Super Bowl XL

[justcoz 0]

Ive only read of one person having the opinion that the referees were absolutely perfect. Even the televised talking heads mentioned the bad calls quite often.

 

The only thing as sad as the conspiracy theories is acting like there were zero mistakes by the officials.

 

Yes, there were some horrible calls in that game....but the fact is that, after all these bad calls, Seattle was only down 14-10 at the start of the 4th quarter and had a whole 15 minutes to score just once to take the lead, but they played like shit and got nothing. Seattle lost that game, no one else lost it for them.

 

I don't disagree with you, but the phantom hold that took back a play that would have got the ball at the Pittsburgh 2 happened in the 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Hasselbeck promptly threw a pick a couple of plays later on 3rd and long. If Seattle scores and goes up 17-14, or even kicks a field goal it's a one possession game. In any case, Seattle didn't deserve to win, but then again neither did Pittsburgh.

 

Pittsburgh deserved to win because they successfully made the big plays that win football games. They showed more character. Seattle had some bad breaks (although overexaggerated by some here) but if they made the two field goals, caught passes in bounds, didn't drop passes, managed the clock better and had better play calling, they could've won too. They didn't. Pittsburgh didn't let opportunities escape them despite a sub par performance overall.

 

its hard to let opportunities escape when u are handed a 21 pt swing and ya opponent had 161 yards taking away in penalties and callbacks

 

Wow. Let me ask you this. If Pittsburgh overcame bad officiating in Indy to win, why couldn't Seattle??? My answer. Pittsburgh played their best football against Indy and Seattle didn't play their best against Pittsburgh. This is the reason they lost the game.

 

How many times does someone have to call attention to the missed field goals, dropped passes, no running game, routine punts into the endzone when they could have pinned a struggling Steelers offense deep in their own territory and just overall terrible coaching and clock management?

 

The Steelers didn't play great football but those big plays that the offense executed won the game and their defense didn't blow big plays like the Parker run and the Randel El - Ward reverse.

 

And where are you coming up with Pittsburgh being handed 21 points? 14 of those 21 Pittsburgh points were because Seattle's defense dropped the ball on coverages, had nothing to do with officiating. A 75 yard running play that had they watched the tapes they would have seen Parker break against Cleveland I believe. A reverse pass using Randel El with Hines off to himself that they pretty much ran fairly similar in the Cinci playoff game. And Cowher would have likely went for the seven on the fourth and inches whether the Ben TD was called back or not so that likely would have been another a TD.

 

I would have preferred a Steeler victory where there were no blown calls and no excuses. The NFL has a problem with their officiating and it needs to be addressed and taken care of, no argument from me there. Turning a blind eye to what really cost Seattle this game will get an argument from me.

 

the OPI on Jackson=7 pts

holding on Locklear=possible 7pts

Roethlisberger TD=7 pts

and im not even mentioning the horse collar..the 15 yd penalty on Hasselbeck for 'blocking' that set up the Randle El pass..the horrible spot on the Mack Strong run...the 34 yard punt return called back, etc every single questionable call went against Seattle..if it were just bad refs...there woulda been bad calls both ways..this deserves federal investigation..seriously....I remember listening to Jay and Michelle on 97.1 last week and a brother of a ref said that the NFL wanted the Steelers to win...they hung up on him..he doesnt look so crazy today

 

 

the OPI on Jackson=7 pts: the right call, he pushed him off

 

holding on Locklear=possible 7pts: possible being the key word, could have easily been three

 

Roethlisberger TD=7 pts: and had the call been reversed, it would have either been 3 points or a fairly easy QB sneak or Bettis push over the goal line for 7

 

the 15 yd penalty on Hasselbeck for 'blocking' that set up the Randle El pass: The interception set up the Randle El pass, the block gave them better field position but so would 15 yds accumulated with some run or passing plays. not to mention that Hines was open by about ten yards.

 

I remember listening to Jay and Michelle on 97.1 last week and a brother of a ref said that the NFL wanted the Steelers to win...they hung up on him..he doesnt look so crazy today: Yes, the league officials made sure that Josh Brown couldn't make two field goal attempts, Shaun Alexander's presence amounted to nothing (i was shocked to see he had 95 yds total rushing), four punts went for touchbacks, big pass plays were dropped and the Hawks couldn't get their offensive play calling together to get some additional points at the end of the first half or at the end of the 4th quarter.

[Fökai 0]

RE: Stevens' fumble.

 

Yeah, that was a fumble. It's just that Stevens has this trait where he catches on his tiptoes, so it looks like he's always trying to plant his feet as a defender is about to hit him. He takes two steps with the ball before Hope strips him.

 

The next play, Scobey blows the punt by Rouen that could've placed the Steelers on their own 1.

[Guest]

And, hey, while we're at it, let's talk about the Stevens fumble when he held the ball for three steps and had it stripped... and it was called incomplete. He caught the ball, got to the ground, took three steps... and they call it incomplete? ZUH?! Right there, that play makes the Jackson PI call not happen because the Steelers have the ball at their own 20-ish. What about the illegal pick in the EZ on Stevens' touchdown?

I don't know why, but I forgot all about that play.

[Urban Warfare 0]

And, hey, while we're at it, let's talk about the Stevens fumble when he held the ball for three steps and had it stripped... and it was called incomplete. He caught the ball, got to the ground, took three steps... and they call it incomplete? ZUH?! Right there, that play makes the Jackson PI call not happen because the Steelers have the ball at their own 20-ish. What about the illegal pick in the EZ on Stevens' touchdown?

I don't know why, but I forgot all about that play.

 

If anything, that would have hurt the Steelers, because he fumbled it ahead like 15 yards, and the Hawks would have been down to the 15 yard line.

[Guest]

I think Pittsburgh would have picked it up.

[Gert T 0]

You forgot about the play because it was just another routine Jerramy Stevens drop.

[Hawk 34 0]

You forgot about the play because it was just another routine Jerramy Stevens drop.

 

Who?

 

okay, thats the last time. I promise.

[Guest Princess Leena]

And, hey, while we're at it, let's talk about the Stevens fumble when he held the ball for three steps and had it stripped... and it was called incomplete. He caught the ball, got to the ground, took three steps... and they call it incomplete? ZUH?! Right there, that play makes the Jackson PI call not happen because the Steelers have the ball at their own 20-ish. What about the illegal pick in the EZ on Stevens' touchdown?

 

I mentioned it a page earlier!

 

IMO, that was the 2nd worst blown call of the game behind the Hasselbeck "chop block". Nevermind that the ball went eventually went out of bounds... when ruled, it was in favor of Seattle.

 

I'm not understanding why EVERYONE is going on this fix bandwagon. While Seattle should feel frustrated by some of the calls... they were legit.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Let me clarify my position, while I'm at it. By no means am I arguing that there were no bad calls by the officials. Any one of those could have gone the other way, and the Hasselback personal foul was as bullshit of a call as I've seen (by the way, the Steelers had the same call against them earlier in the year off of a Mommy Maddox pick; the rule was as BS then as it is now). However, this isn't the same type of situation as the game in Indy, where the refs almost made the Colts -- who were thoroughly outplayed the entire game -- the victors. In this circumstance, you had a team who thoroughly bungled away a victory by themselves, with no help from the refs.

 

1) Joey Porter was 100% wrong in calling Jeremy Stevens soft before the game. Case in point: his hands.

 

2) The Seacawks seemed completely baffled by the fact that the Steelers rotated coverage towards Darrell Jackson after the first quarter. Let's see: you have a wily veteran as your second WR, one who has kept the team together through the 3/4 of the season Jackson was hurt. He's facing a rookie corner. In the Super Bowl. And how many catches did Bobby Engram come up with? 6 for 70 mostly meaningless yards. No touchdowns, no real impact on the course of the game.

 

3) They were completely unable to establish the tempo of the game through their running game. Color me baffled that Shaun Alexander had 95 yards, because it seemed like whenever the Cawks needed a good gain, they threw the ball. In every situation where having an all-world MVP tailback would seem to benefit you, they put the ball on Matt Hasselbeck's shoulders and let Alexander rot. He must've had the quietest 4.8 ypc game I've ever seen in my life, and it's entirely Mike Holmgren's fault. He let good ol' Hasselbeck throw up some wounded quails on third down and you're just not going to win the Super Bowl going 5/18 on third down.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

And sorry 'bout that, Leena. I didn't read the whole thread, I just saw a few of the same "Cawks were rawbed'd'!!!" posts I've seen everywhere. Props to you.

[dh86 0]

Ive only read of one person having the opinion that the referees were absolutely perfect. Even the televised talking heads mentioned the bad calls quite often.

 

The only thing as sad as the conspiracy theories is acting like there were zero mistakes by the officials.

 

Yes, there were some horrible calls in that game....but the fact is that, after all these bad calls, Seattle was only down 14-10 at the start of the 4th quarter and had a whole 15 minutes to score just once to take the lead, but they played like shit and got nothing. Seattle lost that game, no one else lost it for them.

 

I don't disagree with you, but the phantom hold that took back a play that would have got the ball at the Pittsburgh 2 happened in the 4th quarter if I remember correctly. Hasselbeck promptly threw a pick a couple of plays later on 3rd and long. If Seattle scores and goes up 17-14, or even kicks a field goal it's a one possession game. In any case, Seattle didn't deserve to win, but then again neither did Pittsburgh.

 

Pittsburgh deserved to win because they successfully made the big plays that win football games. They showed more character. Seattle had some bad breaks (although overexaggerated by some here) but if they made the two field goals, caught passes in bounds, didn't drop passes, managed the clock better and had better play calling, they could've won too. They didn't. Pittsburgh didn't let opportunities escape them despite a sub par performance overall.

 

its hard to let opportunities escape when u are handed a 21 pt swing and ya opponent had 161 yards taking away in penalties and callbacks

 

Wow. Let me ask you this. If Pittsburgh overcame bad officiating in Indy to win, why couldn't Seattle??? My answer. Pittsburgh played their best football against Indy and Seattle didn't play their best against Pittsburgh. This is the reason they lost the game.

 

How many times does someone have to call attention to the missed field goals, dropped passes, no running game, routine punts into the endzone when they could have pinned a struggling Steelers offense deep in their own territory and just overall terrible coaching and clock management?

 

The Steelers didn't play great football but those big plays that the offense executed won the game and their defense didn't blow big plays like the Parker run and the Randel El - Ward reverse.

 

And where are you coming up with Pittsburgh being handed 21 points? 14 of those 21 Pittsburgh points were because Seattle's defense dropped the ball on coverages, had nothing to do with officiating. A 75 yard running play that had they watched the tapes they would have seen Parker break against Cleveland I believe. A reverse pass using Randel El with Hines off to himself that they pretty much ran fairly similar in the Cinci playoff game. And Cowher would have likely went for the seven on the fourth and inches whether the Ben TD was called back or not so that likely would have been another a TD.

 

I would have preferred a Steeler victory where there were no blown calls and no excuses. The NFL has a problem with their officiating and it needs to be addressed and taken care of, no argument from me there. Turning a blind eye to what really cost Seattle this game will get an argument from me.

 

the OPI on Jackson=7 pts

holding on Locklear=possible 7pts

Roethlisberger TD=7 pts

and im not even mentioning the horse collar..the 15 yd penalty on Hasselbeck for 'blocking' that set up the Randle El pass..the horrible spot on the Mack Strong run...the 34 yard punt return called back, etc every single questionable call went against Seattle..if it were just bad refs...there woulda been bad calls both ways..this deserves federal investigation..seriously....I remember listening to Jay and Michelle on 97.1 last week and a brother of a ref said that the NFL wanted the Steelers to win...they hung up on him..he doesnt look so crazy today

 

 

the OPI on Jackson=7 pts: the right call, he pushed him off

 

holding on Locklear=possible 7pts: possible being the key word, could have easily been three

 

Roethlisberger TD=7 pts: and had the call been reversed, it would have either been 3 points or a fairly easy QB sneak or Bettis push over the goal line for 7

 

the 15 yd penalty on Hasselbeck for 'blocking' that set up the Randle El pass: The interception set up the Randle El pass, the block gave them better field position but so would 15 yds accumulated with some run or passing plays. not to mention that Hines was open by about ten yards.

 

I remember listening to Jay and Michelle on 97.1 last week and a brother of a ref said that the NFL wanted the Steelers to win...they hung up on him..he doesnt look so crazy today: Yes, the league officials made sure that Josh Brown couldn't make two field goal attempts, Shaun Alexander's presence amounted to nothing (i was shocked to see he had 95 yds total rushing), four punts went for touchbacks, big pass plays were dropped and the Hawks couldn't get their offensive play calling together to get some additional points at the end of the first half or at the end of the 4th quarter.

 

Jackson did not push off...yes he placed his hands on the guy but they were touching each other the whole route...the corner didnt budge and it was a ticky tack call at best and no way Cowher would have tried that trick play at his own 28...starting at the 43 instead made it much easier...and what makes u think ben or bettis would have gotten in from the 1 when seattle stopped them 3 times earlier?...it would have been 4th and goal....the seahawks had 1st and goal from the 2...big difference..my main point is that...sure Seattle could have overcome the descrepancy...but why would they have to?...the game is at travesty on every level and it fucked up the legitimacy of the NFL in my eyes

[Guest]

Placing hands on a guy = pass interference. They call that shit on the defense every fucking time and when they don't, people freak out over it.

 

My view is this. If you have to depend on every single call from the refs in order to win, you weren't good enough. Seattle would have to have had ALL these questionable calls go their way in order to win.

[Special K 0]

They could've gotten the ball to Jurevicius some more, too. He is the shit.

[Fökai 0]

RE: My quote on Hasselbeck's personal foul:

 

And it wasn't a low tackle - it was a low block. They said he attempted to cut on Townsend, not Taylor (the guy who made the interception). It's not a reviewable call and we benefitted from the magic of four thousand cameras on the field. We can be armchair quarterbacks on a lot of things - this is one instance in where we couldn't.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

In fairness to the Seahawks, they did try to get it to Jurevicius. He was blanketed by 'Shea the whole game. Shea had probably the best game of his career.

[dh86 0]

Placing hands on a guy = pass interference. They call that shit on the defense every fucking time and when they don't, people freak out over it.

 

My view is this. If you have to depend on every single call from the refs in order to win, you weren't good enough. Seattle would have to have had ALL these questionable calls go their way in order to win.

 

and the Steelers DID get all the questionable calls and won...ok

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

-------------------------- Kingofthe909's point

 

 

 

 

 

-------------------------- dh86's head

[dh86 0]

RE: My quote on Hasselbeck's personal foul:

 

And it wasn't a low tackle - it was a low block. They said he attempted to cut on Townsend, not Taylor (the guy who made the interception). It's not a reviewable call and we benefitted from the magic of four thousand cameras on the field. We can be armchair quarterbacks on a lot of things - this is one instance in where we couldn't.

 

but wtf was hasselbeck blocking for if he was on defense?...seriously....referees need to be fired for these bad calls...only way to send a message

[Guest]

I don't know if you understand this, but there were calls going the other way too.

 

Overall, terribly played game, and poorly officiated (but that doesn't matter when Seattle had the chance to hang a ton of points on Pittsburgh in the first half, yet only got 3). At least it's going to be memorable, but sadly not for it being Jerome Bettis' (a bonafide Hall of Famer if there was one) last game, and that's clearly evidenced here.

[dh86 0]

-------------------------- Kingofthe909's point

 

 

 

 

 

-------------------------- dh86's head

 

he said if u need every questionable call to win then u dont deserve to win...thats exactly with the steelers did...I got his point u dumb fuck...but whatever...we all saw the same game...

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

The rule is that he was trying to trip up a blocker, which is a foul. I don't necessarily agree with the rule, but it's a rule.

[dh86 0]

I don't know if you understand this, but there were calls going the other way too.

 

do give examples

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Point was that the Steelers didn't get every questionable call, nor did they need it. The Seahawks had more problems than the questionable calls. Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not isn't really my problem.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I had a post up there ^^^^^^ where I gave two of them. There were more, including the non-calls that prompted the infamous holding call against the left tackle who tried to clothesline Clark Haggans.

[Guest]

I don't know if you understand this, but there were calls going the other way too.

 

do give examples

I don't need to answer to you when there already are examples in this thread. If you ignore them, then nothing I tell you is going to be different.

[dh86 0]

I had a post up there ^^^^^^ where I gave two of them. There were more, including the non-calls that prompted the infamous holding call against the left tackle who tried to clothesline Clark Haggans.

 

didnt ask u..but are u talking about the play where Haggans jumped offside against the RIGHT tackle? ok

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

He didn't jump offsides. He timed the snap well because he figured out the Seahawks' silent count. They changed it after that posession because they realized he had figured out the timing.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Whoever the Steelers DB was did the same thing that Jackson did.

 

What's overlooked in the Locklear play is the Steeler LB or DE jumped offsides.

 

The Steelers got away with a ton of holding plays, including on the Roethlisberger TD.

 

 

Two of Pittsburgh's TD where set up by questionable calls. Roethlisberger's TD, and more importantly the missed holding call on the play. The Locklear holding call on the completion down the three yard line. That's 3 or 7 point off the board.

[Fökai 0]

RE: My quote on Hasselbeck's personal foul:

 

And it wasn't a low tackle - it was a low block. They said he attempted to cut on Townsend, not Taylor (the guy who made the interception). It's not a reviewable call and we benefitted from the magic of four thousand cameras on the field. We can be armchair quarterbacks on a lot of things - this is one instance in where we couldn't.

 

but wtf was hasselbeck blocking for if he was on defense?...seriously....referees need to be fired for these bad calls...only way to send a message

 

The referres thought that Hasselbeck attempted to undercut Townsend, which is acceptable at every other angle but the endzone camera. In fact, Townsend would've had his knees demolished by Hasselbeck's helmet if he didn't sidestep at the last second.

 

EDIT: Looking back at the holding call which would've put the Seahawks at the 2, Locklear held Haggans after they disengaged. Too bad because he got the better of Haggans; Haggans was already falling to the ground where he held him by the helmet and jersey. Either the language is too vague, or Madden is senile enough to believe that there isn't holding on every play in football already.

[Guest]

Something I've learned as an offensive lineman in high school, is that there's holding on EVERY play, and there's all kinds of little tricks to avoid being caught.

 

EDIT: And someone creeps in with that point before I post it. Good job.