PDA

View Full Version : I have just witnessed the single worst piece of officiating I have ever seen!



NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 04:45 PM
On 4th and inches..we have just witnessed the first do over in NFL history!. Either its false start on the offense or offsides on the defense! To state that there was no flag on the play...then what the hell just happened?!?!..Nothing?!?! The ball was not snapped yet players interacted and moved past the line of scrimmage....The NFL should be ashamed of themselves...I have never seen anything like that before ever! This crew should be fired right after the game!

unifiedtheory
01-15-2006, 04:47 PM
That non call on the pass interference in the first half was the worst non call I've seen in a LONG time.

Not a good weekend for NFL officials.

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 04:50 PM
I totally agree with you on that Pass Interference...until I witnessed the do-over! These officials are just terrible...that PI call in the first half was a mugging...then the next call of a do-over! OMG! what a joke!

cnc66
01-15-2006, 04:56 PM
this thought may have been premature

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 04:58 PM
There was indisputable evidence that that was not a pick???? What the heck is going on???

PressCoverage
01-15-2006, 04:59 PM
yeah, i believe the encroachment non-call just got trumped.... in the same game, no less!

unifiedtheory
01-15-2006, 05:01 PM
That overrule on the INT was the worst call I've ever seen in my life in any sport.

I am ASTOUNDED at how bad that call was...it makes that non call on the PI in the 1st half look good.

PressCoverage
01-15-2006, 05:03 PM
yeah, watch the make-up calls now...

Jt0323
01-15-2006, 05:04 PM
That overrule on the INT was the worst call I've ever seen in my life in any sport.

I am ASTOUNDED at how bad that call was...it makes that non call on the PI in the 1st half look good.


same here, that call was a s**** call, these officials are horrible

Flying Pencil
01-15-2006, 05:06 PM
Well, the NFL can't legislate Peyton to a trophy, so I guess they're just getting desperate now. God knows why, but the Pats, Cowboys, and 49ers have never gotten as much help from the league as the Colts have the last few years.

If they manage to lose, I expect an announcement in March that the Colts won an untelevised tournament in Rio de Janeiro, and are retroactively awarded the previous four Super Bowl trophies. :fire:

PressCoverage
01-15-2006, 05:14 PM
i just don't know what else to say about this football game... this is beyond words

cnc66
01-15-2006, 05:17 PM
ya know PC, the non interception changed the entire course of the game

PressCoverage
01-15-2006, 05:21 PM
sure did... i thought "one knee equals two feet?"

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:23 PM
sure did... i thought "one knee equals two feet?"


It does but you have to maintain possesion untill you get off the ground or you are touched down and the play is over

it was the right call

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:24 PM
ya know PC, the non interception changed the entire course of the game

and arguably, the non-false start call (which was clearly a Pittsburgh false start) took 2 and a half minutes off the clock, which if it had not been called, would have left Indy with a healthy 9 minutes to drive to comeback, which means Peyton Manning likely wouldn't have made such a throw across the middle because there would have been no desperation, and since it was a swing of 20 yards, it's possible that it might have impacted field position.

unifiedtheory
01-15-2006, 05:25 PM
It does but you have to maintain possesion untill you get off the ground or you are touched down and the play is over

it was the right call

The rulebook states that you have to have possesion of the football (which he did) and attempt a football move (which was what he did when he rolled on the ground in possesion of the football).

If ANYTHING the call should have been interecteption and then a fumble (which he recovered).

You don't have to be touched down. He had possesion of the ball CLEARLY...doubting he had possesion is rediculous.

If you doubt that was an intereception then I think I'd have a hard time convincing you the sky is blue.

I'm done argueing with you...enjoy your dilluted view of reality.

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 05:25 PM
It does but you have to maintain possesion untill you get off the ground or you are touched down and the play is over

it was the right call
What are you talking about????. They ruled that he lost possesion before he rolled over...and if anything it was a interception and then a fumble in which he covered. Where did it show that in any replay???/Indisputable?????are you kidding me???

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:25 PM
I disagreed with the interception call as well, but blame the NFL for the vagueness of what "football move" means.

Besides, they spend a lot more time reading the rule book than we do.

Not that it matters anyway--The Colts lost.

And most of you chatting that the NFL is trying to benefit the Colts with these calls is simply put laughable. So far that's probably the 5th team in the last week I've heard that "gets the benefit of calls". Usually by seasons end every year, according to fans in the NFL, all 32 teams are being set up by the NFL to win by officials :)

SCall13
01-15-2006, 05:26 PM
That overrule on the INT was the worst call I've ever seen in my life in any sport.

I am ASTOUNDED at how bad that call was...it makes that non call on the PI in the 1st half look good.



I know. I was in absolute SHOCK. The game should have never came down to to that last ditch drive by the Colts. Pittsburg almost got robbed.

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:26 PM
The rulebook states that you have to have possesion of the football (which he did) and attempt a football move (which was what he did when he rolled on the ground in possesion of the football).

If ANYTHING the call should have been interecteption and then a fumble (which he recovered).

You don't have to be touched down. He had possesion of the ball CLEARLY...doubting he had possesion is rediculous.

If you doubt that was an intereception then I think I'd have a hard time convincing you the sky is blue.

I'm done argueing with you...enjoy your dilluted view of reality.

you have to maintain possesion of the ball while you are on the ground

HE NEVER GOT UP

it was the right call, revisit the rulebook when your less steamed about it

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:27 PM
you have to maintain possesion of the ball while you are on the ground

HE NEVER GOT UP


He never got up? :)

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:28 PM
What are you talking about????. They ruled that he lost possesion before he rolled over...and if anything it was a interception and then a fumble in which he covered. Where did it show that in any replay???/Indisputable?????are you kidding me???


They said he lost possesion when his knee kicked it out

at that point he was still on the ground

therefore its an incompletion and the right call

3 words

MAINTAINED POSSESION THROUGHOUT

which he didnt have

Dolphin1184
01-15-2006, 05:28 PM
you have to maintain possesion of the ball while you are on the ground

HE NEVER GOT UP

it was the right call, revisit the rulebook when your less steamed about it

Yes he did.

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:29 PM
He never got up? :)


One knee was still on the ground so therefor he is still down


people need to look at the play again when they are less angry

unifiedtheory
01-15-2006, 05:30 PM
They said he lost possesion when his knee kicked it out

at that point he was still on the ground

therefore its an incompletion and the right call

3 words

MAINTAINED POSSESION THROUGHOUT

which he didnt have

What are you watching!

Troy caught it, had possesion, rolled one and a half times with the ball in his hands and then tried to get up and knocked it loose with his knee.

Stop disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing!

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:30 PM
Yes he did.

Umm no he didnt

one knee was still on the ground at that point


So he is still legally on the ground and must maintain his possesion

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 05:31 PM
They said he did not have possesion before his knee was down...you can put in any way you want....that was an interception!. The single worst officiated game I have ever seen.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:31 PM
One knee was still on the ground so therefor he is still down


people need to look at the play again when they are less angry

I'm angry? :)

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:31 PM
What are you watching!

Troy caught it, had possesion, rolled one and a half times with the ball in his hands and then tried to get up and knocked it loose with his knee.

Stop disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing!

He caught it while diving through the air

He rolled around WHICH DOESNT MATTER YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE BALL THE ENTIRE TIME YOU ARE ON THE GROUND

while one knee was still down he kicked it out

call on the field is overturned

Its the right call

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:32 PM
They said he did not have possesion before his knee was down....

No they didn't. They said that since his right knee was still on the ground when the ball came out, it was incomplete.

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:32 PM
I'm angry? :)


Not you in particular

Others

Maybe you are angry and hiding it with that smilie face :lol:

unifiedtheory
01-15-2006, 05:33 PM
They said he did not have possesion before his knee was down...you can put in any way you want....that was an interception!. The single worst officiated game I have ever seen.

EXACTLY!

Mike Ferreira said when explaining the call "he did'nt have possesion when he went to the ground".

How can you have the ball in your hands, roll one and a half times and NOT have possesion?

unifiedtheory
01-15-2006, 05:35 PM
He caught it while diving through the air

He rolled around WHICH DOESNT MATTER YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE BALL THE ENTIRE TIME YOU ARE ON THE GROUND

while one knee was still down he kicked it out

call on the field is overturned

Its the right call

Whatever. He had the ball in his hands...you and Mike Ferreira are the only two people on the Planet who think the ruling was right.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:35 PM
I'm not. I'm disappointed that another game almost ended in controversy, but at least this time the deserving team won.

I still don't see why people aren't bringing up the non-called false start though. Yes, Pittsburgh didn't score on the drive, but two and a half minutes ticked off the clock and 20 yards moved. I don't know that field position would have been altered much since they only started at the 20 due to a touchback....but the Colts arguably would have run the football with 9 minutes still on the clock.

Besides, chaos theory states one call that's different changes the entire outcome of the game so who knows maybe Indy would have scored 41 points in 5 minutes.

But honestly, Pittsburgh deserved this one.

0000001
01-15-2006, 05:36 PM
On 4th and inches..we have just witnessed the first do over in NFL history!. Either its false start on the offense or offsides on the defense! To state that there was no flag on the play...then what the hell just happened?!?!..Nothing?!?! The ball was not snapped yet players interacted and moved past the line of scrimmage....The NFL should be ashamed of themselves...I have never seen anything like that before ever! This crew should be fired right after the game!

100% agreed. also what was up with that interception being called back?

Brad528
01-15-2006, 05:37 PM
This game reminded me of most of the college bowl games which were also poorly officiated. I thought Randal El got mugged on 2 plays in the first half one on the short little flip pass by Roethlisberger and one on the long pass when Marlin Jackson cleary stopped his progess to get back to the ball.

WestCoastPhins
01-15-2006, 05:38 PM
There were plenty of bad calls too bad they all favored the colts. It should have been a 10 pt game when it ended. And it should have ended much sooner. Total BS. And why as dolphins fans would be bias. Not like anyone had any vested intrest in pittsburg. And notice how everyone on cbs explains why its a bad call, it mirrors what we are saying.

DolfanISS
01-15-2006, 05:38 PM
I don't have a rulebook handy but if that is indeed the rule it is WEAK. I agree with one thing, and probably only one, that John Madden said while he was rambling on one Monday night. He said that in today's NFL it seems like all of the rules are geared to make excuses as to why a catch isn't a catch and a fumble isn't a fumble. I agree with that 100%. Every close call seems to be an incompletion or no fumble in these 2 scenarios. It's weak, very weak.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:39 PM
EXACTLY!

Mike Ferreira said when explaining the call "he did'nt have possesion when he went to the ground".

How can you have the ball in your hands, roll one and a half times and NOT have possesion?

His exact words were:

"After review, the player caught the ball, lost it prior to getting his knee off the ground, therefore it is an incomplete pass". He wasn't arguing possession, he was stating that since his knee wasn't off the ground apparently he hadn't completed the football move.

Do I agree? No. But the NFL really should explain what a "football move" is so we can stop arguing.

PressCoverage
01-15-2006, 05:39 PM
false start? i dunno bout that... maybe a guy flexed his fingers... but the Colts totally tried to force the issue by storming across the line, and that was bone-headed... They deserved encroachment for being so assumptuous... Bad non call, one way or the other, for sure...

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 05:39 PM
I'm not. I'm disappointed that another game almost ended in controversy, but at least this time the deserving team won.

I still don't see why people aren't bringing up the non-called false start though. Yes, Pittsburgh didn't score on the drive, but two and a half minutes ticked off the clock and 20 yards moved. I don't know that field position would have been altered much since they only started at the 20 due to a touchback....but the Colts arguably would have run the football with 9 minutes still on the clock.

Besides, chaos theory states one call that's different changes the entire outcome of the game so who knows maybe Indy would have scored 41 points in 5 minutes.

But honestly, Pittsburgh deserved this one.
The whole point of this thread was the non-call do-over about the false start...but after that there was enough awful calls that people forget it. I have never seen a do-over in this league...never! So what exactly happened with people in the backfield and ball not being snapped and whistles blowing 20 seconds after the fact!

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:41 PM
Whatever. He had the ball in his hands...you and Mike Ferreira are the only two people on the Planet who think the ruling was right.


He never got OFF THE GROUND

you cant maintain possesion while on the ground if you lose the ball while you are still ON THE GROUND

and your previous post is also flawed

The referee said

That he caught the ball, but didnt maintain possesion, his left knee was down as his right knee kicked it out

You even misheard the call

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:41 PM
There were plenty of bad calls too bad they all favored the colts. It should have been a 10 pt game when it ended. And it should have ended much sooner. Total BS. And why as dolphins fans would be bias. Not like anyone had any vested intrest in pittsburg. And notice how everyone on cbs explains why its a bad call, it mirrors what we are saying.

You can't just say something was a bad call and then lift the points that came as a result off the scoreboard. It doesn't work that way.

Had the call been made differently, chaos theory states the rest of the events would be completely different and none of them would have been what happened in this game.

It was a bad call, but if I'm going to hear whining about this for the next century, I might have to leave message boards for a while.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:41 PM
He never got OFF THE GROUND

you cant maintain possesion while on the ground if you lose the ball while you are still ON THE GROUND

and your previous post is also flawed

The referee said

That he caught the ball, but didnt maintain possesion, his left knee was down as his right knee kicked it out

You even misheard the call

That isn't what he said :). read my above post

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:42 PM
His exact words were:

"After review, the player caught the ball, lost it prior to getting his knee off the ground, therefore it is an incomplete pass". He wasn't arguing possession, he was stating that since his knee wasn't off the ground apparently he hadn't completed the football move.

Do I agree? No. But the NFL really should explain what a "football move" is so we can stop arguing.

Thank you

Thats the most logical arguement anyone has made against the call so far

I still think the call was right based on the rule

But the rule is flawed and should be changed some

unifiedtheory
01-15-2006, 05:42 PM
His exact words were:

"After review, the player caught the ball, lost it prior to getting his knee off the ground, therefore it is an incomplete pass". He wasn't arguing possession, he was stating that since his knee wasn't off the ground apparently he hadn't completed the football move.

Do I agree? No. But the NFL really should explain what a "football move" is so we can stop arguing.

If you take that explanation by Ferreira then, in my opinion, it should have been a fumble. Argueing possesion is rediculous in my opinion. The guy had the ball in his hands and was on the ground.

I think you're right on the "football move" issue. The NFL has to define that. "Football move" is so damn generic.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:42 PM
The whole point of this thread was the non-call do-over about the false start...but after that there was enough awful calls that people forget it. I have never seen a do-over in this league...never! So what exactly happened with people in the backfield and ball not being snapped and whistles blowing 20 seconds after the fact!

That was pretty unbelievable.

I almost thought...ALMOST, for one moment...thought that the officials were going to review the play, even though it is not allowed by rule.

But it didn't happen, because they knew they'd all be suspended or fired for it.

Alex44
01-15-2006, 05:43 PM
That isn't what he said :). read my above post


I didnt mean exactly

I was giving the basic Idea of hit

and the fact that he said he lost the ball while still on the ground because of his knee

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:44 PM
If you take that explanation by Ferreira then, in my opinion, it should have been a fumble. Argueing possesion is rediculous in my opinion. The guy had the ball in his hands and was on the ground.

I think you're right on the "football move" issue. The NFL has to define that. "Football move" is so damn generic.

I have to admit I was rooting for the Colts in this one, as I'm a Peyton fan, but I thought the call was blown too.

I just don't like when people state if the Colts win, that would have been why. I still think that non-call false start really screwed the Colts as it really gave them little time to mount a rally. 9 minutes to rally means Edgerrin can run the ball to open up the passing game.

unifiedtheory
01-15-2006, 05:47 PM
I have to admit I was rooting for the Colts in this one, as I'm a Peyton fan, but I thought the call was blown too.

I just don't like when people state if the Colts win, that would have been why. I still think that non-call false start really screwed the Colts as it really gave them little time to mount a rally. 9 minutes to rally means Edgerrin can run the ball to open up the passing game.

Well, the non-false start call was a make up call for that HORRID non-call on the pass interference in the first half.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 05:51 PM
Well, the non-false start call was a make up call for that HORRID non-call on the pass interference in the first half.

It was definitely pass interference, but pass interference non-calls happen every game. That and phantom pass interference calls. The Fins (luckily) got away with quite of few of them late in the season.

Am I the only one here that thought when Roethlisberger was ruled down on that sack, that it was indeed a fumble? It didn't appear he was down to me when the ball was popped loose, and while a Steeler did fall on the ball, the whistles had started before then, so arguably the Colts may have stopped pursuing it.

gofins
01-15-2006, 06:01 PM
It does but you have to maintain possesion untill you get off the ground or you are touched down and the play is over

it was the right call
He was off the ground.

gofins
01-15-2006, 06:03 PM
and arguably, the non-false start call (which was clearly a Pittsburgh false start) took 2 and a half minutes off the clock, which if it had not been called, would have left Indy with a healthy 9 minutes to drive to comeback, which means Peyton Manning likely wouldn't have made such a throw across the middle because there would have been no desperation, and since it was a swing of 20 yards, it's possible that it might have impacted field position.
Very good point. I didn't notice but I gues they didn't reset the clock.

Flying Pencil
01-15-2006, 06:06 PM
Well, the non-false start call was a make up call for that HORRID non-call on the pass interference in the first half.

Flinches are missed all the time anyway. Still, this was nowhere near as bad as what happened to the Pats last year (Yes, a bad call against the Pats, imagine that).

When we were playing at New England, McIntosh or McMichael clearly flinched, and the official clearly saw it, but was going to let the play go on. So Rosie Colvin just ran over and shoved him (McIntosh) to force the issue. False Start called (proving that the official saw it and swallowed the whistle).

The next week when they faced Seattle, either Walter Jones, or, more likely, the tight end covering him, clearly flinched, and the official (probably a different one) clearly saw it, but was again going to let the play go on. So Colvin pushes that player to force the issue again. False Start called (proving that an official saw it and swallowed the whistle for the second week in a row). Personal Foul called on Colvin for shoving the guy because the official refused to call a blatant penalty that he clearly saw! :goof:

tylerdolphin
01-15-2006, 06:07 PM
I laughed until the tears were flowing when on the do-over the refs said something like "there was no movement on the play". The whole two teams were mingling LOL. Im glad I didnt favor either team because both of them should be pissed.

BTW, the NFL owes me for the TV I fried spitting my soda on on that Polamalu overturn. I almost hit Indy with that mouthful of soda.

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 06:11 PM
The NFL has now provided a precedent!...when in doubt...just say nothing happened...and lets do a DO-OVER!...what a joke!

DPlus47
01-15-2006, 07:21 PM
That overrule on the INT was the worst call I've ever seen in my life in any sport.

I am ASTOUNDED at how bad that call was...it makes that non call on the PI in the 1st half look good.


yes, yes it was and yes, yes it does...

DPlus47
01-15-2006, 07:23 PM
It was definitely pass interference, but pass interference non-calls happen every game. That and phantom pass interference calls. The Fins (luckily) got away with quite of few of them late in the season.

Am I the only one here that thought when Roethlisberger was ruled down on that sack, that it was indeed a fumble? It didn't appear he was down to me when the ball was popped loose, and while a Steeler did fall on the ball, the whistles had started before then, so arguably the Colts may have stopped pursuing it.

you're right about the fumble, but you can use your own logic in this situation: premature whistles happen all the time as well. i don't see DB's tackling receivers before the ball arrives every game, though, but your basic argument on that is correct.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 07:25 PM
It almost seems to me this year that the league may have wanted officials to back off a little on the re-emphasis of the 5 yard chucking rule due to the inflated offensive numbers last year and that officials are now afraid to throw flags at all.

DPlus47
01-15-2006, 07:33 PM
It almost seems to me this year that the league may have wanted officials to back off a little on the re-emphasis of the 5 yard chucking rule due to the inflated offensive numbers last year and that officials are now afraid to throw flags at all.

i see the logic in this, but more than throwing flags, they're afraid to make calls. this benefits the home team in a lot of cases. i, personally, would like to see a return to the pre-1979 pass defense rules. i know it'll never happen, though.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 07:42 PM
i see the logic in this, but more than throwing flags, they're afraid to make calls. this benefits the home team in a lot of cases. i, personally, would like to see a return to the pre-1979 pass defense rules. i know it'll never happen, though.

I wouldn't mind seeing it because I know while it might seem that it would hurt the offense, I think receivers are so athletic nowadays they might find a way to overcome the more physical defense allowed and reduce the points off of pass interference. Plus, the receivers would be allowed to be more aggressive in fighting for the football as well.

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 07:44 PM
I wanted to reiterate the beginning of this thread. We watched an NFL game where the ball was in play..QB calling out the signals...all of a sudden players ran across the line of scrimmage...the ball was not snapped...no whistles were blown...no flags were thrown...and then the Refs huddled up...then decided that.........NOTHING happened...no penalty...no play...no flag...nothing...what we just saw DID NOT happen...we would just do it over.
It was not a false start...it was not offside...the play was not blown dead....just forget it happened...lets do it again. I am 40 years old and have watched football since I was 10...I have never seen anything like that before...EVER!...What a disgrace!

caneproud117
01-15-2006, 07:45 PM
His knee was just coming off the ground at the exact moment he kicked it out with his left knee. If that's indisputable evidence, I'm the Easter Bunny. Even still I would consider a roll a football move. If he clearly has COMPLETE posession that's an interception, I don't care what the rule book states.

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 07:49 PM
I wanted to reiterate the beginning of this thread. We watched an NFL game where the ball was in play..QB calling out the signals...all of a sudden players ran across the line of scrimmage...the ball was not snapped...no whistles were blown...no flags were thrown...and then the Refs huddled up...then decided that.........NOTHING happened...no penalty...no play...no flag...nothing...what we just saw DID NOT happen...we would just do it over.
It was not a false start...it was not offside...the play was not blown dead....just forget it happened...lets do it again. I am 40 years old and have watched football since I was 10...I have never seen anything like that before...EVER!...What a disgrace!

I was a bit stunned by it. and here's why I think it happened.

They didn't see the false start (obviously), and saw the Colt players pointing at the Steelers, but in doing so, they had jumped offside.

They knew they couldn't make a call based on what the players were alleging, so they really couldn't realistically rule "false start" without getting lambasted by Steelers fans and press. They did, however, see the offsides by the Colts.

What should they have done? Probably just ruled the offsides, even if it was wrong, if they did not deep down inside believe that there was any false start.

But to say no contact was made was absolutely ridiculous, I agree. And don't think they won't get in a lot of heat for it. I doubt they'll be officiating the Super Bowl.

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 07:51 PM
I was a bit stunned by it. and here's why I think it happened.

They didn't see the false start (obviously), and saw the Colt players pointing at the Steelers, but in doing so, they had jumped offside.

They knew they couldn't make a call based on what the players were alleging, so they really couldn't realistically rule "false start" without getting lambasted by Steelers fans and press. They did, however, see the offsides by the Colts.

What should they have done? Probably just ruled the offsides, even if it was wrong, if they did not deep down inside believe that there was any false start.

But to say no contact was made was absolutely ridiculous, I agree. And don't think they won't get in a lot of heat for it. I doubt they'll be officiating the Super Bowl.
I totally agree...but this is an official game...with rules!...you make a call..offsides..false start..but you make a call!!!!!...you don't just says oops...I don't know...lets pretend that it never happened.

Roman529
01-15-2006, 07:53 PM
The reversal of Troy Palomala's inteception today was ridiculous...he clearly caught the ball and rolled over with the ball in his possession. The Steelers almost blew the game because of this (and Jerome Bettis' fumble), but we all knew Vanderchoke would miss it. :D

Metal Panda
01-15-2006, 07:55 PM
I totally agree...but this is an official game...with rules!...you make a call..offsides..false start..but you make a call!!!!!...you don't just says oops...I don't know...lets pretend that it never happened.

I agree. They should have just called offsides if they didn't see the false start, even if it was wrong. Because if they felt calling offsides was the "wrong" call, then obviously they must have believed there was a false start!

flintsilver7
01-15-2006, 07:59 PM
It does but you have to maintain possesion untill you get off the ground or you are touched down and the play is over

it was the right call

No, it wasn't.

You do not have to get up at all to establish possession.

There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that it was the right call, and only an extreme Colts homer will tell you otherwise.

NYPhinFan
01-15-2006, 11:03 PM
It is 6 hours after the game and I am still in total disbelief of the calls in this game. The only thing I know will upset me more will be the lame excuses the Director Of Officiating will make . The league would get so much more credit if they came out and admitted that some of the calls were poor and that they were being addressed than rather just say good call...next!

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:07 AM
I have read this ENTIRE thread from front to end... I watched the game today as well... I am truly puzzled by those that defend the overturn of the INT and in FULL agreement with those that have issues with the "NON-CALL" on False-Start or Off-Sides...

1st, I would like to offer my opinon of the "NON-CALL"... IT doesn't really matter whether it was a False-Start or Off-Sides... If it was "FALSE-START", based on the other calls made during the game, I BELIEVE that PITT would have been penalized!!! The issue is that the REFs did not call "OFF-SIDES" on the COLTS as there was no VISUAL evidence that PITT committed a False-Start!!!! The "DO-OVER" was totally trash!!!

2nd, I have watched professional Football for many more years than a lot of you arguing have been alive! The interception by TROY was that!!! An INT!!! How many INTs have you seen where the defender goes to the ground catching the ball?!!! The give on this play was the fact that when he tried to get up to run with it, he kicked it loose with his knee!!! It was still an interception!!! He fumbled the ball getting up from the ground!!! I don't care how you look at it... UNLESS the rule book says that an intercepting defender CAN NOT loose the ball after the interception has been COMPLETED!!!!!, then TROY intercepted the ball, fumbled it and recovered a fumble!!!:fire: :o

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 12:15 AM
I have read this ENTIRE thread from front to end... I watched the game today as well... I am truly puzzled by those that defend the overturn of the INT and in FULL agreement with those that have issues with the "NON-CALL" on False-Start or Off-Sides...

1st, I would like to offer my opinon of the "NON-CALL"... IT doesn't really matter whether it was a False-Start or Off-Sides... If it was "FALSE-START", based on the other calls made during the game, I BELIEVE that PITT would have been penalized!!! The issue is that the REFs did not call "OFF-SIDES" on the COLTS as there was no VISUAL evidence that PITT committed a False-Start!!!! The "DO-OVER" was totally trash!!!

2nd, I have watched professional Football for many more years than a lot of you arguing have been alive! The interception by TROY was that!!! An INT!!! How many INTs have you seen where the defender goes to the ground catching the ball?!!! The give on this play was the fact that when he tried to get up to run with it, he kicked it loose with his knee!!! It was still an interception!!! He fumbled the ball getting up from the ground!!! I don't care how you look at it... UNLESS the rule book says that an intercepting defender CAN NOT loose the ball after the interception has been COMPLETED!!!!!, then TROY intercepted the ball, fumbled it and recovered a fumble!!!:fire: :o
I am 40 yrs old and I totally agree with your assesment. I have NEVER seen the calls I witnessed today..NEVER!

Alex44
01-16-2006, 12:19 AM
I have read this ENTIRE thread from front to end... I watched the game today as well... I am truly puzzled by those that defend the overturn of the INT and in FULL agreement with those that have issues with the "NON-CALL" on False-Start or Off-Sides...

1st, I would like to offer my opinon of the "NON-CALL"... IT doesn't really matter whether it was a False-Start or Off-Sides... If it was "FALSE-START", based on the other calls made during the game, I BELIEVE that PITT would have been penalized!!! The issue is that the REFs did not call "OFF-SIDES" on the COLTS as there was no VISUAL evidence that PITT committed a False-Start!!!! The "DO-OVER" was totally trash!!!

2nd, I have watched professional Football for many more years than a lot of you arguing have been alive! The interception by TROY was that!!! An INT!!! How many INTs have you seen where the defender goes to the ground catching the ball?!!! The give on this play was the fact that when he tried to get up to run with it, he kicked it loose with his knee!!! It was still an interception!!! He fumbled the ball getting up from the ground!!! I don't care how you look at it... UNLESS the rule book says that an intercepting defender CAN NOT loose the ball after the interception has been COMPLETED!!!!!, then TROY intercepted the ball, fumbled it and recovered a fumble!!!:fire: :o

No the rulebook states you have to maintain possesion the entire time on the ground, his knee was still down when he lost it

It doesnt matter how many somersaults or tumbles he did

Its the correct call

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:22 AM
No the rulebook states you have to maintain possesion the entire time on the ground, his knee was still down when he lost it

It doesnt matter how many somersaults or tumbles he did

Its the correct call

If you watch the play JUNIOR, You will see that he DID maintain control of the ball to complete the interception!!! He LOST the ball when he tried to get up with it to run!!!

WHAT IS SO HARD to understand about that!!!

byroan
01-16-2006, 12:26 AM
:rofl: @ Alex22 defending a horrible call. Did you defend the Tuck Rule as well?

Alex44
01-16-2006, 12:27 AM
If you watch the play JUNIOR, You will see that he DID maintain control of the ball to complete the interception!!! He LOST the ball when he tried to get up with it to run!!!

WHAT IS SO HARD to understand about that!!!


One knee was still on the ground, before he got up his other knee knocked it out

One knee on the ground and you are DOWN it doesnt matter what he did with the ball, because he never got UP, He didnt maintain possesion the Entire time on the ground

Visit the rulebook before you resort to namecalling

maddendude
01-16-2006, 12:27 AM
On 4th and inches..we have just witnessed the first do over in NFL history!. Either its false start on the offense or offsides on the defense! To state that there was no flag on the play...then what the hell just happened?!?!..Nothing?!?! The ball was not snapped yet players interacted and moved past the line of scrimmage....The NFL should be ashamed of themselves...I have never seen anything like that before ever! This crew should be fired right after the game!


I think it was a good call. One thing that we all don't want is for a call to decide the game. This was a big play too cuz if they didnt get the 1st its indy ball, if they did, clock drains.
Cuz if they called it against the colts, they might be making the wrong decision (which is true), the other way...well they werent sure. So redo is the best way.

i hope someone understands what i wrote, i just write with what im thinking, might not make sense.(commas in teh wrong spot and such)

Alex44
01-16-2006, 12:28 AM
:rofl: @ Alex22 defending a horrible call. Did you defend the Tuck Rule as well?


If you look at the rules and apply them to the play, its the correct call

And no the tuck rule sucks

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:28 AM
One knee was still on the ground, before he got up his other knee knocked it out

One knee on the ground and you are DOWN it doesnt matter what he did with the ball, because he never got UP, He didnt maintain possesion the Entire time on the ground

Visit the rulebook before you resort to namecalling

OK... I see your problem now... THIS IS THE NFL... NOT COLLEGE FOOTBALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!:sidelol:

byroan
01-16-2006, 12:30 AM
its the correct call

No it's not.

Alex44
01-16-2006, 12:31 AM
OK... I see your problem now... THIS IS THE NFL... NOT COLLEGE FOOTBALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!:sidelol:


Call me slow but that didnt really make sense to me....explain please?

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:31 AM
Visit the rulebook before you resort to namecalling

I was not NAME CALLING by the way... Just pointing out that you are junior to me based on your posted age...:lol:

Alex44
01-16-2006, 12:32 AM
No it's not.

Yes it was

How can you even argue it wasnt?

fact is you have to maintain possesion the entire time you are on the ground throughout the catch

he lost it before both knees were up

how can you even argue it?

Alex44
01-16-2006, 12:33 AM
I was not NAME CALLING by the way... Just pointing out that you are junior to me based on your posted age...:lol:

Oh ok I get it :lol:

Your right about that though lol

byroan
01-16-2006, 12:33 AM
Yes it was

How can you even argue it wasnt?

fact is you have to maintain possesion the entire time you are on the ground throughout the catch

he lost it before both knees were up

how can you even argue it?

:sidelol: You're wrong on all counts. Go back and watch the play. Do you even know what the actual rule is? You have to maintain possesion when you're touched. There wasn't another player within 5 yards of him. He made a football move and fumbled the ball. Show me the link that defends your arguement.

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 12:33 AM
I think it was a good call. One thing that we all don't want is for a call to decide the game. This was a big play too cuz if they didnt get the 1st its indy ball, if they did, clock drains.
Cuz if they called it against the colts, they might be making the wrong decision (which is true), the other way...well they werent sure. So redo is the best way.
With all due respect...did you just say a redo was the best way???????...give me a second to digest that...Please tell me that was a joke! So if a ball is thrown and the ref is not sure about the call...pass interference or not...should we just have a do over???/...was it a fumble or did he have possesion???...too tough to call...lets just run it again...The problem is there is no such thing as a redo...it is either a penalty or it isn't...it is one or the other....you have quoted the rulebook all day long...can you please quote me the rule about the "do over"???????
Let me hear the Supervisor of Officials come out and say" we were really not sure about this play...so we decided to do it all over"...what do you think the chances of that will be???
So please tell me the page and number of the rule about the do over and I will learn something about football I have not learned in the past 30 years.
I originally thought this post was written by Alex22 so I am sorry to confuse the both of you.

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:35 AM
Call me slow but that didnt really make sense to me....explain please?

Just because the knee is down in the PRO sport level, that does not mean that the guy is down... That rule only applies in College Football...

In the PRO league, the guy has to be TOUCHED WHILE down, but he was not and made a move to get to his feet and in the act of doing so, knocked the ball loose... He then recovered his own fumble...:tongue:

maddendude
01-16-2006, 12:39 AM
My point is just that the call shouldnt decide the game,and potentially it could have. And they really werent sure bout the play. It truely was 50/50 to them.

And I think we're talking bout the wrong plays...Im talking bout the false start thing.

byroan
01-16-2006, 12:40 AM
"I felt they were cheating us. When the interception happened, everybody in the world knew that was an interception. Don't cheat us that bad. When they did that, they really want Peyton Manning and these guys to win the Super Bowl. They are just going to straight take it for them. I felt that they were like 'We don't even care if you know we're cheating. We're cheating for them.' "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/16/sports/football/16indy.html

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:41 AM
With all due respect...did you just say a redo was the best way???????...give me a second to digest that...Please tell me that was a joke! So if a ball is thrown and the ref is not sure about the call...pass interference or not...should we just have a do over???/...was it a fumble or did he have possesion???...too tough to call...lets just run it again...The problem is there is no such thing as a redo...it is either a penalty or it isn't...it is one or the other....you have quoted the rulebook all day long...can you please quote me the rule about the "do over"???????
Let me hear the Supervisor of Officials come out and say" we were really not sure about this play...so we decided to do it all over"...what do you think the chances of that will be???
So please tell me the page and number of the rule about the do over and I will learn something about football I have not learned in the past 30 years.
I originally thought this post was written by Alex22 so I am sorry to confuse the both of you.

Now now NYPHINFAN... Don't you think you are being a bit harsh here? :sidelol: :sidelol: :sidelol:

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 12:42 AM
My point is just that the call shouldnt decide the game,and potentially it could have. And they really werent sure bout the play. It truely was 50/50 to them.

And I think we're talking bout the wrong plays...Im talking bout the false start thing.
NO we are talking about the same exact play. There has never been a do over in pro football. There is no such rule...never has been. It is either a play run as is....a penalty on the steelers...or one on the colts...there is NO OTHER OPTION....it was a HUGE mistake on thier parts...and I believe that it will be one that they will be penalized for...even though I think they hope the league can give then a do over on the whole thing!

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:42 AM
My point is just that the call shouldnt decide the game,and potentially it could have. And they really werent sure bout the play. It truely was 50/50 to them.

And I think we're talking bout the wrong plays...Im talking bout the false start thing.

FALSE START or OFF SIDES??? Which is the REAL question???:sidelol:

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 12:43 AM
Now now NYPHINFAN... Don't you think you are being a bit harsh here? :sidelol: :sidelol: :sidelol:
Really don't want to be harsh...but have you ever...ever...ever heard of a do over in a game???

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:44 AM
Really don't want to be harsh...but have you ever...ever...ever heard of a do over in a game???

NEVER in my entire life as a football palyer or arm chair QB!!!:sidelol:

byroan
01-16-2006, 12:45 AM
Didn't they technically redo the play? They said there was no penalty on the play but the play never happened because they blew it dead.

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:46 AM
Didn't they technically redo the play? They said there was no penalty on the play but the play never happened because they blew it dead.

YES... I believe that they replayed the down!!! Correct me if I am wrong though...

wazzy
01-16-2006, 12:46 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/16/sports/football/16indy.html

Harpers wife is crazy!

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:48 AM
Harpers wife is crazy!

DON'T CHANGE THE SUBJECT!!!:sidelol:

Alex44
01-16-2006, 12:49 AM
Just because the knee is down in the PRO sport level, that does not mean that the guy is down... That rule only applies in College Football...

In the PRO league, the guy has to be TOUCHED WHILE down, but he was not and made a move to get to his feet and in the act of doing so, knocked the ball loose... He then recovered his own fumble...:tongue:


That would work except you have to maintain the possesion the whole time you are down on the ground

if you get touched on one knee you are down

if you lose the ball on one knee its incomplete because you are still on the ground

Coral Reefer
01-16-2006, 12:53 AM
That overrule on the INT was the worst call I've ever seen in my life in any sport.

I am ASTOUNDED at how bad that call was...it makes that non call on the PI in the 1st half look good.


Yeah, that was absolutely dumbfounding.....
I was actually rooting for the Colts to win the game until that happened. If the Colts had won the game after that it would have trumped the Patriot/Raider Tuck rule game as biggest injustice ever in an NFL game.

In all seriousness, I believe the NFL has serious problems with their officiating. It's horrendous and every single game something happens that is just unacceptable.

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 12:57 AM
That would work except you have to maintain the possesion the whole time you are down on the ground

if you get touched on one knee you are down

if you lose the ball on one knee its incomplete because you are still on the ground

OK DUDE!!! Let's see how I can explain this to you... HE HAD CONTROL OF THE BALL WHILE HE WAS ON THE GROUND!!! He kicked the ball loose when trying to get up to run with it!!! WHAT PART of this do you NOT UNDERSTAND?!!! Watch the replays!!! I am sure that they will be on ESPN, NFL NETWORK and all the rest of the sports channels!!!

Just admit you were thinking COLLEGE and everything will be fine!!!:yell:

flintsilver7
01-16-2006, 01:34 AM
No the rulebook states you have to maintain possesion the entire time on the ground, his knee was still down when he lost it

It doesnt matter how many somersaults or tumbles he did

Its the correct call

I want to see the section and the article that states this explicitly as it applies to his situation. I know you cannot do that because you're flat out wrong.

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 01:50 AM
Didn't they technically redo the play? They said there was no penalty on the play but the play never happened because they blew it dead.
The funny part then is why would you blow the play dead if there was no penalty????? What possible reason would you give to blow the whistle and stop play???...They totally screwed it up ..then said no penalty...then why was play stopped?...you can't have it both ways(talking about the officials)

flintsilver7
01-16-2006, 01:54 AM
The funny part then is why would you blow the play dead if there was no penalty????? What possible reason would you give to blow the whistle and stop play???...They totally screwed it up ..then said no penalty...then why was play stopped?...you can't have it both ways(talking about the officials)

It was a do-over. That's right, the infamous "do-over" that you haven't seen since you were 9.

Joey Porter might be fined, but he was right.

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 01:56 AM
What did Joey Porter say?

flintsilver7
01-16-2006, 02:00 AM
What did Joey Porter say?

Let me find the exact quote....there's a lot of it. This should do:

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/sports/steelerslive/s_413888.html

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 02:06 AM
Let me find the exact quote....there's a lot of it. This should do:

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/sports/steelerslive/s_413888.html
I dislike Joey Porter but I have to admit what he said ..though probably not true was running through the mind of most of America. Thats why these calls can not be left not scrutinized because it opens up the door wide for questioning the integrity of the officails and of the league.

flintsilver7
01-16-2006, 02:10 AM
I dislike Joey Porter but I have to admit what he said ..though probably not true was running through the mind of most of America. Thats why these calls can not be left not scrutinized because it opens up the door wide for questioning the integrity of the officails and of the league.

I said before, it bothers me because I don't want to think like this. I don't want to think that as I'm watching the game with six people and on the phone with six more that the game is out of the players' hands. I don't want to think that the NFL has turned into the WWF. A lot of older people think the NFL is fixed. I don't normally think that, but games like today make me really think that somebody - somebody with some sort of power - wants a certain team to win and that it's not entirely up to the players.

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 02:14 AM
Its funny because I feel exactly the same way...hated having that feeling for the first time...and I had no interest at all in who won the game..I was so pissed at the blatant way things seem to be slanted in this game.

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 02:15 AM
I dislike Joey Porter but I have to admit what he said ..though probably not true was running through the mind of most of America. Thats why these calls can not be left not scrutinized because it opens up the door wide for questioning the integrity of the officails and of the league.

I think that they should make the officiating crew a FULL TIME job... This stuff with seasonal help will NEVER solve the problem... IF they are FULL TIME and can have their salaries hit with fines, I bet you will see a much better game called!!!

Until they do that, we have to live with this type of crap every season...:mad:

maddendude
01-16-2006, 02:52 AM
They nvr called hike so its not offsides or lining up in neutral zone...and the colts players nvr touched the steelers, so its not encroachment. They nvr saw the false start. They COULDNT call a penalty on nothing or something that they didnt see. THey made a mistake in stopping the game. Thus they continue playing with no penalty

twg76
01-16-2006, 03:12 AM
The Steelers jumped. I think it was #66. It was a false start. Bad call.

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 11:15 AM
They nvr called hike so its not offsides or lining up in neutral zone...and the colts players nvr touched the steelers, so its not encroachment. They nvr saw the false start. They COULDNT call a penalty on nothing or something that they didnt see. THey made a mistake in stopping the game. Thus they continue playing with no penalty
I have watched the play a hundred times...I have TiVo....of course the players touched...the reason the ball was not snapped yet was that the officials blew the whistles...why again would you blow the whistle if there was no penalty?..why would you stop play for????...It was a TERRIBLE non call and one of the worst blatant incompetent calls EVER in a game!...

DPlus47
01-16-2006, 02:16 PM
I said before, it bothers me because I don't want to think like this. I don't want to think that as I'm watching the game with six people and on the phone with six more that the game is out of the players' hands. I don't want to think that the NFL has turned into the WWF. A lot of older people think the NFL is fixed. I don't normally think that, but games like today make me really think that somebody - somebody with some sort of power - wants a certain team to win and that it's not entirely up to the players.

this is so true. if the colts had won, i was thinking WWF all the way. the league doesn't need that, but that's what they're going to get when they come out and defend that call with all guns blazing. that game shouldn't have been close.

Spector
01-16-2006, 03:00 PM
That would work except you have to maintain the possesion the whole time you are down on the ground

if you get touched on one knee you are down

if you lose the ball on one knee its incomplete because you are still on the ground

Let me try to explain what you are saying in a way that makes you sound very very uninformed.

If the way you explain the rule is true, a player can catch the ball, roll over 10 times start to crawl around the field, always with atleast one knee in contact with the ground.

Over the course of 30 seconds he could technically do this with not one person touching him, but oh my god! he drops the ball!!! it is now an incomplete pass because he never got off the ground, and always had at least one knee on the ground nobody touching him, and he did not maintain possession of the football throughout his entire time on the ground.


If that is not good enough for you, then how about the player just rolling 20 yards with nobody touching him, but after rolling around the field like a crazy person in a straight jacket, kicks the ball out of his hand without ever getting up.

In your explination of the rule, both of these senarios would end in an incompletion

nick1
01-16-2006, 03:18 PM
the thing I'm mad about is that the refs overruled the INT by Polamalu, that was an INT plain and simple. He had the bad and when he came up it came out but that doesn't matter. Tons of times it's a catch when the ball comes out right after the receiver is about to get up. Joey Porter tells it like it is, http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/news/story?id=2294214

PassRush
01-16-2006, 03:50 PM
In theory, couldnt a player intercept a pass and fall to the ground, make forward pass to another defender and take it to the house? Why not, since the pass is not incomplete until it hits the ground and it is not caught until a knee touches the ground, wouldnt it be ruled as if the ball bounced off a player into the hands of another?

The director of officiating is going to be sweating bullets on NFL Network this week...

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 04:06 PM
In theory, couldnt a player intercept a pass and fall to the ground, make forward pass to another defender and take it to the house? Why not, since the pass is not incomplete until it hits the ground and it is not caught until a knee touches the ground, wouldnt it be ruled as if the ball bounced off a player into the hands of another?

The director of officiating is going to be sweating bullets on NFL Network this week...
As much as I would love to see him sweat...I truly doubt it. You will see a song and dance how they "got it right"..and what a great job they did. I will put up every dollar I have you will not hear one word about them making ANY mistakes this week.

DPlus47
01-16-2006, 04:34 PM
In theory, couldnt a player intercept a pass and fall to the ground, make forward pass to another defender and take it to the house? Why not, since the pass is not incomplete until it hits the ground and it is not caught until a knee touches the ground, wouldnt it be ruled as if the ball bounced off a player into the hands of another?



that's an interesting thought.

burger13
01-16-2006, 04:46 PM
from the NFL rulebook on NFL.com:

23. Possession: When a player controls the ball throughout the act of clearly touching both feet, or any other part of his body other than his hand(s), to the ground inbounds.

I think that it was clearly an INT to anyone who just wants to use logic, or common sense, or whatever you want to call it. But what the ref is trying to do, and what it is his job to do, it make the call according to guidelines and rules that are set up for them……rules that just seem nonsensical at times. ( see “Tuck Rule”).

By what the official said after the reversal, he interprets THROUGHOUT to mean the complete act of diving to the ground to catch the ball THROUGHT the act of trying to get up, which was all one maneuver by Polamalu…..and the ref didn’t not consider the act complete, until both knees were off the ground…..by which time he had knocked the ball loose.

These rules leave room for interpretation…….The one thing that no one has brought up is that these refs are almost certainly instructed on how they are expected to interpret the rules…..and judging by the confidence with which the ref gave his explanation, it leads me to believe that he had received some instructions pertaining to that rule.

IMO, the reason the rules are so vague, is to get the NFL out of jams just like this one. The NFL has a rule that makes no sense….but now has an out to simply say that one official used his judgement, and let all the fans in the world mad at the official for his poor judgement, and the NFL as a whole gets a pass…..just like the tuck rule.

As for the false start/encroachment non-call……..there is no good explanation for that.

Jal
01-16-2006, 04:57 PM
I have watched the play a hundred times...I have TiVo....of course the players touched...the reason the ball was not snapped yet was that the officials blew the whistles...why again would you blow the whistle if there was no penalty?..why would you stop play for????...It was a TERRIBLE non call and one of the worst blatant incompetent calls EVER in a game!...

Maybe the refs were suffering from premature penalization???:D :goof:

PressCoverage
01-16-2006, 05:23 PM
anyone who catches the explanation by the head of officiating guy on NFL Network, would you please post here what was said?

flintsilver7
01-16-2006, 05:50 PM
from the NFL rulebook on NFL.com:

23. Possession: When a player controls the ball throughout the act of clearly touching both feet, or any other part of his body other than his hand(s), to the ground inbounds.

I think that it was clearly an INT to anyone who just wants to use logic, or common sense, or whatever you want to call it. But what the ref is trying to do, and what it is his job to do, it make the call according to guidelines and rules that are set up for them……rules that just seem nonsensical at times. ( see “Tuck Rule”).

By what the official said after the reversal, he interprets THROUGHOUT to mean the complete act of diving to the ground to catch the ball THROUGHT the act of trying to get up, which was all one maneuver by Polamalu…..and the ref didn’t not consider the act complete, until both knees were off the ground…..by which time he had knocked the ball loose.

These rules leave room for interpretation…….The one thing that no one has brought up is that these refs are almost certainly instructed on how they are expected to interpret the rules…..and judging by the confidence with which the ref gave his explanation, it leads me to believe that he had received some instructions pertaining to that rule.

IMO, the reason the rules are so vague, is to get the NFL out of jams just like this one. The NFL has a rule that makes no sense….but now has an out to simply say that one official used his judgement, and let all the fans in the world mad at the official for his poor judgement, and the NFL as a whole gets a pass…..just like the tuck rule.

As for the false start/encroachment non-call……..there is no good explanation for that.

It's possible the official was thinking along those lines, but you cannot in any sort of sane manner suggest that falling down and rolling over twice constitutes a single "act" akin to getting two feet down. Polamalu managed to hit his elbow, both knees, his head, and in fact his entire body while maintaining possession.

It's an official mistake now:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs05/news/story?id=2294309

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 06:04 PM
If you look at the rules and apply them to the play, its the correct call

And no the tuck rule sucks
Son...the NFL...which never ever admits to a mistake...just admitted that the Refs call on that Interception was DEAD wrong...and so was all your rule quoting. This was about as obvious to the most of us as any single play I have watched in 30 yrs of football!

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 06:16 PM
It does but you have to maintain possesion untill you get off the ground or you are touched down and the play is over

it was the right call
I didn't need to look at a rule book to know that call was DEAD WRONG

gofins
01-16-2006, 07:10 PM
It does but you have to maintain possesion untill you get off the ground or you are touched down and the play is over

it was the right call



it was the right call, revisit the rulebook when your less steamed about it

They said he lost possesion when his knee kicked it out

at that point he was still on the ground

therefore its an incompletion and the right call

3 words

MAINTAINED POSSESION THROUGHOUT

which he didnt have

One knee was still on the ground so therefor he is still down


people need to look at the play again when they are less angry

He caught it while diving through the air

He rolled around WHICH DOESNT MATTER YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE BALL THE ENTIRE TIME YOU ARE ON THE GROUND

while one knee was still down he kicked it out

call on the field is overturned

Its the right call

He never got OFF THE GROUND

you cant maintain possesion while on the ground if you lose the ball while you are still ON THE GROUND

and your previous post is also flawed

The referee said

That he caught the ball, but didnt maintain possesion, his left knee was down as his right knee kicked it out

You even misheard the call

Thank you

Thats the most logical arguement anyone has made against the call so far

I still think the call was right based on the rule

But the rule is flawed and should be changed some

No the rulebook states you have to maintain possesion the entire time on the ground, his knee was still down when he lost it

It doesnt matter how many somersaults or tumbles he did

Its the correct call

One knee was still on the ground, before he got up his other knee knocked it out

One knee on the ground and you are DOWN it doesnt matter what he did with the ball, because he never got UP, He didnt maintain possesion the Entire time on the ground

Visit the rulebook before you resort to namecalling

If you look at the rules and apply them to the play, its the correct call

And no the tuck rule sucks

Yes it was

How can you even argue it wasnt?

fact is you have to maintain possesion the entire time you are on the ground throughout the catch

he lost it before both knees were up

how can you even argue it?
Hey Alex..............http://www.superbowl.com/news/story/9168866
Sorry. Just had to rub it in since you argued and argued and argued and argued..........................:D

gofins
01-16-2006, 07:12 PM
anyone who catches the explanation by the head of officiating guy on NFL Network, would you please post here what was said?
My post above has the link.:up:

BlitPhinFan
01-16-2006, 07:18 PM
My post above has the link.:up:

EVIL! :evil:

:sidelol:

He did have it coming though.:D

NYPhinFan
01-16-2006, 07:27 PM
Now that the league has admitted there were wrong on the interception...I would love to hear what they say now about the "do over" play(which had first started this thread way back. How do you justify just running a do-over????

Maynard the Hammer
01-16-2006, 07:36 PM
at least they realized they were wrong. the both knees up thing makes no sense at all--what if the player rolls into the endzone? its not a TD untill he gets up???:lol:

FINintheMOON
01-16-2006, 07:43 PM
Well I gues we can finally put this puppy to rest!!!:lol:

gofins
01-17-2006, 01:13 AM
ttt

nick1
01-17-2006, 08:58 AM
I can't beleive they admitted a mistake

Metal Panda
01-20-2006, 01:46 AM
Let me find the exact quote....there's a lot of it. This should do:

http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/sports/steelerslive/s_413888.html

Joey Porter's wrong, although his frustration was forgivable. Conspiracy theories are for serious nerds.

DPlus47
01-20-2006, 03:20 PM
Conspiracy theories are for serious nerds.

certain kinds, maybe. if everyone continues blindly trusting everything the corporate establishment is feeding us now, our children will learn about the bill of rights as a "historical document."

Metal Panda
01-21-2006, 03:20 PM
certain kinds, maybe. if everyone continues blindly trusting everything the corporate establishment is feeding us now, our children will learn about the bill of rights as a "historical document."

Obviously I was referring to football.

Not overzealous neo-conservative republicans. :) (ducks)