Huum

[JugglingReferee]

Originally posted by Pats4Life
A knowledgable football fan.

Dave Laliberte
Fort Pierce, Florida

While in college, it looks like you took TV instead of grammar.

[BktBallRef]

Hey Dave Laliberte from Fort Pierce, Florida, do the letters FO mean anything to you? Nobody here cares what you think. You're just another fanboy who's here just trying to irritate others.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally posted by rockyroad

Excellent explanation - thanks. But a question...two steps prior to Jackson turning and "holding off", the defender put both hands on Jackson - one on shoulder pad, one on back - and shoved Jackson and Jackson was thrown off stride...if you let that illegal contact go, why would you flag what Jackson did?

Hey, a lot of the folks from the Bball board are over here, which is great to see.

Bob, thanks for your explanation - I have to admit, the first few times I thought the call was "ticky-tack" at best. I tried to compare it to basketball - and would I have let a post player do the same thing - and after thinking, my answer was "no". So a gutsy call by that official, I have to conclude.

Rocky - let's compare it again to hoops. If a player was cutting to the key to post up, and was grabbed a bit by the defender, do we blow it right away, or wait for the advantage? I think in the Super Bowl case, the official likely saw that the receiver was able to continue his route, so thought no advantage. But when the push-off came, the advantage was basically a TD - thus the flag.

That's how I'm thinking it out, anyway.

[Adam]

Hey guys, occasional reader, rare poster (at least on the football side). I'd read some bickering about the game and thought I'd come to the experts.
What I've noticed here is that the ones b!tching aren't giving any real rationale, but the ones "defending" the crew have plenty of reason on their side; and they're employing it well.
Of course it just reinforces my opinion anyway; that the crew did an overall good job. My only real question is about that illegal block call on the Seattle int. Was that a call that is justified by the rules but was poor judgment, or was it a misapplication of a rule? Or, conversely, was it the right call?

[bluezebra]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Pete in AZ
That push off penalty was crap. It never gets called all season and then you ticky tack it here.

That Hasselback fumble call just proves how bad this crew was. The ground doesn't cause fumbles and it should never have needed to be reviewed and reversed.

When did Big Ben cross the goal line. The ball only touched the paint when he was flat on his belly with three guys on top of him.

Horrible officiating and the world got to see it all. [
/QUOTE]

1..The contact by the reveiver prevented the DB from changing direction.

2..Hasselback was TOUCHED on his way down.

3..If you could see carefully, the nose of the ball broke the plane BEFORE Ben was down.

4..And HOW MUCH did YOU LOSE on the game?

Bob

[Ref inSoCA]

Most posters are ignorant fans who have been listening to ignorant announcers and/or beyond-ignorant Sports radio talk hosts.

I found the first flag of the game bizarre---a hold on an OL on a sack for a 15 yd loss. It was declined but who throws that? Ichalked it up to the U's adreneline.

The OPI was a great call and was called immediately. BJ just couldn't find his flag.

The Pitt TD call looked ugly with the initial DB signal but on replay, he was clearly in before he hit the ground.

All in all it was a ugly game between 2 mediocre teams. Holmgren should be embarrassed by his butchering of the end of each half. It reminded me why I don't watch NFL games on a regular basis.

It also proved that the NFL is the best officiated of the pro leagues.

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Hey guys, occasional reader, rare poster (at least on the football side). I'd read some bickering about the game and thought I'd come to the experts.
What I've noticed here is that the ones b!tching aren't giving any real rationale, but the ones "defending" the crew have plenty of reason on their side; and they're employing it well.
Of course it just reinforces my opinion anyway; that the crew did an overall good job. My only real question is about that illegal block call on the Seattle int. Was that a call that is justified by the rules but was poor judgment, or was it a misapplication of a rule? Or, conversely, was it the right call?

Snaqwells,
it's kind of like you posted if you put it in the right light it is always the right call. In my opinion, it was bad judgement to make that call. It was the QB! He was trying to make a tackle and him a blocker blow the waist. By rule it is a penalty, but applied to this case wrong.

[Dale Smith]

Originally posted by Pats4Life
Well I Guess That Being a Football Fan who isn't for either team, and someone who is well versed in the game of football and Not a Blind Zebra Makes The Facts inadmissable. Its Better for The Officials to sit up on their pedestal like nothing happened.

Think about this instead of the Talk being the Wonderful Story of Pittsburgs Championship, We're talking about wether or not the officials had influence in the game.

For you to discount my opinions, and thats what the are, on the basis of my official or nonofficial status is Pompas and what is wrong with Sports today.

If you delete this than thats your rite, but it is also my rite to voice them.

A knowledgable football fan.


Dave Laliberte
Fort Pierce, Florida

Dave, you are way out of line and are forgetting one thing, this is a form for football officials. Most of the persons that post on this form have years and years of on the field experience, playing and officiating, at both the high school and college level. We learn from observing, critiquing and discussing game situations and other officialÂ’s performances. We might not agree with what others say, but we respect their opinions as fellow officials.
You coming on to this form and making remarks like “Blind Zebras” and “Its Better for The Officials to sit up on their pedestal like nothing happened” or calling us Pompous, shows that you have no respect for us officials.
ItÂ’s easy to sit up in the stands or in front of a TV and criticize. ItÂ’s harder to get off you backside and do something. If you are as knowledgeable and well versed in the game of football, as you say that you are, why donÂ’t you take a class get your permit and join us on the field as an official? We are always looking for good people to lend a hand. Maybe we will see you working a AAC game in four years and then SB 45.:-)
BTW When you post on a form owned by someone you are a guest on that form. The only rites that you have are the ones given to you by the owner.
Dale Smith

[Edited by Dale Smith on Feb 6th, 2006 at 11:09 PM]

[mcrowder]

Originally posted by hooper
The officials blew it, plain and simple. It happens sometimes. Most of the time it won't affect the outcome of the game, but there were so many bad calls in this game against one team, it's undeniable that it impacted the outcome of the game.

I would submit that it is not "undeniable" since the majority of real officials who have seen these calls seem to disagree that they were mistakes.

The only "bad" call in my book was the blocking below the waist penalty on Hasselbeck when trying to make a tackle. And I never saw a replay showing me whether or not he actually contacted the blocker - this MAY have actually been a technically correct call. The one replay I did see leads me to doubt this, but lacking multiple replays, it's possible.

[mcrowder]

One other thing. I think that only 1 of the calls in the Bowl were incorrect calls - and it may have benefitted Seattle (the Stephens non-catch/fumble). But Seattle needs to quit complaining. In my opinion (and in the opinions of many non-officials), Pittsburgh dealt with a FAR more blatant run of bad calls against them in the Indi game... and managed to overcome them.

[JasonTX]

Originally posted by Snaqwells
Hey guys, occasional reader, rare poster (at least on the football side). I'd read some bickering about the game and thought I'd come to the experts.
What I've noticed here is that the ones b!tching aren't giving any real rationale, but the ones "defending" the crew have plenty of reason on their side; and they're employing it well.
Of course it just reinforces my opinion anyway; that the crew did an overall good job. My only real question is about that illegal block call on the Seattle int. Was that a call that is justified by the rules but was poor judgment, or was it a misapplication of a rule? Or, conversely, was it the right call?

In this play, had he it the player next to the runner it would have been a good call. I believe he thought the other player got hit below the waist and not the runner. Sometimes officials see things that didn't actually happen. It's much like basketball. How many times do we see a foul call when there wasn't any contact at all?

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by JasonTX


In this play, had he it the player next to the runner it would have been a good call. I believe he thought the other player got hit below the waist and not the runner. Sometimes officials see things that didn't actually happen. It's much like basketball. How many times do we see a foul call when there wasn't any contact at all?

That depends on the official? Fortunately in basketball we are a lot closer, but I see your point.

Peace

[andy1033]

Ben said on TV last night that the ball was not in.

[Ref inSoCA]

The officials blew it, plain and simple

---------------------------

Spoken like a truly ignorant fan who has never officiated one second of his life.

Originally posted by mcrowder
The only "bad" call in my book was the blocking below the waist penalty on Hasselbeck when trying to make a tackle. And I never saw a replay showing me whether or not he actually contacted the blocker - this MAY have actually been a technically correct call. The one replay I did see leads me to doubt this, but lacking multiple replays, it's possible.

mcrowder,
I have the tape. He did block below the waist. So, technically it was the correct call.