It was a classic call. If you do not want enforcement of rules, then let the players call their own fouls and we will see how fun that will be.

Peace

if it's the "rule" it should be called EVERY time. My point is that it's NOT. It happens on every passing play in every game, and it's part of the game.

By definition of the rule, "It is pass interference by either team when any player movement beyond the line of scrimmage significantly hinders the progress of an eligible player of such player’s opportunity to catch the ball."

By that definition, knocking the ball away is a foul. Instead of looking at the strict definition, consider the SPIRIT of the rule, which implies doing something that gives an unfair advantage to a player.

I just watched the video of the play. The defender grabbed the receiver, and the receiver pushed his arm away. That was it. Equally amount defensive pass interference by the letter of the law, but nobody here would have called that.

And to answer the posters question about why so many new people come out of the woodwork after a big game -- it's because people search for things after they see them. I stumbled across this forum because of the controversy and am very disappointed by the attitudes here.

It does not happen on every play. I did not see a push off on the Randal-El/Ward play. I think you are exaggerating a little bit to try to bolster your point. It does not happen on every play. Please stop all the hyperbole for God’s sake.

Extending your arms on a push off seems like that fits the spirit of the rules pretty much if you ask me. Just because the player did not fall on is back on his back does not make the call any less accurate. Basically what took place was similar to an arm bar where the extension of the arms prevents the player from moving forward. The defender moved back and both feet moved. It was not like he was standing still and the contact did not affect him. The receiver was able to move without any problem. I wonder who got and advantage here?

There is such thing as incidental contact. If the defender was holding the receiver, he would have had to struggle to get away. Touching does not constitute holding someone by any means. If it does in your mind, you need to go back and read the definition of a hold in a dictionary or rulebook.

His question was rhetorical at best. His point was if you really want to learn about our feelings, we debate all season long on games when the media does not say a word about a game. I read more critical comments about officiating all season long here than I ever did in the media. Only when someone did something in the Super Bowl are you seeing folks like you that come here now telling us what is proper and what is not. Where have you been all year?

Peace

You are a troll. Go away. Feel free to let the door hit your a$$ on the way out, it might wake up your brain.

I'm a troll why? Because I have an opinion different than yours? Because I think the officiating was sub-par? Or because I don't blindly defend fellow referees just because I know their job is hard?

The officials of this game should be embarassed by their performance. Everybody has an off day, and they do an amazing job in general, considering how fast things happen and how mere inches decide whether their call is right or wrong.

Still, man up when you make a mistake, and that game was full of mistakes. For the NFL to simply say "no errors in the game" is sad. To say "that's good enough for me" is, to me, a joke. I expressed my opinion, others refuted that opinion with theirs -- which is what this forum is for... to open lines of discussion and debate.

I respect people that have opinions different than mine, but for you to resort to name calling and pissing third grade comments shows what kind of a man you are.

Anyone who joins this forum just to whine about the SB officials should let the door hit him on the way out.

Actually, I checked out the forum because I was curious what other officials thought about what I saw as a very poorly called game. I was surprised to see so few people questioning the calls, and nearly everybody defending the calls, giving the benefit of the doubt on EVERYTHING.

I had a different opinion, and thought I'd share that to open discussion. Some people have responded with constructive answers and differing opinions, then others simply attack those that don't agree.

To me, that's the difference between a referee that discusses the calls with the players and explains it to them (did you see the "He spit right in his face" explanation that ended all complaining by the players?), which is a GOOD job of officiating, and the basketball ref that gives a technical if anybody questions a single call, which is a BAD job of officiating.

I can see which one you are.

The other funny thing is that in Tuesday's Tampa Tribune, Darrell Jackson said of the OPI, "I didn't even touch him."

So much for eyewitness testimony.

You're really on a roll. "Knocking the ball away is a foul" by definition? Excuse me? Did you read the rule you just cited and typed? Do the words "hinders the progress of an eligible player" mean anything to you? If I have to connect those dots for you, maybe you shouldn't be wearing stripes on a football field.

I guess I need to introduce myself to everyone. I've perused this site for over a year without ever posting, but with the Super Bowl controversies, I couldn't resist joining in. I've worked as a young official for two years in football and am starting my second in baseball. I don't hold myself out as an expert in this world; only a learner at this point.

http://www.nfl.com/fans/rules/useofhands

A defensive player is allowed to maintain continuous and unbroken contact within the five-yard zone until a point when the receiver is even with the defender. The defensive player cannot use his hands or arms to push from behind, hang onto, or encircle an eligible receiver in a manner that restricts movement as the play develops. Beyond this five-yard limitation, a defender may use his hands or arms ONLY to defend or protect himself against impending contact caused by a receiver. In such reaction, the defender may not contact a receiver who attempts to take a path to evade him.

doogs what is your point??

My point being that if you want to take the strict reading of rules, after the first 5 yards the defender can only put his hand on a receiver in order to protect himself from impending contact. This I feel was not the case. The play started as a 1st and 10 at the Pitt. 16. When the defender put his hand on the receiver he was at the goal line, beyond the 5 yard cushion. In reading that rule the play should have been offsetting penalties and replay the down.

How did the defender impede the progress of the receiver? The receiver ran toward the defender. The receiver got away with no problem.

Also to be technical, the officials are taught things that are interpreted outside the "words" of the rulebook. If you were an official you would at the very least know that. In HS the casebook is our interpretation and application book. In the NFL they see tape, see play after play to tell them what is a hold, OPI, DPI or any other infraction that has taken place. The NFL uses tapes to tell them about mechanics and what is the proper technique. I even saw a tape on what is the proper procedure to throw a flag.

Peace

The NFL reviewed all of the calls and found nothing wrong. I disagree with one, the bogus call on Hasselbeck when he tackled Ike Taylor (and didn't even hit the blocker in question) but other than that what evidence do YOU have other than your opinion?

The NFL did not say "nothing" was wrong. The NFL said that the game was officiating properly. The reason that distinction needs to be made, is because things we have no idea about things that were not fouls or not fouls. For all we know there might have been a problem with a mechanic, a spot or positioning. There might have even been a problem with who threw a flag and who did not throw a flag. NFL officials can get downgraded for things we never see or understand or hear about.

Peace