OT: Here's a picture from the Seachicken group: The TD was good
John Walsh
He clearly broke the plane of the goal.
Gary Rosen
"John Walsh" <j1w...@lava.net> wrote in message
news:43E8B828...@lava.net...
That's what I thought at the time - very close, but he was in.
The biggest problems with the officiating were the tacky
OPI and holding calls that took away a TD and a 1st and goal
at the 1 from the Seahawks. Not technically "wrong" calls,
but rarely called that closely in critical situations.
Actually, come to think of it, the OPI may have actually been
wrong. Aren't WRs, like DBs, allowed to put their hand on
the other guy? It certainly didn't look like he pushed him away
at all (unlike Irvin, who used to get away with mugging DBs
all the time).
- Gary Rosen
stonej
football briefly break the white line. It was a TD.
I don't think a lot of the Seahawks will ever accept
that.
Bill Tuthill
Looks that way, although if the picture is from the 5 yard line,
and above, foreshortening could make it seem like he broke the plane,
though perhaps he did not. The cameraman would have had to be
parallel with the goal line
Gary Rosen <garym...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> The biggest problems with the officiating were the tacky
> OPI and holding calls that took away a TD and a 1st and goal
> at the 1 from the Seahawks. Not technically "wrong" calls,
> but rarely called that closely in critical situations.
I feel the OPI against Jackson was technically wrong, because
the DB had his arms in the air touching Jackson, interfering with
his right to catch a ball, if thrown.
There was only one replay of the non-holding call against Locklear,
presumably because ABC knew it was a bogus call and didn't want to
throw gasoline on the fire. Stevens' catch at the 1 or 2 would have
probably soon made the game 17-14.
> Actually, come to think of it, the OPI may have actually been
> wrong. Aren't WRs, like DBs, allowed to put their hand on
> the other guy? It certainly didn't look like he pushed him away
> at all (unlike Irvin, who used to get away with mugging DBs
> all the time).
Looked like he was just trying to peel off the DB's hands.
The DB could have easily been called for DPI. That's why it was
such a dishonest call. No call would be the honest choice.
You didn't mention the low "block" called against Hasselbeck,
which was also dishonest. It's ridiculous to make such a call
on a QB (!) making a potentially game-saving tackle.
All three flags should have been picked up.
Also, I think I saw the Steelers OT line move twice before the snap.
Neither penalty was called.
John Walsh
I saw it and I agree, but you're still nothing but an asshole troll.
John Walsh
Sure they are, but it's up to the refs to interpret the move. If you
watch the play again, all he did was hand check and there was no way
the other player was moved by the touch. Even then, he could have
just cut back to the left, with all that room and no player to his
left.
Ron
"Gary Rosen" <garym...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Actually, come to think of it, the OPI may have actually been
> wrong. Aren't WRs, like DBs, allowed to put their hand on
> the other guy? It certainly didn't look like he pushed him away
> at all (unlike Irvin, who used to get away with mugging DBs
> all the time).
I think that call is correct. If you look, you'll see that the
defender's weight shifts - he almost takes a step back the other way due
to the pushoff.
It's tricky, because that minor contact is not usually called if the
players are running next to each other, jostling for position. However,
since they were both essentially standing still at that moment, it was
much more obvious.
I think that call is usually made in that situation - but a similar
amount of contact is usually not called if the players are running
stride for stride.
-Ron
Ron
> There was only one replay of the non-holding call against Locklear,
> presumably because ABC knew it was a bogus call and didn't want to
> throw gasoline on the fire.
Huh?
This makes no sense. They don't want to throw fuel on the fire, but they
have Madden calling it a bad call on the air?
I don't know if that's a bad call or not. I didn't rewatch it extra
times on tivo. But it did look like the offensive lineman was beat, and
trying to block the defensive lineman from the side.
When that happens, sometimes you get holding calls. Sometimes you don't.
So it might have been a marginally bad call; the sort of thing that can
go either way and goes wrong 3-4 times a game. But that's about it.
-Ron
Leonard
"Ron" <ronald...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ronaldinho_m-59F3...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
I'm sure that you are correct.........all the correct calls were made, the
Steelers were the better team and deserved to win, etc.
Ford Prefect
"stranger" <stra...@perfect.com> wrote in message
news:h9lhu1tio9mv033gm...@4ax.com...
No. It's Mike Holmgren's brain.
John Walsh
I don't know Ron. I watched it probably as many times as anyone else
and it looks like the push was more of a hand check. That the defender
was moving the other way had as much to do with him being on the wrong
side of the play. The receiver had all of the left side for himself.
John Walsh
It's his hand with the football in it.