Questionable Calls Superbowl 43

[fljet]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

The holder was flattened. You're a moron.

you could see Wilson pull up, his stumbling momentum took him into the holder, if it was flagrant he would have "layed the wood"

In 23 years of watching multiple NFL games per week, I have never seen that call

[Rich]

Originally Posted by fljet

you could see Wilson pull up, his stumbling momentum took him into the holder, if it was flagrant he would have "layed the wood"

In 23 years of watching multiple NFL games per week, I have never seen that call

That's cause NFL players don't hit the holder. Pulling up has nothing to do with it. The holder is completely vulnerable.

[fljet]

Ok explain the Lebron James impersonation, using the ball as a prop = 15 yards

[Rich]

Originally Posted by fljet

Ok explain the Lebron James impersonation, using the ball as a prop = 15 yards

I have no idea why this wasn't called. I mentioned it to my wife when it happened, saying "he's going to get flagged for this" and he didn't. You have a, IMO, valid point there.

[zm1283]

The worse no-call on the 100 yard return was the blatant block in the back at about the 10 or 15 yard line.

[fljet]

Originally Posted by zm1283

The worse no-call on the 100 yard return was the blatant block in the back at about the 10 or 15 yard line.

Oh yeah there was multiple issues with that play, I forgot to mention that, thanks

Im sure JRutledge will pick you apart as well, he comments on everything like he is some sort of god.

[SethPDX]

I watched the whole game. The run was replayed at least three times and I did not see an illegal block. I don't know how blatant something is if only two people here are making noise about it.

If you were looking for rules explanations of sports you don't officiate, you could do much worse than JRutledge.

[fljet]

whatever Im not a Cardinals or Steelers fan and I did not enjoy the game tonight as with the other 20 or so folks, due to the lopsided officiating, many were judgement calls but to average fans, and not trained officials the game was poorly officiated. We can argue about it all week but the bottom line is that the Cardinals got robbed.

If you can review the entire game film and still come to the same conclusion then you must be a Pittsburgh bandwagon fan, I guarantee that this crew will receive a less than perfect grade.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by zm1283

The worse no-call on the 100 yard return was the blatant block in the back at about the 10 or 15 yard line.

The block was by #56 on #34, The intiial contact was on #34's right shoulder. He turned and the contact continued on the back. Since initial contact determines whether a block is legal or not, this block is legal.

You repeatedly show your ignorance regarding football officiating and football rules on this board. You should really stay on the basketball board where you not quite as clueless.

As for the original poster, he's a total idiot, so I'm not even going to respond to his stupidity.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by zm1283

The worse no-call on the 100 yard return was the blatant block in the back at about the 10 or 15 yard line.

Oops, my bad, I thought you were talking about Fitzgerald's block on Bolden's 45yd reception. Must have been similar blocks that did not get flagged.

[kdf5]

There were lots of flags but every replay showed they were right on the money as far as the advantage/disadvantage. The roughing call was the only one I questioned and only because I was rooting for the Cards but like others have said losing QB's in the NFL has a huge ripple effect across the league and the league has spoken loud and clear about it.

Hey fljet: You should contact your local high school and college associations and get yourself some games as referee. I'm not sure how football ever made it this far without you and it sure can't wait any longer. Don't delay, we need you.

[wisref2]

Originally Posted by zm1283

The worse no-call on the 100 yard return was the blatant block in the back at about the 10 or 15 yard line.

When I first saw the play live I thought that was a block in the back. Upon further review - it was obvious he got him on the shoulder - no foul, not even in a high school game.

Roughing the snapper was so obvious that I'd fire anyone who didn't flag it.

[football-1]

Originally Posted by wisref2

When I first saw the play live I thought that was a block in the back. Upon further review - it was obvious he got him on the shoulder - no foul, not even in a high school game.

Roughing the snapper was so obvious that I'd fire anyone who didn't flag it.

really sure ?

live wire
9:48 and
at stop 10:12 you can see his left arm in the back and his right arm (i think) from behind is over the right shoulder. that is correct?
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80e9de21

anatomy
3:33
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80e97cd9

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fljet

you could see Wilson pull up, his stumbling momentum took him into the holder, if it was flagrant he would have "layed the wood"

In 23 years of watching multiple NFL games per week, I have never seen that call

You do not see it happen because players are usually smart enough to not run into a holder.

You do not have to hit someone in a flagrant way to have a penalty. Try again.

Peace

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by fljet

you could see Wilson pull up, his stumbling momentum took him into the holder, if it was flagrant he would have "layed the wood"

In 23 years of watching multiple NFL games per week, I have never seen that call

Doesn't matter that he 'pulled up' as you put it. The holder is in a vulnerable position and can not be touched. Period.