• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Did the refs ruin the Super Bowl?

Peralin

Active member
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
426
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
First of all, I'm a huge Seahawks fan, so I'm biased in all my opinions.

But give me a break! The refs made some terrible calss, and they all seemed to be against the Hawks. Okay, here are the ones I saw:

First, the Darrell Jackson touchdown which was called back for pass interference. From what I saw, Jackson did push off the Steeler a bit, but the Steeler was also blocking him, which is illegal after 5 yards. I don't think the Steelers deserve a penalty, but I didn't think that Jackson deserved it at all.

Second, the Roethlisberger touchdown which was reviewed and upheld. I honestly don't think he made it. But the ref called a touchdown, and, on further review, I would say that there isn't indisputable evidence. So I'm not upset about that one, because the Bus probably would've scored on 4th and 1 anyhow.

Third, the Peter warrick punt return holding call. I didn't even see a foul, but I wasn't watching closely. Any opinions on this one?

Fourth, the Sean Locklear holding call on Hasselbeck's pass top Stevens at the Steelers 2 yard line. This is ridiculous! For one thing, the Steeler's lineman was offside! And I don't even think it was holding, because Locklear made no grab and simply pushed the Steelers guy away from Hasselbeck. And that's a killer! That's pretty much taking 7 points away from Seattle.

Fifth, Hasselbeck's alleged block below the knees on his tackle after he threw the interception! He didn't block a single player, he only dove at Ike Taylor, who had the ball! It is legal to tackle below the knees, right? This penalty didn't matter much, but it was still a bad call.


So, basically, Seattle was robbed of 11 points (the Jackson touchdown adds 4 to Brown's field goal, and the Stevens pass adds waht would've been a 7-point run for Alexander or a rollout for Hasselbeck) and a lot of yardage. And, hey, what a coincidence, they lost by exactly 11 points! Plus, Seattle would've had all the momentum if they'd scored that second touchdown, and they'd be leading by 3! Who knows what might have happened?

Yes, I know, I'm blaming everything on the refs. I know the Seahawks didn't play very well, but even at the level they were playing at I think they could've won the game. I honestly believe that if the refs had made some better calls, Seattle could've won or at least sent it to overtime.
Is that a ridiculous proposal?
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Peralin said:
First of all, I'm a huge Seahawks fan, so I'm biased in all my opinions.

But give me a break! The refs made some terrible calss, and they all seemed to be against the Hawks. Okay, here are the ones I saw:

First, the Darrell Jackson touchdown which was called back for pass interference. From what I saw, Jackson did push off the Steeler a bit, but the Steeler was also blocking him, which is illegal after 5 yards. I don't think the Steelers deserve a penalty, but I didn't think that Jackson deserved it at all.

Second, the Roethlisberger touchdown which was reviewed and upheld. I honestly don't think he made it. But the ref called a touchdown, and, on further review, I would say that there isn't indisputable evidence. So I'm not upset about that one, because the Bus probably would've scored on 4th and 1 anyhow.

Third, the Peter warrick punt return holding call. I didn't even see a foul, but I wasn't watching closely. Any opinions on this one?

Fourth, the Sean Locklear holding call on Hasselbeck's pass top Stevens at the Steelers 2 yard line. This is ridiculous! For one thing, the Steeler's lineman was offside! And I don't even think it was holding, because Locklear made no grab and simply pushed the Steelers guy away from Hasselbeck. And that's a killer! That's pretty much taking 7 points away from Seattle.

Fifth, Hasselbeck's alleged block below the knees on his tackle after he threw the interception! He didn't block a single player, he only dove at Ike Taylor, who had the ball! It is legal to tackle below the knees, right? This penalty didn't matter much, but it was still a bad call.


So, basically, Seattle was robbed of 11 points (the Jackson touchdown adds 4 to Brown's field goal, and the Stevens pass adds waht would've been a 7-point run for Alexander or a rollout for Hasselbeck) and a lot of yardage. And, hey, what a coincidence, they lost by exactly 11 points! Plus, Seattle would've had all the momentum if they'd scored that second touchdown, and they'd be leading by 3! Who knows what might have happened?

Yes, I know, I'm blaming everything on the refs. I know the Seahawks didn't play very well, but even at the level they were playing at I think they could've won the game. I honestly believe that if the refs had made some better calls, Seattle could've won or at least sent it to overtime.
Is that a ridiculous proposal?
I am a fan of neither team... They both played well and hard, but overall it was the referees that beat Seattle more so then Pittsburg. Bad calls steal away heart and momentum ultimately changing the course of game.
That game sucked to watch!
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Good teams overcome all deficiencies...I'm sure the Ravens would've wanted these refs to call a game more than having Trent Dilfer as their own QB, but they won anyway...

Here's an idea...Make field goals and manage the clock and you won't have these questions...23-21 was not out of the realm of possibility had they not made their own mistakes...And I don't mean penalty-wise...
 

Apostle13

Wisdom Warrior
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
24
Location
Outer Darkness
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
cnredd said:
Good teams overcome all deficiencies...I'm sure the Ravens would've wanted these refs to call a game more than having Trent Dilfer as their own QB, but they won anyway...

Here's an idea...Make field goals and manage the clock and you won't have these questions...23-21 was not out of the realm of possibility had they not made their own mistakes...And I don't mean penalty-wise...
Yes... I did not understand how Seattle could of screwed up on the clock so badly... Not once but twice. That was just plain stupity.
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
Apostle13 said:
Yes... I did not understand how Seattle could of screwed up on the clock so badly... Not once but twice. That was just plain stupity.
I also agree. The Hawks blew this game on their own. Maybe there was a bad call here or there, don't know, doesn't matter. If the Hawks had manged the clock and played smarter they wouldn't have been put in a situation where one or two calls lost them the game. They kept handing the game to the Steelers and the Steelers gladly accepted it.

And yes, I'm a Seahawks fan.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Pacridge said:
I also agree. The Hawks blew this game on their own. Maybe there was a bad call here or there, don't know, doesn't matter. If the Hawks had manged the clock and played smarter they wouldn't have been put in a situation where one or two calls lost them the game. They kept handing the game to the Steelers and the Steelers gladly accepted it.

And yes, I'm a Seahawks fan.
A few years ago, the Flyers lost a playoff game to the Toronto Maple Leafs...

With the score 0-0, the ref called what has to be the worst call ever made...an elbow on John LeClair...with less then 3 minutes in regulation...Of course, Toronto scored, won the game, and won the series...

Everyone in Philly was bitchin' endlessly...but they all seemed to miss one important fact...

The Flyers scored ZERO GOALS...

The last I checked, there hasn't been a hockey game where the winning side scored zero goals...

If they scored 4 or 5, the whole thing would've been a non-issue...Same thing here...

How many "3-and-outs" did the Seahawks have?...How many times did they punt?...They lost by two scores, so if they punted more than 2 times, then there ain't no ref issue...

Watch the replays...How many dropped balls did the refs have for Seattle?...How many missed blocks?...How many punts?...How many blown coverages?...

I didn't see the guys in black and white make any...I saw the guys in funky blue make quite a few...
 

galenrox

ROCK AND ROLL MASTER
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,571
Reaction score
38
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Dude, I'm not saying that the Seahawks would've won if the refs had been competent, but it ruined the Super Bowl for me because I don't know.

Anyone who watches football understands the importance of momentum, how when a team with momentum simply can't be stopped, barring something LIKE a major play being called back, or the other team getting an extraordinarily proposterous call in their favor. Both of these things happened at times when the Seahawks had a lot of momentum, and it completely killed it each time. When that touchdown was called back, the Seahawks were at a point where that touchdown could've given them momentum for the rest of the half. And right when Rothlesberger got that TD even though the ball clearly never broke the plain, the Seahawks would've had the momentum of taking a team from within the 5 and holding them to a field goal.

In the Iowa City area there are a **** ton of Steelers fans due to black and gold pride (hawkeyes), and thus I was one of two Seahawks fans at the game, where about 20 people were, and there wasn't a single person who wasn't enraged by those calls. This is because it takes away the legitimacy of the Steelers' win. The Steelers are a fantastic team who definately could've won the game fairly, but now we'll never know.
 

debate_junkie

Worst Nightmare
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
19
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
cnredd said:
A few years ago, the Flyers lost a playoff game to the Toronto Maple Leafs...

With the score 0-0, the ref called what has to be the worst call ever made...an elbow on John LeClair...with less then 3 minutes in regulation...Of course, Toronto scored, won the game, and won the series...

Everyone in Philly was bitchin' endlessly...but they all seemed to miss one important fact...

The Flyers scored ZERO GOALS...

The last I checked, there hasn't been a hockey game where the winning side scored zero goals...

If they scored 4 or 5, the whole thing would've been a non-issue...Same thing here...

How many "3-and-outs" did the Seahawks have?...How many times did they punt?...They lost by two scores, so if they punted more than 2 times, then there ain't no ref issue...

Watch the replays...How many dropped balls did the refs have for Seattle?...How many missed blocks?...How many punts?...How many blown coverages?...

I didn't see the guys in black and white make any...I saw the guys in funky blue make quite a few...
owwww redd, you're killing me. That game still sticks out in my mind like a sore thumb. You are right... the mistakes Seattle made were attrocious. My point is the ref's were WAY too visible in this game, period. Now, having said that... I still believe when you award points to a team, when it CLEARLY shows that his forward progress was stopped mid air, and the replay shows that the ball never breaks the plane of the goal line until after he's down... no matter what team that call would have been for... that's just downright unacceptable in the NFL.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
debate_junkie said:
owwww redd, you're killing me. That game still sticks out in my mind like a sore thumb. You are right... the mistakes Seattle made were attrocious. My point is the ref's were WAY too visible in this game, period. Now, having said that... I still believe when you award points to a team, when it CLEARLY shows that his forward progress was stopped mid air, and the replay shows that the ball never breaks the plane of the goal line until after he's down... no matter what team that call would have been for... that's just downright unacceptable in the NFL.
How many angles did we see?...

Now how many angles did the judges and refs see?...

Think what would've happened before instant replay...The ref throws his hands up in the air and they kick a 1 pointer 20 seconds later...Whether you think it was right or wrong, what they did is still better than the alternative...

You also have to remember the term "inconclusive"...99.9% of the time that means whatever was called on the field stands...If the ref said "No TD" at the end of the play, I'm sure the replay wouldn't have changed that call either...
 

debate_junkie

Worst Nightmare
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
19
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
cnredd said:
How many angles did we see?...

Now how many angles did the judges and refs see?...

Think what would've happened before instant replay...The ref throws his hands up in the air and they kick a 1 pointer 20 seconds later...Whether you think it was right or wrong, what they did is still better than the alternative...

You also have to remember the term "inconclusive"...99.9% of the time that means whatever was called on the field stands...If the ref said "No TD" at the end of the play, I'm sure the replay wouldn't have changed that call either...
True, but the official did not signal touchdown until he was right on top of the play, which was after Ben moved the ball. The official watching the replay was then privy to all of the angles that we saw... so you're correct in that the judge, making the initial call, had to go on what he thinks he saw. The ref, watching the replay, then saw everything we did. Also remember, Holmgren wasn't able to challenge this one. The call to review it came from upstairs, in the review booth. So if it were a spot on play, would it have been necessary to review it? I think not. :2wave:
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
debate_junkie said:
True, but the official did not signal touchdown until he was right on top of the play, which was after Ben moved the ball. The official watching the replay was then privy to all of the angles that we saw... so you're correct in that the judge, making the initial call, had to go on what he thinks he saw. The ref, watching the replay, then saw everything we did. Also remember, Holmgren wasn't able to challenge this one. The call to review it came from upstairs, in the review booth. So if it were a spot on play, would it have been necessary to review it? I think not. :2wave:
Although you MAY be correct, you're first sentence is what you THINK happened...The ref who made that call hasn't been publicly questioned, and you are ASSUMING he only made that call because "Ben moved the ball"...

I'm not saying it was wrong and I'm not saying it was right...I'm saying I'm a little more open to other angles, both physically and mentally...There may be something out there that hasn't been shown or discussed...

Remember...we are talking about a few inches here(Like I haven't heard THAT before!:doh )...

The view from the ref's eyes and the view from the camera angles are at least the same few inches apart...if not a few feet...
 

debate_junkie

Worst Nightmare
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
19
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
cnredd said:
Although you MAY be correct, you're first sentence is what you THINK happened...The ref who made that call hasn't been publicly questioned, and you are ASSUMING he only made that call because "Ben moved the ball"...

I'm not saying it was wrong and I'm not saying it was right...I'm saying I'm a little more open to other angles, both physically and mentally...There may be something out there that hasn't been shown or discussed...

Remember...we are talking about a few inches here(Like I haven't heard THAT before!:doh )...

The view from the ref's eyes and the view from the camera angles are at least the same few inches apart...if not a few feet...
I'm not assuming he made that call because Ben moved that ball. I'm basing my claim on the fact that running over he hesitated to call a TD, and the arms went up as he got closer. I guess when you watch the Superbowl with someone who's got Tivo, you can do the things that we did... watch it in slow motion with all the angles presented (which we did LOL) It was not the right call, and the Steeler's fan's present were even in agreement with that.

Now having said that... this call would NEVER have changed the outcome of the game, as it's already been said the Seahawks made too many mistakes.
 

Peralin

Active member
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
426
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
debate_junkie said:
I'm not assuming he made that call because Ben moved that ball. I'm basing my claim on the fact that running over he hesitated to call a TD, and the arms went up as he got closer. I guess when you watch the Superbowl with someone who's got Tivo, you can do the things that we did... watch it in slow motion with all the angles presented (which we did LOL) It was not the right call, and the Steeler's fan's present were even in agreement with that.

Now having said that... this call would NEVER have changed the outcome of the game, as it's already been said the Seahawks made too many mistakes.
No, not this call alone. But if you add it all up, it WOULD HAVE. I'm not saying that Seattle necessarily woul have won, but the outcome would hve been different. The Sean Locklear call is the one that's killing me. Even with Roethlisberger's touchdown and Jackson's no touchdown, the Seahawks would have scored a touchdown with 1st and goal at the 2. They probably wwould have gone up 17-14, and it would've changed the momentum significantly. Anyway, things would've changed, and it would've been a much closer game.
 

NYStateofMind

Active member
Joined
Jan 29, 2006
Messages
281
Reaction score
14
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
Apostle13 said:
I am a fan of neither team... They both played well and hard, but overall it was the referees that beat Seattle more so then Pittsburg. Bad calls steal away heart and momentum ultimately changing the course of game.
That game sucked to watch!
My feeling exactly. We always watch the Superbowl, and this one stunk. The bad calls ruined it for me. I love to watch a good matchup, and this one was until the refs made bad call after bad call. I'd rather see the players win or lose the game, not the ref's calls. The refs were just way too involved in the game, period.

I'm not a fan of either team. My hubby was happy, his team won. :mrgreen:
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Horrible officiating. Sorry Steeler fans, but this one needs an astericks next to it.
 
H

hipsterdufus

Peralin said:
First of all, I'm a huge Seahawks fan, so I'm biased in all my opinions.

But give me a break! The refs made some terrible calss, and they all seemed to be against the Hawks. Okay, here are the ones I saw:

First, the Darrell Jackson touchdown which was called back for pass interference. From what I saw, Jackson did push off the Steeler a bit, but the Steeler was also blocking him, which is illegal after 5 yards. I don't think the Steelers deserve a penalty, but I didn't think that Jackson deserved it at all.

Second, the Roethlisberger touchdown which was reviewed and upheld. I honestly don't think he made it. But the ref called a touchdown, and, on further review, I would say that there isn't indisputable evidence. So I'm not upset about that one, because the Bus probably would've scored on 4th and 1 anyhow.

Third, the Peter warrick punt return holding call. I didn't even see a foul, but I wasn't watching closely. Any opinions on this one?

Fourth, the Sean Locklear holding call on Hasselbeck's pass top Stevens at the Steelers 2 yard line. This is ridiculous! For one thing, the Steeler's lineman was offside! And I don't even think it was holding, because Locklear made no grab and simply pushed the Steelers guy away from Hasselbeck. And that's a killer! That's pretty much taking 7 points away from Seattle.

Fifth, Hasselbeck's alleged block below the knees on his tackle after he threw the interception! He didn't block a single player, he only dove at Ike Taylor, who had the ball! It is legal to tackle below the knees, right? This penalty didn't matter much, but it was still a bad call.


So, basically, Seattle was robbed of 11 points (the Jackson touchdown adds 4 to Brown's field goal, and the Stevens pass adds waht would've been a 7-point run for Alexander or a rollout for Hasselbeck) and a lot of yardage. And, hey, what a coincidence, they lost by exactly 11 points! Plus, Seattle would've had all the momentum if they'd scored that second touchdown, and they'd be leading by 3! Who knows what might have happened?

Yes, I know, I'm blaming everything on the refs. I know the Seahawks didn't play very well, but even at the level they were playing at I think they could've won the game. I honestly believe that if the refs had made some better calls, Seattle could've won or at least sent it to overtime.
Is that a ridiculous proposal?
The refs almost cost the Steelers the game in Indy. The NFL issued a statement after the Indy game that the Troy Palamalou interception should have been allowed. There were also several other awful calls during the Indy game.

All in all they did a terrible job during the playoffs.

Bottom line Peralin - the Steelers were very beatable on Sunday and the Hawks blew a lot of chances with dropped passes and missed field goals. If it's going to make you and Holmgrem feel better to blame it all on the refs - be my guest.
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
hipsterdufus said:
The refs almost cost the Steelers the game in Indy. The NFL issued a statement after the Indy game that the Troy Palamalou interception should have been allowed. There were also several other awful calls during the Indy game.

All in all they did a terrible job during the playoffs.

Bottom line Peralin - the Steelers were very beatable on Sunday and the Hawks blew a lot of chances with dropped passes and missed field goals. If it's going to make you and Holmgrem feel better to blame it all on the refs - be my guest.
Agreed, they played a terrible game, but I can't blame them, everything was going the Steelers way, the calls, the fans, and the momentum from those playoff games. I think the same thing that happened to my Bears, happened to the Hawks, too much time off!:(

I don't think any calls were bad, just not reviewable, but I did think the call for pass interference, in the in zone was lame, and should have been allowed.
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
hipsterdufus said:
The refs almost cost the Steelers the game in Indy. The NFL issued a statement after the Indy game that the Troy Palamalou interception should have been allowed. There were also several other awful calls during the Indy game.

All in all they did a terrible job during the playoffs.

Bottom line Peralin - the Steelers were very beatable on Sunday and the Hawks blew a lot of chances with dropped passes and missed field goals. If it's going to make you and Holmgrem feel better to blame it all on the refs - be my guest.

Well said. I just hope the Hawks don't freaking let this bleed over to next year. I'm certain they feel like they were robbed, mugged and ripped off. I don't know if I feel that way. Sure you got the momentum thing, which is huge in just about any sport. I certainly think a couple calls were questionable at best. But as cnredd points out they had opportunity after opportunity to win this game. They let those chances slip away. Their clock management was beyond awful. I have no way of knowing this but I think it's possible Holmgrem let the thought of a bad call get into his head.

As far as the ref's go, until the game is ref'ed by computers and scanners or something there's always going to be mistakes. Someone earlier stated they thought the NFL wanted the Steelers to win. The whole "Bus" homecoming thing. I'm sorry I can't buy into that whole conspiracy theory BS. I had season tix to the Portland Trailblazers for several years. They played the Bulls in the finals one year. Blazer fans whined about Jordan getting all the calls. Many claimed the NBA just wanted the Bulls to win. The fact of the matter is Jordan nailed shot after shot, many from behind the line. The refs didn't beat the Blazers, Jordan did.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Pacridge said:
As far as the ref's go, until the game is ref'ed by computers and scanners or something there's always going to be mistakes. Someone earlier stated they thought the NFL wanted the Steelers to win. The whole "Bus" homecoming thing. I'm sorry I can't buy into that whole conspiracy theory BS. I had season tix to the Portland Trailblazers for several years. They played the Bulls in the finals one year. Blazer fans whined about Jordan getting all the calls. Many claimed the NBA just wanted the Bulls to win. The fact of the matter is Jordan nailed shot after shot, many from behind the line. The refs didn't beat the Blazers, Jordan did.
If anyone is so whacked to believe the NFL wanted anyone in particular to win, the Colts would've been there instead of the Steelers...
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Even with all the questionable calls the refs did not cost the Hawks the game......In the middle of the 3rd quarter with the score 14-10 Steelers the Hawks had the ball in Steeler terrority and did no get it done........

The refs had nothing to do with the 75 yard run by Parker for a TD or the 50 yard pass to Ward for a TD.......That was just bad defense......

Overall neither team played a good game...........
 

Peralin

Active member
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
426
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
hipsterdufus said:
The refs almost cost the Steelers the game in Indy. The NFL issued a statement after the Indy game that the Troy Palamalou interception should have been allowed. There were also several other awful calls during the Indy game.

All in all they did a terrible job during the playoffs.

Bottom line Peralin - the Steelers were very beatable on Sunday and the Hawks blew a lot of chances with dropped passes and missed field goals. If it's going to make you and Holmgrem feel better to blame it all on the refs - be my guest.

I'm not blaming it all on the refs. But they definitely were a factor. I know that the Seahawks didn't play well. But I still think they played better than the Steelers. Both teams played badly, and Seattle missed on some big oppurtunities, so I don't completely blame the refs. But in reality, if the refs hadn't messed up on the Jackson touchdown and the Locklear holding, the Seahawks would've had 11 more points (assuming they score a touchdown on 1st and goal at the 2).

And I'm not even that upset about the Jackson call. He did slightly push off, so I see what the ref was thinking. But the Locklear call was terrible. The Steelers player was offside! And if that one call hadn't been made (or had been called on the Steelers), the Seahawks would've taken the lead and been up 17-14. This would completely change the momentum of the game, and it would put Seattle on top.

Seattle did miss oppurtunities, but they still should've had 11 points more. I am not saying that Seattle lost because of the refs. I'm only saying that their attempt to come back and take the lead was spoiled by the refs. With some beeter officiating, the Seahawks would have taken the lead 17-14.
 

Peralin

Active member
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
426
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Deegan said:
I don't think any calls were bad, just not reviewable, but I did think the call for pass interference, in the in zone was lame, and should have been allowed.

No. The call against Hasselbeck for illegal block below the knees was DEFINITELY a bad call. He didn't touch anyone except Ike Taylor.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Peralin said:
I'm not blaming it all on the refs. But they definitely were a factor. I know that the Seahawks didn't play well. But I still think they played better than the Steelers. Both teams played badly, and Seattle missed on some big oppurtunities, so I don't completely blame the refs. But in reality, if the refs hadn't messed up on the Jackson touchdown and the Locklear holding, the Seahawks would've had 11 more points (assuming they score a touchdown on 1st and goal at the 2).

And I'm not even that upset about the Jackson call. He did slightly push off, so I see what the ref was thinking. But the Locklear call was terrible. The Steelers player was offside! And if that one call hadn't been made (or had been called on the Steelers), the Seahawks would've taken the lead and been up 17-14. This would completely change the momentum of the game, and it would put Seattle on top.

Seattle did miss oppurtunities, but they still should've had 11 points more. I am not saying that Seattle lost because of the refs. I'm only saying that their attempt to come back and take the lead was spoiled by the refs.
Replays showed that Jackson clearly pushed the defensive back and the ref called it.......Its a jusgment call........If you don't want a penalty you don't push the DB.......
 

easyt65

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
2,061
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Peralin said:
First, the Darrell Jackson touchdown which was called back for pass interference.
Didn't see that play, so I can not comment.

Peralin said:
Second, the Roethlisberger touchdown which was reviewed and upheld. I honestly don't think he made it. But the ref called a touchdown, and, on further review, I would say that there isn't indisputable evidence. So I'm not upset about that one, because the Bus probably would've scored on 4th and 1 anyhow.
I believe that the ball came equal to the white line by a miniscule amount. The ref coming in initially had his hand signalling down before switching it to TD as he ran in. THAT is bogus! As far as the excuse that it didn't matter because they would have just gone for it on 4th down, that is bunk. Bettis had already been stuffed, and, if you believe it, Big Ben had just been stuffed - no guarantee they get in on 4th down! That is why we play the game!

Peralin said:
Third, the Peter warrick punt return holding call. I didn't even see a foul, but I wasn't watching closely.
Didn't see the play.

Peralin said:
Fourth, the Sean Locklear holding call on Hasselbeck's pass top Stevens at the Steelers 2 yard line.
I did see Locklear's hand come up under the opposing player's shoulder pad/arm, what looked like hands grabbing a jersey for a fleeting second, and then him push the defender on around. I can see where a small case can be made for holding, but holding occurs EVERY play somewhere along the line, as almost any official will tell you. It is just a matter of what is seen and gets called. i also believe that it shouldn't be called unless it is just incredibly blatant and definitely affects the play/prevents a defender from reaching the QB before he can get rid of the ball....which was NOT the case on this play. He should have held that hankie!

Peralin said:
Fifth, Hasselbeck's alleged block below the knees on his tackle after he threw the interception!
This was the MOST ridciculous call of the game, IMO! The replay shows Hasselbeck diving and making contact with the runner, his momentum continuing his morion forward, and the blocker trying to get out front then having to jump over Hasselbeck. He made contact with the runner - it was a tackle, for Peete's sake!

I am neither a Seahawk fan nor a Steeler fan and had nothing invested in the game, so I can fairly confidently say I am un-biased.

Were the Referees the reason the seahawks lost?
- I don't think so! They missed more opportunities than those mentioned above. Jackson was not the only one having his problems. clock management, for example, was horrendous, both at the end of both the 1st and 2nd halves! The referees did not help, though.

Holmgren made the remark about how he didn't know they would have to beat the Steelers AND the refs. Remember the Steeler who complained publicly about the refs in their game against the Colts? The NFL slapped him mildly on the wrist because they knew their refs had been wrong. I think, if they look at these calls again as well, they will see that Holmgren had just as much right to say what he did as the Steeler did after the Colts game and will onlyslap him on the wrist! I would have added "but we still got beat by a good Steeler Team" at the end so as not to sound like 'sour grapes'!

Bottom line, though, if the referees are getting THIS much discussion after a game, especially the Super Bowl, then there is a major problem!
 

Peralin

Active member
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
426
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Navy Pride said:
Even with all the questionable calls the refs did not cost the Hawks the game......In the middle of the 3rd quarter with the score 14-10 Steelers the Hawks had the ball in Steeler terrority and did no get it done...................
No, the refs definitely cost the Seahawks 11 points, whether the calls were right or not. The refs obviously took away 4 points in the Jackson touchdown.

And in the fourth quarter, the Seahawks should've had the ball at the Steelers 2 yard line on the pass to Stevens. From there, the Seahawks would've scored easy. So that would make it 17-14 Seattle.

I AM NOT SAYING THAT THE REFS WERE BIASED. I don't know if they were, so I won't make that claim. And it's true, Seattle probably could've overcome the bad calls. But the fact remains that 11 points were taken away, and those 11 points would've made it a 21-21 tie.

Of course, the Steelers would've tried harder at the very end and may have gotten a field goal, but then... Seattle may have decided to prevent a long pass, whcih would've stopped Randle-El's pass. We don't know waht would've happened. But, from the Stevens catch till the end of the game, It would've been a great ending. Seattle may have won, or Pittsburgh may have won. But it would have been a fairer and better ending iff the call had been made correctly,
 
Top Bottom