PDA

View Full Version : Steelers/Colts: Eating Some Crow?



Dom Heffner
01-15-2006, 04:03 PM
Looks like Indy is playing flat.

I'll become the biggest Broncoes fan in the world next week if the Colts lose. :)

Playadlc
01-15-2006, 04:05 PM
The Colts aren't blocking anyone.

One of the worst offensive line performances I have seen in a while.

WVRed
01-15-2006, 04:11 PM
What did Peyton Manning do to make his line turn against him?

21-3 now.

Falls City Beer
01-15-2006, 04:12 PM
Colts chokesville. I had a feeling we'd see this happen.

Playadlc
01-15-2006, 04:17 PM
I mean, the Colts look embarrassing out there.

It's all about pressure.

captainmorgan07
01-15-2006, 04:19 PM
pathetic performance so much for super bowl contenders peyton is running around like a kid at chucky cheese with free tokens thats' how bad his line is blocking

Playadlc
01-15-2006, 04:20 PM
So now Peyton has the ability to overrule Dungy on calls?

Who is the coach here?

WVRed
01-15-2006, 04:26 PM
So now Peyton has the ability to overrule Dungy on calls?

Who is the coach here?

I noticed that too. Unfortunately, CBS said that took "guts" to do what he did and didn't even acknowledge if there was a sideline exchange between Manning and Dungy afterwards.

I'd love to see it.

Dom Heffner
01-15-2006, 04:30 PM
I think wrapping it up early hurts a team. They haven't played a meaningful game in two months.

Another week of listening to Porter's mouth is all I can take. Go Broncos.

Playadlc
01-15-2006, 04:56 PM
That overturn might have very well been the worst call I have ever seen in an NFL game.

Falls City Beer
01-15-2006, 04:58 PM
Instant replay is an abomination. Reason # six trillion that football sucks.

Playadlc
01-15-2006, 05:00 PM
If the Colts win this one, I don't think I will stop laughing for a good 5 days.

Caveat Emperor
01-15-2006, 05:02 PM
I'm by no means a Steelers fan...

But if you ever wanted to believe that games are influenced by the NFL offices in New York, this was the best piece of evidence you're ever going to get.

That was, quite possibly, one of the worst screwjob replay calls I've ever seen in my life -- and after a LONG time that the official was talking to someone. Surprise, surprise -- the league's top team and best story in the postseason gets new life and scores a touchdown.

You combine that with the horrific "No call" pass interference on Randel-El earlier in the game, the "no call" encroachment in the 4th quarter, and the "no-call" safety against Manning...

It's suspicious...

Playadlc
01-15-2006, 05:17 PM
I'm sure Bettis envisioned a different scenario for his last NFL carry.

Caveat Emperor
01-15-2006, 05:17 PM
I'm sure Bettis envisioned a different scenario for his last NFL carry.

If they lose, he simply cannot retire.

Playadlc
01-15-2006, 05:18 PM
Not even close.

redsfanmia
01-15-2006, 06:06 PM
I cant believe the Colts played like that. They flat out got dominated in every facet of the game and had no business coming as close as they did. As a Colts fan im now done getting excited about the playoffs because they will never win the super bowl as long as Peyton Manning is the quarterback and Tony Dungy is the coach. In the immortal words of Bill Walton that was very dissappointing.

redsfanmia
01-15-2006, 06:06 PM
Is crow better served cold or is there anyway to cook it to make it better? Im going to be eating alot of it.

Mutaman
01-15-2006, 06:08 PM
There really needs to be an investigation of the Polamalu reversal. The issue is not whether Polamalu intercepted the pass, the issue is-- was there "incontrovertable visual evidence" for the call on the field that he did intercept the pass to be overturned. Of course there wasn't. A reversal that defies all common sense.

Of course I assume that we all agree that there is plenty of "incontrovertable visual evidence" that the Indianapolis Colts are the most overated team in the history of sport.

redsfanmia
01-15-2006, 06:11 PM
[QUOTE=Mutaman

Of course I assume that we all agree that there is plenty of "incontrovertable visual evidence" that the Indianapolis Colts are the most overated team in the history of sport.[/QUOTE]
Im a Colts fan and I think you can throw Peyton Manning as one of the most overrated players in the history of sports as well.

Caveat Emperor
01-15-2006, 06:20 PM
The NFL really needs to take a hard look at what constitutes "possession" for the purposes of making a reception or interception.

With this call, the call last week against Tampa in the end zone, etc. there needs to be an official league clarification of the matter. All of this crap about two feet down, knee down, falling to the ground untouched, falling to the ground while touched, making a "football move," etc. It's too confusing, and the league needs to simplify and/or clarify the rules so that these calls don't end up in confusion.

And, someone needs to tell officials that it's OK to say "The replay does not show anything conclusive, the ruling on the field stands."

SteelSD
01-15-2006, 06:25 PM
I'm by no means a Steelers fan...

But if you ever wanted to believe that games are influenced by the NFL offices in New York, this was the best piece of evidence you're ever going to get.

That was, quite possibly, one of the worst screwjob replay calls I've ever seen in my life -- and after a LONG time that the official was talking to someone. Surprise, surprise -- the league's top team and best story in the postseason gets new life and scores a touchdown.

You combine that with the horrific "No call" pass interference on Randel-El earlier in the game, the "no call" encroachment in the 4th quarter, and the "no-call" safety against Manning...

It's suspicious...

I'd say that it's beyond suspicious at this point.

There wasn't a way in the world that INT could have been overturned unless an official were looking to somehow benefit the Colts. Using his own logic, no receiver could catch a pass while on the ground without then popping up to his feet while still controlling the ball. It's inconceivable that the play could be overturned. But it was.

And yes, the Pass Interference was ridiculous. The "no call" Encroachment moreso, even if it caused less actual damage. It's impossible not to call a penalty on that one way or the other. There's no "start over" rule when an entire defensive line jumps offsides and causes the right Guard (or Tackle?) to stand up from his set position. It can't happen. But it did.

Pittsburgh overcame all of it (by some miracle named "drunk kicker"), but you'll lose 99 times out of 100 when you have to overcome a team the caliber of the Colts, a crowd as loud as theirs, AND an officiating crew that is consistently looking for some way to allow them not to lose. It's almost inconceivable to me that an officiating crew can be that bad without some kind of direction to be that bad.

Unless one of those officials gets fired this week, I have zero confidence in the integrity of officiating in the NFL. If one gets fired, I'll have a little more confidence than that. But not much.

cincinnati chili
01-15-2006, 06:30 PM
I cant believe the Colts played like that. They flat out got dominated in every facet of the game and had no business coming as close as they did. As a Colts fan im now done getting excited about the playoffs because they will never win the super bowl as long as Peyton Manning is the quarterback and Tony Dungy is the coach. In the immortal words of Bill Walton that was very dissappointing.

I didn't watch the game, but what exactly did Peyton do wrong? His stat line looked pretty good.

SteelSD
01-15-2006, 06:34 PM
I didn't watch the game, but what exactly did Peyton do wrong? His stat line looked pretty good.

He couldn't block for himself.

That's about that he did wrong except for throw an interception that won't show up in the box score.

redsfanmia
01-15-2006, 06:35 PM
I didn't watch the game, but what exactly did Peyton do wrong? His stat line looked pretty good.
He had happy feet and was awful in the first half when the Colts dug the hole that was just too deep, I have seen it time and time again with Peyton, a great regular season quarterback who just doesnt have what it takes to lead his team to the promised land. The offensive line play did not help today but he made alot of bad throws today. Alot of what im saying is just releasing some frustration but he still needs to get improve in pressure situations.

TeamBoone
01-15-2006, 06:40 PM
I cant believe the Colts played like that. They flat out got dominated in every facet of the game and had no business coming as close as they did. As a Colts fan im now done getting excited about the playoffs because they will never win the super bowl as long as Peyton Manning is the quarterback and Tony Dungy is the coach. In the immortal words of Bill Walton that was very dissappointing.

I'm shocked that you are blaming Manning. His offensive line let him down all game long.

Yes, he made some bad throws, but as far as I could see, it was because he was constantly rushed.... by a defense that the offense couldn't block.

redsfanmia
01-15-2006, 06:44 PM
I'm shocked that you are blaming Manning. His offensive line let him down all game long.
I agree, its just frustration talking. I think the Steelers out played and out game planned the Colts. It actually think most of the blame can be laid on the feet of whoever it was that decided it was smart to have most of the starters take a month off.

Caveat Emperor
01-15-2006, 06:53 PM
I agree, its just frustration talking. I think the Steelers out played and out game planned the Colts. It actually think most of the blame can be laid on the feet of whoever it was that decided it was smart to have most of the starters take a month off.

I love Tony Dungy like no other coach in the NFL, as a Buccaneers fan, but watching today was a sobering reminder as to why the franchise decided that they had to go in a different direction.

I don't know what it is about him, but his teams just do not show up ready to play in the postseason. The way the Colts looked in the first half reminded me so much of the way Tampa would come out against teams in the first half in the playoffs. Sometimes their defense would hold the fort down until the offense got in synch...other times, they'd just get blown out and the game would be over before halftime.

I think the problem with the Colts today started at the very top.

redsfanmia
01-15-2006, 07:00 PM
I love Tony Dungy like no other coach in the NFL, as a Buccaneers fan, but watching today was a sobering reminder as to why the franchise decided that they had to go in a different direction

I think the problem with the Colts today started at the very top.
I agree. Tony Dungy is a great person and is a great coach but he is not the coach to lead you to the superbowl.

Mutaman
01-15-2006, 07:15 PM
And, someone needs to tell officials that it's OK to say "The replay does not show anything conclusive, the ruling on the field stands."

Absolutely. It should be so simple. If the replay doesn't show that the call on the field was clearly wrong, then don't reverse it. Thats what the rule says.

TeamCasey
01-15-2006, 07:38 PM
They were asleep in the first half. Manning got absolutely no protection. That glimmer of hope made it interesting, but damn!

redsfanmia
01-15-2006, 07:57 PM
Well I can look on the brightside of things, now I can stop being dissappointed by the Colts and move on to being dissappointed by the Reds.

GAC
01-15-2006, 08:48 PM
I didn't watch the game, but what exactly did Peyton do wrong? His stat line looked pretty good.

He (they) had a horrendous first half (123 total yards at halftime, 74 in the air)...and most of that came on that last drive right before the half. They then recovered somewhat in the second thanks to James being able to run the ball. But the pressure on Peyton was so intense he was throwing the ball all over the place and was out of rhythm.

Dungy was just out coached IMO by Cowher and LeBeau. And I'm sure they were studying (and mimicked) the SD game.

Mike Doss of Indy had a terrible game.

The officiating? You guys have already covered it well. It was downright atrocious. Morelli's explanation...."I had the defender catching the ball. Before he got up, he hit it with his leg with his other leg still on the ground. Therefore, he did not complete the catch. And then he lost the ball. It came out, and so we made the play an incomplete pass."

Yeah, right. :rolleyes:

So now explain the blatant no call on the INT and the no call on the "whatever that play was where everyone jumped, and contact WAS made!" :lol:

The Steelers deserved to win this game, and the score should have never been this close. Anyone who watched the game, regardless of loyalties, had to see that.

OnBaseMachine
01-15-2006, 09:02 PM
Reason #746 why I can't stand the NoFunLeague.

The refs are horrible. Flag happy and terrible calls. This game had to be fixed; how else can you explain overturning that INT?

GAC
01-15-2006, 09:33 PM
Anyone see the final play of the Chicago-Panthers game. Not that Chicago had a chance of winning it, but that was PI also IMO (and not called). It was a quick slant pass, and the Panther defender made contact from behind (tripped up) the receiver IMO.

KronoRed
01-15-2006, 10:04 PM
Robots for Refs

Danny Serafini
01-15-2006, 10:38 PM
I'm not buying this anti-Steeler conspiracy theory garbage. Admittedly, the Polamalu INT was the single worst call I've ever seen on a review. But there were calls that went the Steelers way too. I can't imagine why any Steeler fans would complain about that garble with the no call on the supposed Colts offside. Alan Faneca flinched, it was a false start and didn't get called. It should have been 4th and 6, instead it remained 4th and 1 and Pittsburgh picked it up. Yeah, the Steelers really got screwed there. :rolleyes: How about when Bob Sanders was (correctly) flagged for grabbing Hines Ward's facemask, yet there was no call on Ward when he grabbed Sanders' facemask just as blatantly at the same time?

I honestly don't recall the pass interference play, but really it's not something to get too worked up about since it's purely a judgement call. It's not a black and white rule, so what are you going to do? PI is a lot like holding, it happens a lot more often than it's called, and sometimes you get away with it. There were plays that went both ways against both teams in both games today, that's just the way it goes with that.

It certainly wasn't the best officiated game I've ever seen, or anywhere close. But to suggest there was some sort of anti-Steeler bias in the officiating today is just silly. Time to take off the fan goggles and look at things objectively.

deltachi8
01-15-2006, 10:59 PM
it all evens out. im not into conspiracy theories. now that my heart rate is normal, i can look forward to next week.

WVRed
01-15-2006, 11:02 PM
Lets talk about something that is really grinding my gears right now.

Its hard for Dungy to coach the team when he really has no control.

Case in point, 4th down, Peyton sends the punt team OFF the field, calls the offense back to the huddle, and gets the first down. By the looks of things, Dungy was flat-out shocked, and they showed Cowher, who I think even looked like he felt sorry for Dungy.

Being Dungy is a good Christian man, I didnt expect him to get up in Peyton's face, but i'm betting sometime this week, Dungy will say something to him.

If it were me, even though the end result would have been tarred, feathered, and ridden out of town on a rail, I would have pulled Manning and played Sorgi the rest of the game. Would it have eliminated all hope? Probably. But at least it would have let the players known, this is MY team, and I will run things as I see them.

SteelSD
01-15-2006, 11:11 PM
There were plays that went both ways against both teams in both games today, that's just the way it goes with that.

No. That's not "just the way it goes" when you're talking about the particular errors that were made today. What an excuse for the officiating we've seen this offseason: "That's just the way it goes."

Well, I'll tell you what- if it keeps "going" the way it's going, the NFL is going to be right below professional wrestling and the boxing federations on the "Officials Integrity" list. It's beyond a competency issue.

The officiating in that game was abyssmal. Don't try to act as if one team didn't get the vast VAST majority of the benefit from it.

And I fail to see how anyone can grump about a slight "flinch" made by Faneca when the entire Colts offensive line is allowed to move freely- even after being in the "set" position. Could a false start been called on Faneca? Yep. But if it wasn't, there was absolutely zero room for the officals to give the Colts a "do over" even if they didn't touch a Steelers player because the Colts 'en masse intrusion into the neutral zone drew the Steelers LG or LT up from the "set" position. There was no way that a call couldn't be made there. By rule, if they didn't call Faneca for a False Start, they couldn't do what they did. Simply couldn't do it.


I honestly don't recall the pass interference play, but really it's not something to get too worked up about since it's purely a judgement call. It's not a black and white rule, so what are you going to do?

It is a black and white rule. When the defender is hanging onto the receiver like a Mr. T starter set before the ball arrives (particularly as badly as that play), you have to make the call. You're obligated to because you're an NFL official and you've promised to enforce the rules of the game. But then, you don't remember it so I'm sure you're a little bit foggy on the severity of the infraction.


It certainly wasn't the best officiated game I've ever seen, or anywhere close. But to suggest there was some sort of anti-Steeler bias in the officiating today is just silly. Time to take off the fan goggles and look at things objectively.

Official took about 3 minutes for a review that anyone with a brain could have completed in 10 seconds and took plenty of that time in conference with- at minimum- the replay booth looking for a way to give the Colts back the ball after the ruling on the field was "Interception".

That's as objective as it gets.

Falls City Beer
01-15-2006, 11:16 PM
Yep. My objective take: it was a terribly called game, and it heavily favored Indy.

(And Kimo took a cheap, low shot at Palmer's knee). ;)

SteelSD
01-15-2006, 11:28 PM
Yep. My objective take: it was a terribly called game, and it heavily favored Indy.

(And Kimo took a cheap, low shot at Palmer's knee). ;)

Yeah yeah. I've heard that story...

The Bengals lost the NFL MVP early in the game and were able to overcome that extreme setback and win their first playoff game ever.

Oh wait...that was SEATTLE...;)

(BTW, I think it's great that Boss and GIK let us talk football on the non-baseball side here. But I hope we can all agree not to take any of this stuff over to the baseball side of things. I know I'm gonna' leave it all here.)

paintmered
01-15-2006, 11:53 PM
Yeah yeah. I've heard that story...

The Bengals lost the NFL MVP early in the game and were able to overcome that extreme setback and win their first playoff game ever.

Oh wait...that was SEATTLE...;)

(BTW, I think it's great that Boss and GIK let us talk football on the non-baseball side here. But I hope we can all agree not to take any of this stuff over to the baseball side of things. I know I'm gonna' leave it all here.)

You say that like it's difficult to stop Washington's offense. They are Chicago-esque when it comes to scoring points.

Falls City Beer
01-16-2006, 12:02 AM
(BTW, I think it's great that Boss and GIK let us talk football on the non-baseball side here. But I hope we can all agree not to take any of this stuff over to the baseball side of things. I know I'm gonna' leave it all here.)

Lord, I couldn't care less about football--the Bengals or Steelers or anyone. I'm just giving you a hard time about a play. Severe sports-boredom.

SteelSD
01-16-2006, 12:21 AM
Lord, I couldn't care less about football--the Bengals or Steelers or anyone. I'm just giving you a hard time about a play. Severe sports-boredom.

Well fine then! Be that way. ;)

<grumble>

SteelSD
01-16-2006, 12:59 AM
Is it just me or does anyone else see the irony in Chad Johnson doing commercials for Fathead wall posters?

Dom Heffner
01-16-2006, 02:30 AM
Is it just me or does anyone else see the irony in Chad Johnson doing commercials for Fathead wall posters?

Although his head is not literally as big as Rex Grossman's. That dude's melon is huge.

Caveat Emperor
01-16-2006, 05:21 AM
I'm not buying this anti-Steeler conspiracy theory garbage. Admittedly, the Polamalu INT was the single worst call I've ever seen on a review. But there were calls that went the Steelers way too. I can't imagine why any Steeler fans would complain about that garble with the no call on the supposed Colts offside. Alan Faneca flinched, it was a false start and didn't get called. It should have been 4th and 6, instead it remained 4th and 1 and Pittsburgh picked it up. Yeah, the Steelers really got screwed there. :rolleyes: How about when Bob Sanders was (correctly) flagged for grabbing Hines Ward's facemask, yet there was no call on Ward when he grabbed Sanders' facemask just as blatantly at the same time?

My NFL alliegences (to my Bucs) are well documented. I'm by no means a Steelers apologist or Steelers fan. I actually root for Dungy because I think he's a good cat that just as a tough time motivating teams and coaching his teams up in the playoffs.

But, as an impartial fan (with no money on the outcome) watching todays games, the overwhelming thought in my mind was: The Steelers, for whatever reason, are getting legitimately screwed by the officiating team. I mean, I've watched games before and thought the officiating was bad, and I joke about the league paying extra attention to teams like Chicago, Washington and Boston because the media markets are so much bigger -- but today was the first time I've ever been tempted to come to the conclusion that the refs were throwing the game one direction on orders of the league. It's a scary thought -- way too "Conspiracy nut" for my tastes.

You're right: calls go both ways in a football game. But, when you look objectively at the way the replay on the of the Polamalu, there is simply no way a sane human being could see any visual evidence to overturn the ruling on the field. When an official spends as much time as that one did reviewing the play, the only conclusion I can come to is that they were looking for some reason to overturn the INT and give Indy another shot at getting back into the game. It went beyond being a horrible call and into the realm of purposefully attempting to overturn the outcome of a play -- which is not what replay is at all designed to do.

As for the "False Start" by Faneca. If the Refs saw a false start, then by all means they should flag the false start. I agree, Faneca could've been flagged on that play. But, the refs did not see Faneca flinch. Nobody threw a flag up, nobody indicated that an offensive linemen had broken out of his stance. What did happen, however, were Colts players charging across the line at the Steelers. If the refs did not see a false start, then this by definition has to be an encroachment foul or a nuetral zone violation. You can't just wipe off a play (on 4th down) like that, it's a penalty on one side or the other.

Incidentally, I agree completely with Steel on this point: there should be something done about the gyrating that goes on with Manning, Brady, and other quarterbacks who adjust their plays at the line of scrimmage. Once the linemen drop into a 3 point stance, I was under the assumption they weren't allowed to move a muscle, yet every week I see Colts linemen and Patriots linemen moving around, turning around to hear their quarterbacks, etc. That should be a false start every time. I'd be in favor of a rule change that forbids offensive linemen to move at all once they've established position in their stances, and forbids the quarterback to move (except to recieve the snap of the ball) once he establishes position (two feet down) under center for the snap or behind center for the shotgun.


I honestly don't recall the pass interference play, but really it's not something to get too worked up about since it's purely a judgement call. It's not a black and white rule, so what are you going to do? PI is a lot like holding, it happens a lot more often than it's called, and sometimes you get away with it. There were plays that went both ways against both teams in both games today, that's just the way it goes with that.

It was bad...even the announcers were totally speechless and unable to say anything other than it was a horrible no-call. Remember, at this point in the game, Pittsburgh was really looking to put Indy away, and this non-call saved the Colts about 50 yards of field position. Antwaan Randel-El was basically tackled while running his route, with no call made.


It certainly wasn't the best officiated game I've ever seen, or anywhere close. But to suggest there was some sort of anti-Steeler bias in the officiating today is just silly. Time to take off the fan goggles and look at things objectively.

I am looking at this objectively, and what I see doesn't add up. These aren't fan goggles -- these are NFL fan goggles that saw the "darling" team of the league catch every break possible today at the hands of the officiating crew, and at a certain point things stop being coincidences.

RedsBaron
01-16-2006, 07:52 AM
1. I agree-the referees called a terrible game and appeared to ignore the rules on at least two occasions, the no-call on the either Fancea moved or the Colts were offsides, and the Polamalu interception.
2. I agree-how does any QB get away with overruling his coach, as Manning did by sending the punting unit off the field?
3. Manning did have "happy feet", but the Steelers defense had a lot to do with making his feet happy. Manning had limited pass protection the entire game.
4. I thought Mannin made a very poor decision on third and 2 from the Steelers 28 on the final play before the Vanderjagt field goal miss. I can understand taking a shot at the endzone and a TD on second and 2, but on third and 2 I believe Manning should have tried to pick up the first down rather than go for a TD again. With a first down he could have run off a couple of more plays and perhaps at least have then been in position for a shorter field goal try.
5. I'm not a Broncos fan, but I hope they whip the Steelers.

Redsfaithful
01-16-2006, 08:02 AM
2. I agree-how does any QB get away with overruling his coach, as Manning did by sending the punting unit off the field?

Dungy said after the game that he had told Manning to go for it through his headset. Whether he was telling the truth or simply trying to save face is impossible to know, but there you go.

Ravenlord
01-16-2006, 08:32 AM
Admittedly, the Polamalu INT was the single worst call I've ever seen on a review.

"The ball was not fumbled because the carrier was in forward motion."-head referee of the Browns/Broncos game in 1988 or 1989.

less than 5 minutes left, Elway handed off to his RB, the RB made it to the line of scrimage, Michael Dean Perry basically ripped the ball out of the dude's hand and started running, to be tackled about 5 yards later. flag is thrown, officials confer, and come up with the peace of crap i quoted from the ref. the Broncos get the ball back, and proceed to score , taking the lead and winning the game.

Browns miss the playoffs as a result of the loss, the NFL profusely apologizes with utmost sincerity to Cleveland two weeks later, citing that it might be the worst call in league history.

and to top it off, that's my first football memory.

traderumor
01-16-2006, 09:41 AM
Yeah yeah. I've heard that story...

The Bengals lost the NFL MVP early in the game and were able to overcome that extreme setback and win their first playoff game ever.

Oh wait...that was SEATTLE...;)

(BTW, I think it's great that Boss and GIK let us talk football on the non-baseball side here. But I hope we can all agree not to take any of this stuff over to the baseball side of things. I know I'm gonna' leave it all here.)
Dude, you didn't disappoint. I knew when I saw Alexander looking dazed and confused this was coming. :laugh: Of course, that means I had time to think about the retort. Franchise QB who runs a no-huddle with accurate passing = running back not named Jim Brown in effect on team? I think not :p:

BTW, the wide right struck a mighty blow to the possibility of karma. If karma were true, certainly that baby would have split the uprights, the Bolts (as in from the playoffs yet again, not confused on who was playing) would have won in OT, and we would have seen the hypocrisy of the Steelers fans/apologists of a week ago as the whining about The Call and The Fumble began.;) It just isn't fair. :rant2:

traderumor
01-16-2006, 09:58 AM
Of course, I did see some posts insinuating that the fix was on. And thinking that the Kimo hit was intentional was railed as irrational ;)

Danny Serafini
01-16-2006, 11:00 AM
The officiating in that game was abyssmal. Don't try to act as if one team didn't get the vast VAST majority of the benefit from it.

That's true. The Steelers got some breaks, but the Colts got a few as well so I guess it wasn't one-sided.


And I fail to see how anyone can grump about a slight "flinch" made by Faneca when the entire Colts offensive line is allowed to move freely- even after being in the "set" position.

Really? Ask Tarik Glenn about that, he got flagged for a false start on Pittsburgh's 1 with a move just as subtle as Faneca's. The Colts got nailed for 3 false starts - on their own field - so their line obviously wasn't given free reign.


Could a false start been called on Faneca? Yep. But if it wasn't, there was absolutely zero room for the officals to give the Colts a "do over" even if they didn't touch a Steelers player because the Colts 'en masse intrusion into the neutral zone drew the Steelers LG or LT up from the "set" position. There was no way that a call couldn't be made there. By rule, if they didn't call Faneca for a False Start, they couldn't do what they did. Simply couldn't do it.

The refs screwed up by not making any call, agreed. But the call should've gone against Pittsburgh. I can't see why any Steeler fans are complaining, it's like complaining about your bank screwing up because they added $20 to your account. The Steelers are the ones who got away with one here, not the Colts. It's merely sour grapes about not getting 5 free yards they didn't deserve in the first place.


It (pass interference) is a black and white rule.

So is the strike zone, and we see how uniformly that rule is enforced. The reality is that it's a judgement call in the eye of the official. That's why it can't be reviewed, one man's pass interference is another man's incidental contact. It may be black and white on paper, but in real life it's a thousand shades of gray.


When the defender is hanging onto the receiver like a Mr. T starter set before the ball arrives (particularly as badly as that play), you have to make the call. You're obligated to because you're an NFL official and you've promised to enforce the rules of the game. But then, you don't remember it so I'm sure you're a little bit foggy on the severity of the infraction.

I really don't remember the play, enough people have said that he was getting hung all over, so I'll take everyone's word on it. I also tend to not pay much attention to plays like that whenever Randle-El is involved because I don't think I've ever seen him not get up crying, throwing his hands in the air and making that flag throwing motion whenever it's an incompletion. I've seen his act so many times I just block it out, so the play didn't resonate with me at all. And honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the refs did in the back of their mind, too. I'm not saying it's right, but it is a call made based on judgement and perception, and it's human nature to not take a person seriously when he complains about every little thing. You cry wolf too many times...


Official took about 3 minutes for a review that anyone with a brain could have completed in 10 seconds and took plenty of that time in conference with- at minimum- the replay booth looking for a way to give the Colts back the ball after the ruling on the field was "Interception".

That's as objective as it gets.

Your last two paragraphs are a contradiction. Complaining about a terrible call is one thing. Accusing an official of intentionally trying to give the ball to one team in some great league-wide conspiracy is only objective if you're looking at it through black and gold colored fan goggles. Officials are human. They simply make mistakes, sometimes more than others like yesterday.

Danny Serafini
01-16-2006, 11:06 AM
Of course, I did see some posts insinuating that the fix was on. And thinking that the Kimo hit was intentional was railed as irrational ;)

:laugh: Come on, don't you know league-wide fixes are commonplace! The '85 Bears were really a 6-10 team, but The Fridge was such a great media personality the league made sure he'd go to a Super Bowl.

Danny Serafini
01-16-2006, 11:23 AM
When an official spends as much time as that one did reviewing the play, the only conclusion I can come to is that they were looking for some reason to overturn the INT and give Indy another shot at getting back into the game. It went beyond being a horrible call and into the realm of purposefully attempting to overturn the outcome of a play -- which is not what replay is at all designed to do.

That's not near enough evidence to try and claim conspiracy theory. There are plenty of reviews that drag out a seemingly ridiculous amount of time. Doesn't mean the refs are trying to throw a game.


As for the "False Start" by Faneca. If the Refs saw a false start, then by all means they should flag the false start. I agree, Faneca could've been flagged on that play. But, the refs did not see Faneca flinch. Nobody threw a flag up, nobody indicated that an offensive linemen had broken out of his stance. What did happen, however, were Colts players charging across the line at the Steelers. If the refs did not see a false start, then this by definition has to be an encroachment foul or a nuetral zone violation. You can't just wipe off a play (on 4th down) like that, it's a penalty on one side or the other.

It's not a penalty on the defense until one of the following occurs: a defender makes contact with an offensive player, the ball is snapped while a defender is in the neutral zone, or the offense starts jumping as a result of the defense jumping in. None of those occurred. The play (or preplay I guess) was a garble, and the refs stopped things before they got even more confused. Doesn't make the refs right, just saying the Colts hadn't actually committed a penalty at the time the refs stepped in.

Danny Serafini
01-16-2006, 11:31 AM
Just heard an interesting interview by Mark Manske (sp?) on the Tony Kornheiser show. He compared the Polamalu INT to the Tom Brady "tuck rule" ruling in that when looking at the play everything about the call looks wrong, but when you actually read the rules to the letter the call was correct. When a receiver catches a ball, goes down to the ground untouched and gets back up, he has to retain possession of the ball the entire time he's down. When Polamalu started to get up, he knocked the ball out of his hand while his right knee was down. Since his knee was down he was technically still on the ground when he lost possession, therefore it's no catch. Totally funky the way everything worked out on that play, but it turned out the ref actually got it right on review according to the rules. Curious what the conspiracy theorists have to say on this one.

ochre
01-16-2006, 11:33 AM
yep. Much like the TD overturned in the Jags game, the rules were the culprit here, not replay. I think the refs stink though, so don't take that as an endorsement of them.

I thought there was suposed to be a timer on replays?

Chip R
01-16-2006, 11:44 AM
It just goes to show you that no matter how good an offense is or what kind of scheme you run or how good your QB is, it can all be netralized by a good pass rush.

That reversal if that interception was pretty bad and very suspicious. It appears to not be the only messed up call from the weekend. Seems like the Pats got the short end of the stick as far as penalty calls or non calls went and in the CHI-CAR game yesterday, a RB for CAR clearly loses the ball before it broke the plane of the goal line but the refs called it a TD. It was reversed but I'm thinking that the advent of instant replay has made on field officiating worse. Why get a call right when it can be reversed?

I like instant replay. What I don't like about it is all the replays for where the ball was spotted or crap like that. In college it's up to some official watching a monitor whether of not to review a call. At least in the NFL - except in the last 2 minutes of a half - a coach can decide whether or not a call should be reviewed. But I think it is abused and this is my solution for the abuse of instant replay. Coaches on the field are the only ones who can challenge a call. But if you challenge a call, you lose a time out even if your challenge is upheld.

NJReds
01-16-2006, 12:00 PM
I thought Big Ben's tackle after Bettis' fumble was the most amazing play in that game. I'm not sure many QB's would've made that type of effort and been successful. He kept his head in the play, that's for sure.

I also noticed that Kimo had hit on Manning that was very similar to the hit on Palmer. The big difference was that Manning had his back to Kimo, so his knee wasn't bent sideways...and Manning was still holding the ball.

ochre
01-16-2006, 12:11 PM
Due to his resemblence to the actor that played Jango Fett, I've taken to calling him Kimo Fett. I think its apropos.
http://i.a.cnn.net/si/images/football/nfl/players/2766.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Jango_fett.jpg

Johnny Footstool
01-16-2006, 12:54 PM
The refs were bad, but it did go both ways. They gave the Steelers some extremely generous spots on two consecutive 4th down plays in the 4th quarter. They also screwed up by not calling a false start on Faneca.

We've seen some very inconsistent officiating in every playoff game thusfar.

Caveat Emperor
01-16-2006, 01:58 PM
Just heard an interesting interview by Mark Manske (sp?) on the Tony Kornheiser show. He compared the Polamalu INT to the Tom Brady "tuck rule" ruling in that when looking at the play everything about the call looks wrong, but when you actually read the rules to the letter the call was correct. When a receiver catches a ball, goes down to the ground untouched and gets back up, he has to retain possession of the ball the entire time he's down. When Polamalu started to get up, he knocked the ball out of his hand while his right knee was down. Since his knee was down he was technically still on the ground when he lost possession, therefore it's no catch. Totally funky the way everything worked out on that play, but it turned out the ref actually got it right on review according to the rules. Curious what the conspiracy theorists have to say on this one.

Dude, you don't have to get defensive about this -- it's just an aside to the game. Nobody's going to die or award prizes to the winner of this discussion!

My point is that when the official spends as much time under the hodd as was the case on the Polamalu interception, he's looking for some -- any reason -- reason to overturn the call. It's akin to a judge deciding who he wants to win in a court case, and then going and scouring the law to find some or ANY technicality that he can cite just to give that side a victory.

If you want to make comparisons to the tuck rule, that's actually a good place to go. The "tuck" rule may have been in the NFL rulebook, but it was never enforced (in that manner) prior to that playoff game between New England and Oakland. There had been countless situations (I'm sure) where a quarterback lost control of the football as he was bringing the ball back into his body, but never had we come up with a "tuck" rule before. Similarly here -- the standard for a reception/interception has always been possession with two feet or a knee on the ground and some sort of football move. Anything loss of possession following that is a fumble. This rule might exist, but I've watched a LOT of football, and I've never once seen it enforced in such a manner. That's suspicious to me, when the refs dig as deep into the rulebook as they can to find a reason to make sure an outcome goes one way or the other.

Heck, it need not even be an anti-Steelers/pro-Colts conspiracy -- it could be as simple as the league instructing officials to "keep the game close" so that audiance numbers stay high (akin to the way the computer in a Madden game starts making phenomenol catches when it gets behind).

Danny Serafini
01-16-2006, 02:19 PM
CE,

Not defensive at all, or really sure where you got that. Just heard the interview while I was typing my last response so I kept on typing. I'm not a fan of either team so I really have no dog in this fight.

I just don't buy any conspiracy nonsense. People (and I'm talking in general here, not calling you out specifically) just tend to try and put too much behind the scenes of events. I'm not the type to see black helicopters hovering in the background.

So he took a long time with the call? Maybe, just maybe, he was having a difficult time making a call and wanted to make sure he got it right. There's nothing sinister about that.

And God forbid an official actually enforce a rule as written in the rulebook. If it wasn't enforced before that's the fault of the officials in earlier games, not these officials in this game. And the whole possession issue has been tricky all year. I absolutely despise this whole "football related move" business that's crept in over the past year or two, it's made the whole issue of possession much more ambiguous and leads to situations like this. There have been oddball possession calls all year because of this, and I do think it's something that needs to be addressed.

Like I said, there's nothing I saw yesterday to imply that the league was trying to manipulate the game in any way.

traderumor
01-16-2006, 02:46 PM
I agree with the lefty from the Mexican League on the complication that have been added to possession rules, which I assume were derived to remove ambiguity that arose from looking at a play in slow motion.

Here's a radical thought. Make the replay officials observe the play at regular speed. Then, the primary aim is getting an improved angle rather than looking at stills, which obviously leads to another kind of ambiguity, like creating terms such as "football move" to account for issues that were raised from seeing a play in slow motion.

SteelSD
01-16-2006, 02:46 PM
Just heard an interesting interview by Mark Manske (sp?) on the Tony Kornheiser show. He compared the Polamalu INT to the Tom Brady "tuck rule" ruling in that when looking at the play everything about the call looks wrong, but when you actually read the rules to the letter the call was correct. When a receiver catches a ball, goes down to the ground untouched and gets back up, he has to retain possession of the ball the entire time he's down. When Polamalu started to get up, he knocked the ball out of his hand while his right knee was down. Since his knee was down he was technically still on the ground when he lost possession, therefore it's no catch. Totally funky the way everything worked out on that play, but it turned out the ref actually got it right on review according to the rules. Curious what the conspiracy theorists have to say on this one.

Only relevant if the receiver/defender hadn't already established possession by rule. Polamalu had clearly established possession. To rule that pass an incompletion, the official had to twist the rulebook in such a way that it created an entirely new rule on-the-fly as to when possession is established.

The fact that someone would go on the radio to defend the call is simply another demonstration that there'll always be someone who's willing to defend the indefensible.

traderumor
01-16-2006, 02:49 PM
Only relevant if the receiver/defender hadn't already established possession by rule. Polamalu had clearly established possession. To rule that pass an incompletion, the official had to twist the rulebook in such a way that it created an entirely new rule on-the-fly as to when possession is established.

The fact that someone would go on the radio to defend the call is simply another demonstration that there'll always be someone who's willing to defend the indefensible.I haven't seen the rule in question. Do you have a link to the actual rule?

SteelSD
01-16-2006, 03:15 PM
I haven't seen the rule in question. Do you have a link to the actual rule?

Good luck on that. The NFL considers their rulebook a matter of national security. Makes it easier to add things in the day after they screw something up that way.;)

The closest you're going to get online is:

8. A forward pass is complete when a receiver clearly possesses the pass and touches the ground with both feet inbounds while in possession of the ball. If a receiver would have landed inbounds with both feet but is carried or pushed out of bounds while maintaining possession of the ball, pass is complete at the out-of-bounds spot.

And yes, that applies to the defenders as well (they're considered "Eligible Receivers"). Polamalu had clearly established possession before the ball popped out by any credible interpretation of the rules. To overturn the call, the official had to spend considerable time searching for some way to re-define the point at which possession is actually established.

The Steelers won so I'm expecting the NFL to sweep this one under the rug rather than actually address it. But maybe they'll surprise me.

savafan
01-16-2006, 03:23 PM
I also noticed that Kimo had hit on Manning that was very similar to the hit on Palmer. The big difference was that Manning had his back to Kimo, so his knee wasn't bent sideways...and Manning was still holding the ball.

Kimo the assassin.

I noticed that hit too NJReds. I turned to my dad when it happened and said I sure hope Manning's leg is okay.

deltachi8
01-16-2006, 03:28 PM
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06016/639008.stm


NFL says Polamalu call was official's judgment
No comment on Porter remark
Monday, January 16, 2006

By The Associated Press

NEW YORK -- Referee Pete Morelli's decision to overturn an apparent interception by Pittsburgh's Troy Polamalu late in the Steelers game Sunday in Indianapolis was a judgment call, the NFL said Monday.


Matt Freed, Post-Gazette
Troy Polamalu sees the ball drop to the ground after an apparent interception. However, the play was ruled an incomplete pass after Indianapolis challenged the call.
Click photo for larger image.

It came with 5:26 left in Pittsburgh's 21-18 win over the Colts.

Polamalu made a diving catch. When he got up to run, he fumbled the ball, then recovered. Colts coach Tony Dungy challenged and Morelli ruled Polamalu had not completed the catch, so it was an incomplete pass.

About a dozen TV and scoreboard replays indicated otherwise.

The Colts kept the ball and went on to score, cutting Pittsburgh's lead to three points in a game that ended with a missed field goal by Indy's Mike Vanderjagt that could have sent it to overtime.

"The issue was whether he had possession. The ball came loose when he was getting up. Pete Morelli determined it wasn't a catch," NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said. "That was his judgment."

Aiello added that the league's officiating department had not yet officially reviewed the call to determine if Morelli had made the right decision.

The NFL almost never makes public the result of its reviews, although it did three years ago, when supervisor of officials Mike Pereira said officials should have called pass interference against San Francisco on the final play of a wild-card game with the New York Giants. The correct call would have given New York a second chance to kick a game-winning field goal in a 39-38 loss.

Aiello had no comment on a remark by Pittsburgh's Joey Porter, who said of the Polamalu ruling:

"I know they wanted Indy to win this game; the whole world loves Peyton Manning. But come on, man, don't take the game away from us like that."

In the past, players who have made comments like that have been subject to fines.

Reds Fanatic
01-16-2006, 06:00 PM
Now the NFL is saying the official made the wrong call in reversing that call and it should have been an interception.

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


NEW YORK -- The NFL said the referee made a mistake: Troy Polamalu caught the ball.

The league acknowledged Monday that referee Pete Morelli erred when he overturned on replay Polamalu's interception of a Peyton Manning pass Sunday in the playoff game between Pittsburgh and Indianapolis.

Mike Pereira, the league's vice president of officiating, said in a statement that Morelli should have upheld the call, made with 5:26 left in Pittsburgh's win over the Colts.

After the reversal, the Colts went on to score a touchdown and a 2-point conversion, cutting the Steelers' 21-10 lead to 21-18. That led to a wild final few minutes and Pittsburgh clinched its win only when the Colts' Mike Vanderjagt missed a 46-yard field-goal attempt.

On the play, Polamalu made a diving catch of Manning's pass, tumbled with it in his hands and got up to run. When he did, he fumbled the ball, then recovered. Colts coach Tony Dungy challenged and Morelli ruled Polamalu had not completed the catch.

About a dozen TV and scoreboard replays indicated otherwise. Had the call stood, the Steelers would have had the ball at their own 48 with an 11-point lead.

"The definition of a catch -- or in this case an interception -- states that in the process of making a catch a player must maintain possession of the ball after he contacts the ground," Pereira said.

"The initial call on the field was that Troy Polamalu intercepted the pass because he maintained possession of the ball after hitting the ground. The replay showed that Polamalu had rolled over and was rising to his feet when the ball came loose. He maintained possession long enough to establish a catch. Therefore, the replay review should have upheld the call on the field that it was a catch and fumble.

"The rule regarding the performing of an act common to the game applies when there is contact with a defensive player and the ball comes loose, which did not happen here."

The NFL almost never makes public the result of its reviews, although it did three years ago, when Pereira said officials should have called pass interference against San Francisco on the final play of a wild-card game with the New York Giants. The correct call would have given New York a second chance to kick a game-winning field goal in a 39-38 loss.

After the game, Pittsburgh linebacker Joey Porter said of the ruling:

"I know they wanted Indy to win this game; the whole world loves Peyton Manning. But come on, man, don't take the game away from us like that."

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello had no comment on Porter's statement.

In the past, players who have made such statements have been subject to fines.

SteelSD
01-16-2006, 06:27 PM
Thanks for posting that, RF.

Good for the NFL that they responded to the obvious officiating error. But I'm tired of it. If they want to make that crap stop, they need to make an example of Morelli, if not the whole crew- who, between them, couldn't figure out that a "do-over" isn't an option on a false start, encroachment, or neutral zone infraction before the snap.

I'm sick of apology letters from the league office. Time for some pink slips to be sent instead.

GAC
01-16-2006, 08:50 PM
Basically, it was an INT (possession), and then a fumble.

SteelSD
01-17-2006, 05:31 AM
Basically, it was an INT (possession), and then a fumble.

Yep.

Like I said, only an official who was actively trying to find a way to re-define "possession" could have overturned the correct ruling on the field. Kudos to the NFL for quickly addressing the issue (which only happens on the most egregious of errors). And nice to see that the dolt who appeared on the "Tony Kornheiser Show" was exposed as nothing more than an attention-grabbing apologist.

I'm still waiting for an explanation as to the Encroachment "do-over". I don't know if we'll ever get a reason for that stupidity. But if Morelli's name is on the list of active officals for next season, I'll consider the issues from that game still not properly addressed because Morelli is a guy who shouldn't be officiating Pop Warner games much less NFL playoff contests.


And God forbid an official actually enforce a rule as written in the rulebook. If it wasn't enforced before that's the fault of the officials in earlier games, not these officials in this game.

The officials didn't actually enforce a rule as it was written in the rulebook. The officials tried to make up a new rule on-the-fly. I would hope that's completely clear to you now- particularly being that it's the first call that was addressed by the league officiating office in three years. And it's the first call I can think of that was publicly addressed that went against the team that actually won the game.

This was an even more egregious officiating error than at the end of the January 6th, 2003 Wild Card game between the NY Giants and SF 49'ers. There weren't multiple potential penalties to be sorted through. In that game, there was a Pass Interference (a "judgement" call as you erroneously define it) that wasn't called, even though it was as obvious as the PI non-call in the Pitt/Indy game. But there was no end-of-game timing issue in Sunday's game. There was no "offsetting penalty" issue to be considered when Polamalu rightly picked that ball off.

There was nothing to muddle the mix on the Polamalu Interception. It was a clear case of possession. A clear fumble. And a clear recovery. The reversal of the call on the field goes beyond incompetence. In short, an NFL official can't be dumb enough to screw that up. He has to be looking for a way how to, regardless of what your favorite Tony Kornheiser guest opined in error.