.

Randy WAS cheering for Seattle, so its pretty much in character.    :lol2:

The goal line plane is unique under NFL rules. When a player breaks the plane of the goal line with the ball in his possession, it is a touchdown, even though the player's body may be in the field of play. This plane extends to infinity and if a player crosses the goal line with his body and the ball extended over the sideline, it is a touchdown because of the invisible plane. The sidelines and endlines do not have the same magic; however, if a player has the ball extended over the sideline or endline and his body is completely in the field of play or the end zone, the play is not ruled out of bounds in the field or the end zone.

Reality, and by the definition quoted above, Darryl Jackson did not score the touchdown as he never technically crossed the goal line.  Had he had the presence to make sure his right foot passed directly above or to the left of the right-corner pylon...TOUCHDOWN.  By no means an easy play to make, but an elite receiver should make that catch.

Hmm, you thought the game was well officiated?  Not only do you not agree with the rest of the country but it brings into question your eye-sight or judgement?  Care to pick one?   :rolleyes:  

[Laker Fan]

Make no mistake Randy, it was a horribly called game, I have no problem with that, but ultimately Seattle missed 2 field goals, dropped pass after pass after pass, turned the ball over which resulted in a Steeler score, made dumb mistakes, had some of the most pathetic clock management I have ever seen, committed momentum killing penalties, and in short did as much to lose this game as any team ever has. The officials did not cause Stevens to drop 3 critical, potential game turning passes, did not cause Hasselbeck to toss some very stupid, ill-advised passes, did not cause the O-line to grab and hold anything in yellow and black that moved in the backfield, thereby negating big plays, did not cause Seattle to blow coverage and bite on an obvious fake sweep fleaflicker that even my wife knew was coming, did not cause Seattle to overpersue and leave a gap the size of Aretha Franklin for Parker to blow through on his way to the ENDZONE. Man, if the officials were on Seattle's side, not even they could have saved them from their own worst enemy, themselves.

[Skandery]

I thought the game was horrible officiated which is why I posted earlier in the thread:

jn:Big thumbs down to the refs however. I still the Pittsburgh would've won in a correctly called game but wow, a few of those calls against Seattle were embarssingly bad. 

Skander:Agreed...reffing was BAD...call against Darryl Jackson in the endzone was horrible.

So for you to say:

Hmm, you thought the game was well officiated?

calls into question your eyesight, maybe your judgement?  Care to pick one?  

[Guest_Randy]

I thought the game was horrible officiated which is why I posted earlier in the thread:

jn:Big thumbs down to the refs however. I still the Pittsburgh would've won in a correctly called game but wow, a few of those calls against Seattle were embarssingly bad. 

Skander:Agreed...reffing was BAD...call against Darryl Jackson in the endzone was horrible.

So for you to say:

Hmm, you thought the game was well officiated?

calls into question your eyesight, maybe your judgement?  Care to pick one?

Just think it's funny that you thought the game was horribly officiated but then don't have any problems with the individual calls.  No problem -- I'm sure there isn't any correlation between the officiating and the individual calls (and the fact that ALL the judgement calls went to the Steelers -- that's simply bias on my part and 48 out of 50 states full of fans).

[Reality]

Sounds like the bad call that impacted the most, and the one we are unanimous(?) on its incorrectness was the phantom "hold" in the early 4th that wiped out a 1 yd line 1st and Goal for the Hawks.  Gotta believe 99% they are going to convert a t.d.

The Rothlesburger 2nd qtr dive or not for the t.d., even if called a no go it is still Steeler ball at 4th and goal from the 6 inch line.  I like the odds of a Rothlesburger QB sneak to get the 7 anyways.

'Burgers QB stats for a SuperBowl winner:

"Worst QB rating ever."

[JoMal]

Just think it's funny that you thought the game was horribly officiated but then don't have any problems with the individual calls.  No problem -- I'm sure there isn't any correlation between the officiating and the individual calls (and the fact that ALL the judgement calls went to the Steelers -- that's simply bias on my part and 48 out of 50 states full of fans).

First off, not all the judgement calls went against the Seahawks, or the game would have been decided with the Hasselbeck fumble that was overturned after review.

Second, the poll stated, and I quote, "Do you think officiating "MISTAKES" affected the outcome of Super Bowl XL?", not judgement calls, so what you are saying is that you agree with the majority of people who think the officials made mistakes.

I think they made judgement decisions, the majority of which were correct and happened to go against the Seahawks.

Big difference.