View Poll Results: Who Will Win the SuperBowl?
Seahawks
27
34.62%
Steelers
51
65.38%
Voters: 78. You may not vote on this poll
Official Superbowl Thread!
#801
Originally Posted by Jonesi
If you ask the Seahawk fans it's a little remote controlled football ran by the referees..
#802
Originally Posted by WdnUlik2no
Ok, the more I think about it, what you are saying does make sense. Take Carl Lewis for example, in his prime he could jump close to 30 feet (close to 10 yards). So if Lewis was playing in the NFL, he could conceivably run the ball to the 9 or 8 yard line and then jump out of bounds at a 45 degree angle out of bounds. This would put him pass the plane of the goalline, but well out of bounds. This wouldn't make much sense to be ruled a TD, since many player would attempt to do the same thing as you suggested. I am still curious about the infinity rule, but you seem to be correct about a diving player out of bounds should not be given the TD. Your right, I'm wrong.
how many times do i have to say it.. the ball could cross the line in the air in row 25 but the player would still have to have a bodypart go inside or over the pylon.. that is the rule.. so no carl lewis couldn't jump 10 yards and score a touchdown unless he has a monster elephant penis that could extend inside the pylon
#803
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
how many times do i have to say it.. the ball could cross the line in the air in row 25 but the player would still have to have a bodypart go inside or over the pylon.. that is the rule.. so no carl lewis couldn't jump 10 yards and score a touchdown unless he has a monster elephant penis that could extend inside the pylon
Thats what I said in my post! I was saying that you and cazzy were right I was was wrong.
Originally Posted by wdnulik2no
he could conceivably run the ball to the 9 or 8 yard line and then jump out of bounds at a 45 degree angle out of bounds. This would put him pass the plane of the goalline, but well out of bounds. This wouldn't make much sense to be ruled a TD
#804
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
how many times do i have to say it.. the ball could cross the line in the air in row 25 but the player would still have to have a bodypart go inside or over the pylon.. that is the rule.. so no carl lewis couldn't jump 10 yards and score a touchdown unless he has a monster elephant penis that could extend inside the pylon
#805
Originally Posted by WdnUlik2no
Thats what I said in my post! I was saying that you and cazzy were right I was was wrong.
he wouldn't score a td unless a bodypart went inside the pylon though
#809
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
he wouldn't score a td unless a bodypart went inside the pylon though
#813
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
it would have to be reviewed and magnified to make sure the pube got inside the pylon
#815
When you have posession of the ball, you are not considered out of bounds unless you touch an area that is out of bounds. So, when Carl Lewis is running for the endzone and leaps from in-bounds and the nose of the ball breaks the plane of the goal line (between the pylons) before any part of his body touches out-of-bounds its considered a touchdown (no matter how far to the left or right of the pylon his body is when the ball crosses the goal line).
#816
Originally Posted by jlukja
When you have posession of the ball, you are not considered out of bounds unless you touch an area that is out of bounds. So, when Carl Lewis is running for the endzone and leaps from in-bounds and the nose of the ball breaks the plane of the goal line (between the pylons) before any part of his body touches out-of-bounds its considered a touchdown (no matter how far to the left or right of the pylon his body is when the ball crosses the goal line).
Yep, that is correct. But what I was demonstrating is if he dives out out bounds, cross the plane of the goal line, but no part of his body or the ball is ever in between the pylons.
|
GOALLINE | Lewis ends up here before touching ground
In that diagram above that is not a TD if Carl Lewis is never inbounds on his dive.
Last edited by WdnUlik2no; 02-06-2006 at 03:59 PM.
#819
OK, according to Michael Wilbon on PTI, it wasn't a snub on purpose by Holmgren after the game. Apparently they did have trouble getting together, but Holmgren made it a point to praise Cowher in interviews after the game. Something about so many people on the field after the Super Bowl compared to a regular game makes it harder for the coaches to find each other.
#820
Originally Posted by Mike97 3.0P
Why did Terry Bradshaw decline the invitation to walk out with the other MVP's?
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?id...eadlines&ft=ss
#821
^^^ Bradshaw has maintained that he would be with his family for a while now. Ther's really nobody questioning that. Montana is getting serious heat though, if this $100k rumor is true.
#822
Originally Posted by GreenMonster
Probably for the same reason Montana did... Montana allegidly wanted $100K to show up...
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?id...eadlines&ft=ss
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?id...eadlines&ft=ss
I knew I didn't remember seeing Joe Montana up there. I thought they were going by each superbowl, but for some, they just said "From the 80's". Thats pretty messed up if he wanted 100k.
#823
Originally Posted by GOOSE
yeah, seattle should have won. they're the real champs. if they played this game 10 times, seattle woulda won 9 of them. You guys are right, why play the games?
the "real champs" and their coach didn't royally fuck up on clock management at the end of BOTH halves, didn't drop passes, didn't miss 2 important FGs, didn't get burned on the game deciding 'trick' play, DIDN'T GIVE UP A FREAKING 75 YARD TOUCHDOWN RUN. You're right, seattle deserved to win this game. It's all the refs fault.
the "real champs" and their coach didn't royally fuck up on clock management at the end of BOTH halves, didn't drop passes, didn't miss 2 important FGs, didn't get burned on the game deciding 'trick' play, DIDN'T GIVE UP A FREAKING 75 YARD TOUCHDOWN RUN. You're right, seattle deserved to win this game. It's all the refs fault.
why don't you go and take a look at what all ther NATIONAL sports writers are writing about the game.....foxsports, espn, etc....they are all pointing to the REFS as the deciding factor in this game.
you mention the drop passes and missed FG but how about the TD pass to Jackson on a BS past interference call? how about the phantom holding call after seattle completed a pass to the pitt's 1 yard line (that would have been a guaranteed TD with Alexander in a subsequent play) or how about the touchdown that wasn't with Ben Roethlisberger.....that's a 21 point swing....that's the game right there
#824
Originally Posted by endo022
why don't you go and take a look at what all ther NATIONAL sports writers are writing about the game.....foxsports, espn, etc....they are all pointing to the REFS as the deciding factor in this game.
you mention the drop passes and missed FG but how about the TD pass to Jackson on a BS past interference call? how about the phantom holding call after seattle completed a pass to the pitt's 1 yard line (that would have been a guaranteed TD with Alexander in a subsequent play) or how about the touchdown that wasn't with Ben Roethlisberger.....that's a 21 point swing....that's the game right there
you mention the drop passes and missed FG but how about the TD pass to Jackson on a BS past interference call? how about the phantom holding call after seattle completed a pass to the pitt's 1 yard line (that would have been a guaranteed TD with Alexander in a subsequent play) or how about the touchdown that wasn't with Ben Roethlisberger.....that's a 21 point swing....that's the game right there
Not to mention that you can't argue the pass interference call, because it was pass interference. Sure, you might be able to say it happens all the time, and never gets called that closely, but seattle was just dumb enought to do it 3 feet in front of the official with absolutely no one else around. Makes the call pretty easy, so that takes another 7 off the swing, and it's down to a 7 point or 11 point swing, if you're lucky.
Fact is, seattle didn't make plays. Their receivers were out of bounds on two key plays, they were out of sync with the qb on blitzes, and at least three times didn't even know where the ball was when it was coming to them. Add that to all the drops, and they should've lost by a lot more.
#825
Originally Posted by endo022
why don't you go and take a look at what all ther NATIONAL sports writers are writing about the game.....foxsports, espn, etc....they are all pointing to the REFS as the deciding factor in this game.
you mention the drop passes and missed FG but how about the TD pass to Jackson on a BS past interference call? how about the phantom holding call after seattle completed a pass to the pitt's 1 yard line (that would have been a guaranteed TD with Alexander in a subsequent play) or how about the touchdown that wasn't with Ben Roethlisberger.....that's a 21 point swing....that's the game right there
you mention the drop passes and missed FG but how about the TD pass to Jackson on a BS past interference call? how about the phantom holding call after seattle completed a pass to the pitt's 1 yard line (that would have been a guaranteed TD with Alexander in a subsequent play) or how about the touchdown that wasn't with Ben Roethlisberger.....that's a 21 point swing....that's the game right there
The Ben TD run was ruled a TD on the field so the ref needed indisputable evidence to overturn it. While Ben was in the air they saw they ball cross the plane of the goal line; therefore a TD, regardless of where he lands. Even if the ball didn't cross the goal line while he was in the air, the refs did not have clear visual evidence to overturn it.
Same thing would have happened the other way around, if the play was ruled short of the endzone and it was challenged, the refs probably not (and should not) have overturned it in that case either. Again clear visual evidence is needed.
The Pass Inteference call was a penalty, he did push off no matter how blatant or subtle. But it did look like the ref was pretty late on the flag.
Back to the holding penalty, I am not sure, I only saw on side of it, I didn't see what his hands were doing on the other side.
But it all comes down to missed opportunities. Stephens had butter fingers most of the game, and they missed two FG's. Hasselbeck had a great game for the most part, but that late INT did them in.
Last edited by WdnUlik2no; 02-06-2006 at 05:38 PM.
#826
Originally Posted by WdnUlik2no
The Pass Inteference call was a penalty, he did push off no matter how blatant or subtle. But it did look like the ref was pretty late on the flag.
#828
Senior Moderator
Regional Coordinator
(Mid-Atlantic)
Regional Coordinator
(Mid-Atlantic)
iTrader: (6)
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 92,262
Likes: 4,489
From: ShitsBurgh
Originally Posted by WdnUlik2no
The Ben TD run was ruled a TD on the field so the ref needed indisputable evidence to overturn it. While Ben was in the air they saw they ball cross the plane of the goal line; therefore a TD, regardless of where he lands. Even if the ball didn't cross the goal line while he was in the air, the refs did not have clear visual evidence to overturn it.
Same thing would have happened the other way around, if the play was ruled short of the endzone and it was challenged, the refs probably not (and should not) have overturned it in that case either. Again clear visual evidence is needed.
The Pass Inteference call was a penalty, he did push off no matter how blatant or subtle. But it did look like the ref was pretty late on the flag.
Back to the holding penalty, I am not sure, I only saw on side of it, I didn't see what his hands were doing on the other side.
But it all comes down to missed opportunities. Stephens had butter fingers most of the game, and they missed two FG's. Hasselbeck had a great game for the most part, but that late INT did them in.
Same thing would have happened the other way around, if the play was ruled short of the endzone and it was challenged, the refs probably not (and should not) have overturned it in that case either. Again clear visual evidence is needed.
The Pass Inteference call was a penalty, he did push off no matter how blatant or subtle. But it did look like the ref was pretty late on the flag.
Back to the holding penalty, I am not sure, I only saw on side of it, I didn't see what his hands were doing on the other side.
But it all comes down to missed opportunities. Stephens had butter fingers most of the game, and they missed two FG's. Hasselbeck had a great game for the most part, but that late INT did them in.
#829
Originally Posted by hornyleprechaun
you know all of these arguments would be null if jeremy stevens (and his magic shit talking before the game) would have caught his balls... he has 2-3 dropped passes that would have put seattle inside the 10-15. I also love how at the end he dropped the pass and porter was over him talking shit..
#830
Originally Posted by The Sarlacc
The seahawks QB's 3rd of 4th quarter run that resulted in a huge fumble...that was deemed not a fumble...that was a pretty shit call to me.
He fucking butterfingered the ball, no one made him drop it.
He fucking butterfingered the ball, no one made him drop it.
In Genereal, the officiating was poor and Seahawks got the bad calls - not the steelers. I'm not even a Seahoawks fan, but every call and bad call went against the hawks. penalties 7 to 3, and 4 of the 7 were bad. I'm not sayinf the Hawks would have won, but it would have been a closer game. Shit if punk bitch Porter can say it, I'll say it - the officials wanted the Steelers to win, and probably fomr his whinning ass. Anyways this is why almost every newspaper and sports columnits outside of Pitt this morning has mentioned the poor officiating.
And the "pushoff" was more like a hand touch and did not casue any separation. The defender had already stopped moving and wasn't even aware the ball was coming. The receiver was already moving away so the best the defneder could have done was commit some pass interference since the balls was thrown so far away from the defender. Should have been a no-call.
But I am Happy that Bettis and Hines Ward got a ring - 2 guys with class.
#831
Originally Posted by lowpost
Anyone who's been watching sports for more than 5 years would not interpret what Stevens said as talking shit. What Stevens said was so fucking harmless and non-inflammatory that it would take just the right punk to blow it out of proportion and make something out of nothing. and there you go.
so what do you classify what he said "a guaranteed win" as? he also said bettis wouldn't be leaving detroit with the trophy...
#832
Originally Posted by lowpost
And the "pushoff" was more like a hand touch and did not casue any separation.
#833
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
The ref was only late with the flag because when he went to pull it out the first time, he missed.
A notable point is that championship teams overcome shaky officiating. See ex. A: Pit vs. Indy 3 weeks ago.
#834
Originally Posted by Mike97 3.0P
Actually he grabbed his black beanbag (the thing they toss on the ground to mark fumbles) then reached down again and got his flag.
A notable point is that championship teams overcome shaky officiating. See ex. A: Pit vs. Indy 3 weeks ago.
A notable point is that championship teams overcome shaky officiating. See ex. A: Pit vs. Indy 3 weeks ago.
Yep. Pittsburgh could have let that terrible terrible call take all the air out of them. But they still played like they were playing all game and came out with the win.
#835
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
I think it's safe to say you've never played defense in football before.
#836
Originally Posted by lowpost
Actually I have, but who gives a fuck - what's your fucking point? It's just my interpretatin of what I saw versus what other people saw. I saw a defender who had already stopped moving. Talk about that.
#837
Originally Posted by lowpost
Actually I have, but who gives a fuck - what's your fucking point? It's just my interpretatin of what I saw versus what other people saw. I saw a defender who had already stopped moving. Talk about that.
Too bad he did it right in front of the official because that kinda thing probably happens on about 80% off all pass plays, and only gets called on less than half of those.
#838
Originally Posted by Maximized
The defender got burned, simple as that. It was a bad call and the contact wasn't enough to warrant it.
It was a nice post up but there was no reason for him to create seperation. It was a nice pass outside of the defenders reach.. A quick judgement call by the ref and it became pass interference..
There are Many more refs on the field that could've overturned it.
The sad part is the refs don't make these calls during the season and as soon as the playoffs come there's all these newly enforced penalties. :shakehead
All the playoff games have been fucked up since the first game.
#839
Originally Posted by ccannizz11
The defender was all over him
Too bad he did it right in front of the official because that kinda thing probably happens on about 80% off all pass plays, and only gets called on less than half of those.
Too bad he did it right in front of the official because that kinda thing probably happens on about 80% off all pass plays, and only gets called on less than half of those.
And I'd say less then half the time.. Probably 10% or less.. It happened all season with no call.
#840
Originally Posted by Jonesi
He wasn't all over him...
And I'd say less then half the time.. Probably 10% or less.. It happened all season with no call.
And I'd say less then half the time.. Probably 10% or less.. It happened all season with no call.