Hawks fan here. I can remember only one play where I would agree with you. However I’ve never watched a game until this one where I began to consider whether the refs were biased. Seattle was clearly the better team, but I do not begrudge the Steelers their win. In the end they put up more points on luck as well as officiating but luck is part of the game too.
Really? You don’t begrudge them winning because of luck and “biased” officiating? I wonder what it would look like if you did begrudge someone something!
I myself would not call the scoring plays lucky, except for perhaps having the ref see Roethlisberger as breaking the plane. Otherwise, the luck of the Parker play was three perfect blocks by the Steelers line and the speed of Parker. It was so lucky, that it was his second longest touchdown run from scrimmage all year.
The luck of the Hines Ward touchdown was the luck of a nice block by Roethlisberger, the fact that the Seahawks DB’s bit on the run, and a perfectly thrown pass by Randle El. In other words, you see it as luck, whereas others see it as perfect execution and poor defensive recognition/inadequate speed. So be it, I suppose.
Sorry to say that you may not be as lucky next year with your regular season scheduling, although you will still have the luck of playing in the NFC West. Perhaps we’ll have a rematch for XLI in Miami. If we’re lucky.
Why can’t they sell something interesting, like maybe DVDs with old NFL games on them.
I disagree. I’m no fan of Seattle or Pittsburgh (as a Ravens’ fan, I hate the Steelers), but I didn’t think there was one team clearly better than the other going into the game. I thought Pittsburgh was the better team, but it was about as clear as mud.
The officiating hurt the Seahawks, no question. But the Seahawks hurt themselves more. Ascribing the Steelers’ victory to “luck” is nothing more than sour grapes.
One thing that bugged me about the Roethlisberger TD was the way the line judge called it. He came over with his hand up as if he was going to spot it short and then about 5 seconds after then end of the play he signalled TD. I just didn’t like the way that went down.
Yeah, that bugged me too. It looked like he was running in to spot the ball when he saw Roethlisberger move the ball on the ground. The play was long since over - there’s no justification for changing the call the way he did.
That was particularly egregious. I must admit to thinking that somebody had “suggested” that the refs rig the game if at all possible, and that questionable calls should go the Steelers’ way. Any possibility that bookies or organized, y’know, “families” have anything to do with pro football?
That TD call was just so damn out-to-lunch.
This is my pet conspiracy theory, not just for pro football, but for all pro team sports (hell, maybe all sports period).
Look, people, sports is just another form of entertainment when you get right down to it, but: gambling is involved. Las Vegas has a line on everything to do with the SB. Organized “families” still have ties to LV, despite what the gaming commission insists (or perhaps believes). It sure would be possible to rig games to affect the outcome favorably for the casinos & bookies.
No, I can’t prove any of it. And I’m willing to keep an open mind to any evidence that disproves it. Until then, I believe it’s highly likely.
Scattershooting while wondering where in blue blazes Ellis Dee and Omniscient are…
I can’t help but wonder why there isn’t a technical solution that would end those “plane of the goal line” disputes that happen so frequently in the NFL.
The yellow virtual yard lines they’ve been using on TV broadcasts for the last few years have been a nice touch, so why can’t they just apply similar technology to overlay a translucent virtual barrier that extends vertically from the goal line, rather than having imperfect humans sloppily eyeball it?
Favorably how? The whole idea behind a point spread is to make both sides of the bet equally attractive. And the spread adjusts based on the betting (ie, if the total amount bet on one team begins to exceed the other by a certain amount, the spread moves toward that team). Generally speaking, Vegas makes its money off a “commission” rather than one team or the other winning the game. To make rigging work you’d have to get a huge bet down at the last second and then ensure that the new point spread is beaten. It would also stick out like a sore thumb. Does anyone know if the spread moved considerably just before the game?
Now, if you’re talking about off-book betting, I would suggest that the Mob has WAAAAYYYY more working in Pittsburgh than in Seattle, which would argue for the Mob pushing a Seahawk win since that would cause most of the bets to come in losers (ie, Mob keeps the money).
I agree. One idea would be to put a chip in the ball itself to give its exact location. That’d be enough to determine the TD in this game. They could also sync the ball position information with the replay, so the ref can tell exactly which frame of the replay the ball reached the goal line. He can then tell if a runner’s knee was already down at that point of the replay.
I think they were planning to do something like this for the world cup this year, but last I heard the tech wasn’t going to be ready in time so the idea was scrapped. I’m not sure how hard this is to do technically; it seems like the same basic tech Fox used a few years ago to highlight the puck in hockey games.
Maybe a chip in the ball could give an electrical jolt when the plane is crossed, kinda like some dog collars do when the pass beyong a restricted boundary.
Sure would cut down on some of those end zone celebrations, or at least add an air of spasticity.
lol curses… You beat me to it. I just typed up this exact reply, although I added you could watch the slo-mo to see if the player jolts when they cross the goal-line.
I laughed out loud after thinking, "Yeah, but then you’d have to have a penalty for “fake jolting” and then imagining the signal the ref would use…
ROFL. Best idea ever. C’mon NFL, do it!
One problem in soccer v football is that a touchdown is scored when any part of the ball crosses the plain, while in soccer it’s a goal when the entire ball is over. The programming/technology would have to be a little different.
As for “the jolt”, I think it would be more interesting to have a jolt whenever the play ends (on the refs whistle) without a touchdown scored. Make the shock sufficient and it would be very hard to fake not getting shocked. Or better yet, put shockers in the shoes of players and shock them whenever they jump offsides or do anything else stupid. Yeah, that could be fun.
I don’t know why they use refs on the field at all anyway. It’s a complete anachronism. Cameras and other technology can completely replace having people in goofy stripes.
I don’t watch or know anything about football. But I would guess that having a lot of questionable calls all go against your team has to be sort of frustrating and demoralizing to a team.
Is there anyone who can honestly say that when the Roethlisberger touchdown occured, right at that moment, before the replay, that you knew for certain–for certain–that he made it or he didn’t? I didn’t. My reaction was, “Wow, that’s gonna be close!”
I think he made it in after looking at the replays, but I’ll concede, it was really, really close. That’s why it wasn’t overturned. It was a friggin’ razor’s edge decision.
So, in summary, we have a ref’s call made in real time (however many beats he waited) for a play that was so stinkin’ close, most folks (I’ll wager) needed several replays to confirm the outcome. And this is reflective of a bias, of a deliberate conspiracy by the refs for the Steelers to win, eh? Um, OK, sure…
At this point, I give up. I’ve gone back and watched the plays. The calls were legit, except for the Hasselbeck cut-block, and even there he did go low and he did make contact with the blocker, but was mostly getting around him to get to the ball carrier. The push off was a push off - a fucking hand to the chest that rocked Hope back enough that he had to take a hop step back to keep his balance - right in front of the ref. There was no “hand fighting.” The holding was an arm fully wrapped around the pass rusher, while he was already by the lineman. It’s all revisionist bullshit and woulda-coulda-shoulda inaccurate memories now.
Yeah, yeah - you would have won without those penalties being called, or if you had made more 50 yard field goals, or hadn’t dropped the balls when you were hit. Hell, some puss in another thread said that if there weren’t those penalties and dropped passes, the Seahawks would have won. And if my aunt had balls, she’d be in a sideshow. How fucking stupid can you be - I could sit here and say, “If Roethlisberger didn’t throw that interception, we’d have won by 40 points!” or “If we hadn’t false started twice on our opening drive, we would have scored!”
Maybe that’s the only way you would have won - being allowed to hold and push off and not being hit very hard. Maybe Skip Bayless and John Madden agree with you. Too fucking bad. You actually have to earn a win, and the Seahawks sucked, and their fans are proving themselves to be big fucking pussies. Boo hoo. Even with our “sieve” like defense and inept offense, you scored 10 points, and allowed 21.
Next year, you won’t even make the playoffs and you can bitch and cry about how badly you were robbed and what could have been, if only. I’m done thinking twice about your arguments and your tears.