royhitshard
New Member
- Messages
- 945
- Reaction score
- 0
It was a touchdown.
Ben's TD was a TD
- Thread starter LittleBoyBlue
- Start date
StanleySpadowski
Active Member
- Messages
- 4,815
- Reaction score
- 0
I've watched that play 20+ times and think that there's no conclusive evidence either way as to whether or not the ball touched the line. It's obcured by Roethlisberger's arm so unless one starts artificially superimposing dimensions of the ball, I can't say for sure.
One thing I can say for sure is that the official blew the call. He's clearly seen in the video running towards the pile indicating fourth down and spotting the ball. He then changes to a TD signal after Roethlisberger stretches the ball across after being down. The only way the side judge can make the TD call is if he saw the ball cross the line while it was in the air, something that clearly did not happen (not the ball crossing, but the official seeing it). If he would have immediately signaled TD, I'd have no problem with the call. He didn't and I have a major problem with how it was handled.
One thing I can say for sure is that the official blew the call. He's clearly seen in the video running towards the pile indicating fourth down and spotting the ball. He then changes to a TD signal after Roethlisberger stretches the ball across after being down. The only way the side judge can make the TD call is if he saw the ball cross the line while it was in the air, something that clearly did not happen (not the ball crossing, but the official seeing it). If he would have immediately signaled TD, I'd have no problem with the call. He didn't and I have a major problem with how it was handled.
baj1dallas
New Member
- Messages
- 6,556
- Reaction score
- 1
It's one or the other...either in or out. If you can say that you can't see one instant where it's for sure that the ball is across the line, that means you can't say it's a TD.
Terrible call. It was not a TD.
Terrible call. It was not a TD.
Chuck 54
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 20,496
- Reaction score
- 12,515
It seemed clear to me that the ball never crossed the goalline as he was holding it below the shoulders and his head barely broke the plane.
However, if the refs want to argue that he broke the plane in the air before being driven back, then the side judge should have blown the whistle and signalled TD immediately...it would have been a Td and nothing that happened afterwards, driven back, fumble, etc...none of it would matter.
However, the guy didn't call it a TD on the initial surge...he ran in holding his hand up in the air and only signalled TD when he got there and saw the ball over the line. As we all saw, Ben pushed it over from about 4-6" back after he was down.
Either way, the refs did a poor job on the call.
I have no problem with Pittsburgh winning, and I have no doubt they'd have run the QB sneak from the 3" line and scored anyway...Seattle had the better team for most of the game, but they didn't make any of the big plays needed to win...Pittsburgh did.
However, if the refs want to argue that he broke the plane in the air before being driven back, then the side judge should have blown the whistle and signalled TD immediately...it would have been a Td and nothing that happened afterwards, driven back, fumble, etc...none of it would matter.
However, the guy didn't call it a TD on the initial surge...he ran in holding his hand up in the air and only signalled TD when he got there and saw the ball over the line. As we all saw, Ben pushed it over from about 4-6" back after he was down.
Either way, the refs did a poor job on the call.
I have no problem with Pittsburgh winning, and I have no doubt they'd have run the QB sneak from the 3" line and scored anyway...Seattle had the better team for most of the game, but they didn't make any of the big plays needed to win...Pittsburgh did.
rynochop
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 6,763
- Reaction score
- 4,657
THUMPER said:
There would have been a holding penalty if that was Seattle getting that close to the goal.
I thought it was the right call. It appeared he crossed it (barely) when he was in mid-air, but when he came down he did not have it accross the plane. Still a TD though.
CrazyCowboy
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 32,287
- Reaction score
- 440
Chevyman08 said:
Not what the ref said......but it did TOUCH the plane....and that is all that is required.
Juke99
...Abbey someone
- Messages
- 22,279
- Reaction score
- 126
Whatever the call was on the field, that's what was going to stand.
If the ref said he didn't make it and it was reviewed, that would have been upheld.
The play was that kind of close.
No guarantee the Steelers would have scored but it would have been 4th and a half inch.
I think people have made too much of this play.
Now, the phantom holding call...THAT was a backbreaker.
If the ref said he didn't make it and it was reviewed, that would have been upheld.
The play was that kind of close.
No guarantee the Steelers would have scored but it would have been 4th and a half inch.
I think people have made too much of this play.
Now, the phantom holding call...THAT was a backbreaker.
CrazyCowboy
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 32,287
- Reaction score
- 440
Juke99 said:
Good point.....4th and an inch.....I like the Bus in that situation
Juke99
...Abbey someone
- Messages
- 22,279
- Reaction score
- 126
CrazyCowboy said:
Well yeah....and I'm not saying the TD was guaranteed....but this wasn't a call like Fred Swearingin made against Benny Barnes which completely changed the game.
The two plays I had a problem with were the holding call...and whatever they called when Hasselbeck tried to make the tackle after his INT.
I didn't have a problem with the offensive PI call against Jackson because if you go by the letter of the law, it was PI....and he did it RIGHT in front of the ref.
TwoSteppinJJ
Active Member
- Messages
- 1,168
- Reaction score
- 3
What ^^^ Said...
Dont see what all the fuss about this is. Chances are that they would have scored a td the next play, and if they didnt they would have seattle at the 1 and possibly force a safety.
Dont see what all the fuss about this is. Chances are that they would have scored a td the next play, and if they didnt they would have seattle at the 1 and possibly force a safety.
Nors
Benched
- Messages
- 22,015
- Reaction score
- 1
Call was TD
Replay - zoom it all you want. The initial forward progress had the ball right at the plane. There was no conclusive evidence the ball did not touch the plane. People are getting caught up with the theatrics of Ben trying to get ball in after play was dead.
Touchdown.
Replay - zoom it all you want. The initial forward progress had the ball right at the plane. There was no conclusive evidence the ball did not touch the plane. People are getting caught up with the theatrics of Ben trying to get ball in after play was dead.
Touchdown.
jman
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,766
- Reaction score
- 25
Nors said:
My problem is with the ref. He ran half way to the pile with his arm up signaling 4th down and pointing towards where the ball would be spotted. Then all the sudden half way there he signals TD?
If he would have signaled TD right from the get go, I would not doubt the call and agree the replay didn't show enough to over turn the call.
DLCassidy
Active Member
- Messages
- 2,390
- Reaction score
- 3
I have no problem with the call not being overturned. I couldn't tell whether he got in on the initial lunge. I have some problem with the way the initial call was made. The ref came running over with his fist in the air like he was going to spot it. Then after he got there he ruled TD. Well the only way Roth was in was on the initial surge. So if the ref wasn't ruling it as a TD right away, why did he change his mind? Surely if he had ruled him short that wouldn't have been overturned either- there was no clear view of the ball.
Would he have scored anyway? Probably but who knows?
The answer to these goal line calls is have a laser set up across the goal line and a microchip installed in the ball. If the ball crosses the plane, you hear a sound like glass shattering.
Would he have scored anyway? Probably but who knows?
The answer to these goal line calls is have a laser set up across the goal line and a microchip installed in the ball. If the ball crosses the plane, you hear a sound like glass shattering.
WV Cowboy
Waitin' on the 6th
- Messages
- 11,604
- Reaction score
- 1,744
It's just a shame.
A real shame for the Seahawks.
Seattle was the best team that day, but they got jobbed.
Pittsburgh's QB was pathetic, and save one good run, so was their running game.
Seattle moved the ball well against the Steelers D, .. Porter did nothing, Polamalu did nothing.
Bettis was his usual slow, fat, show-off do nothing self, ... 3 yds per carry.
Seattle made big plays, but they were continuously overturned by mysterious penalties.
A 98 yd drive in the 4th qtr to score the go ahead TD is what Super Bowl legends are made of, .. but that was taken from the Seahawks for no good reason.
The AP is talking about it, ESPN is talking about it, the Seahawks are talking about it, we are talking about it, everybody is, but nothing is going to change.
Was it coincidence that every crutial call went against one team at the worst of times ?
Was it so the Roonies could get their 5th, ... after all that would be good for the NFL, right ?
Was it so Cowher, who has been a good role model of a coach, could finally get that monkey off of his back, ... after all, he deserves it, doesn't he ?
And it's good for the NFL.
Was it so that the "feel-good" story of this Super Bowl, could come to fruition and Bettis could "come home" and win a Super Bowl, after all that would be good for the NFL, right ?
Do you think that from a marketing standpoint, more T-shirts, hats, etc will be sold if the Steelers win or the Seahawks ?
The Steelers did not win this game.
It's just a shame, a real shame for the Seahawks and their fans.
if this had happened to the Cowboys I would be sick.
Parity sucks.
A real shame for the Seahawks.
Seattle was the best team that day, but they got jobbed.
Pittsburgh's QB was pathetic, and save one good run, so was their running game.
Seattle moved the ball well against the Steelers D, .. Porter did nothing, Polamalu did nothing.
Bettis was his usual slow, fat, show-off do nothing self, ... 3 yds per carry.
Seattle made big plays, but they were continuously overturned by mysterious penalties.
A 98 yd drive in the 4th qtr to score the go ahead TD is what Super Bowl legends are made of, .. but that was taken from the Seahawks for no good reason.
The AP is talking about it, ESPN is talking about it, the Seahawks are talking about it, we are talking about it, everybody is, but nothing is going to change.
Was it coincidence that every crutial call went against one team at the worst of times ?
Was it so the Roonies could get their 5th, ... after all that would be good for the NFL, right ?
Was it so Cowher, who has been a good role model of a coach, could finally get that monkey off of his back, ... after all, he deserves it, doesn't he ?
And it's good for the NFL.
Was it so that the "feel-good" story of this Super Bowl, could come to fruition and Bettis could "come home" and win a Super Bowl, after all that would be good for the NFL, right ?
Do you think that from a marketing standpoint, more T-shirts, hats, etc will be sold if the Steelers win or the Seahawks ?
The Steelers did not win this game.
It's just a shame, a real shame for the Seahawks and their fans.
if this had happened to the Cowboys I would be sick.
Parity sucks.