hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Feb 2, 2009 12:49:22 GMT -5
arizona did not get jobbed. warner fumbled. woodley knocked it out before the arm came forward. warner lost that game throwing that horrible pick late in the half. maybe now they will stop with the warner HOF nonsense. I wouldn't say Arizona got jobbed, but at the end of Super Bowl, on a close call, don't you think the ref should at least go under the hood? And I would disagree about that being a horrible pick. It was a bang bang play that Harrison made a great jump on. (FWIW I think he should have been tossed for that punch in the second half). I don't think the refs saw the punch. I think they called the shove in the face after the Cardinal player was trying to stand up. If they had called the punch in the back, then I think the Cards would have kept the ball. I didn't think the ball had been punted yet.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,267
|
Post by hoyarooter on Feb 2, 2009 13:05:32 GMT -5
As someone who had no rooting interest in the game, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I didn't think it was the best SB ever (to me, that's still Pittsburgh 35 Dallas 31, in whatever number that was), but it's certainly high up there. I do think, though, that the Harrison pick was the most amazing single SB play ever. And I give big props to the Cardinals for coming back from what had to be a total emotional downer from that play.
And I thought the last fumble by Warner was a fumble, but found it odd that the play wasn't reviewed.
|
|
HoyaFanNY
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Never throw to the venus on a spider 3 Y banana!
Posts: 4,992
|
Post by HoyaFanNY on Feb 2, 2009 14:03:40 GMT -5
the play was reviewed, in the booth. once the play was over, the replay booth looked at it and decided it was the right call and did not need to be looked at by the refs on the field.
i thought that pick was a bad read by warner. your first job as a qb in that situation is to protect the ball in the red zone. it was a bad decision. not to mention, his wife could have put up a better effort in trying to tackle harrison. it's the frigging super bowl, nut up and fight to tackle the guy instead of dancing with steeler blockers.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Feb 2, 2009 15:28:57 GMT -5
NY, I agree totally with you with respect to the interception by Warner. Additionally, I think he has to be aware of the situation. It was first at the 6 yard line and you still have 20 some seconds. If it isn't wide open, then you throw it out of the endzone. Also, whatever analyst pointed out that by leaving the back on that side of the field, they were allowing the coverage that led to Harrison dropping back and cutting in front of Fitzgerald. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but I would think that Warner would have to be able to recognize that in that situation.
|
|
HealyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Victory!!!
Posts: 1,059
|
Post by HealyHoya on Feb 2, 2009 17:58:58 GMT -5
No one outside of Pittsburgh and Arizona cares about this Super Bowl. Not to quibble, but suggesting that Steelers fans exist only in Pittsburgh is widely off base. No team in the NFL has a more geographically diverse and diehard following than the Steelers. Given that the Cowboys are a joke, America's Team is pretty much the Steelers until further notice (conceding that the concept of America's Team is dumb). And, in hindsight, last night's game had terrific ratings, especially the 4th quarter. EDIT: I didn't even see RDF's quasi-defense of the Cowboys before I took my shot at them. Just to be clear, my snark wasn't intended as a shot at that post. I'm not in the habit of defending the media and could agree that the Cowboys need not be mentioned at every passing, but my dislike for Jerry Jones, TO's ladylike displays of tears and childish temper tantrums, Romo's dominance in the first three quarters/regular season and absolutely atrocious fourth quarter/playoff play, all whilst being told that the Cowboys are America's Team is just too much. Yuck. Romo in Us Weekly. TO with a reality show on VH1. Jerry Jones being....well, Jerry Jones. It's just a different culture, a different way of doing business than the Steelers. Both are legitimate.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Feb 2, 2009 20:27:39 GMT -5
the play was reviewed, in the booth. once the play was over, the replay booth looked at it and decided it was the right call and did not need to be looked at by the refs on the field. i thought that pick was a bad read by warner. your first job as a qb in that situation is to protect the ball in the red zone. it was a bad decision. not to mention, his wife could have put up a better effort in trying to tackle harrison. it's the frigging super bowl, nut up and fight to tackle the guy instead of dancing with steeler blockers. PTI brought up a couple good points tonight: 1. Why did this review happen so quickly. It's the end of the Super Bowl. Don't you want to take your time to look at that play as closely as you can and make sure you get it right? NBC only had pretty much one chance to show the play before the word came down and Pittsburgh snapped the ball to end the game. Why the rush? It certainly wasn't a clear cut call with all of the additional chances we've had to review it. Maybe a fumble, maybe not, but it needed a closer look, given the scope of the moment. 2. Why did Santonio Holmes not get flagged for a personal foul when he scored his touchdown. Don't get me wrong, I don't like the "ball as a prop" rule for celebrations. But the rule is the rule and both TK and Willybuns pointed out that what he did is AUTOMATIC as a personal foul, under the given rules. I'll add another. It didn't affect the play because Larry Fitzgerlad is Superman and caught the ball with his hand and his helmet, but when he caught his first touchdown pass, he was clearly being faceguarded and that should have been flagged whether he caught it or not. I'm not saying the best team didn't win. Pittsburgh was the best team, much as it hurts me to admit it. But it doesn't change the fact that the officiating sucked harder than Charles Barkley's date. (Sorry, I just read last week's Onion ;D )
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Feb 3, 2009 8:24:03 GMT -5
For a brief moment there, and it may be my failing eyesight, I could have sworn the refs were wearing black and gold stripes...
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Feb 3, 2009 10:02:16 GMT -5
For a brief moment there, and it may be my failing eyesight, I could have sworn the refs were wearing black and gold stripes... And then suddenly they changed into red and white stripes. The officiating in that game was streaky. For a while they were pro-Steelers, but towards the end they suddenly became pro-Cardinals. None of the calls were blatant errors, but it was just strange how the balance suddenly shifted. Are you guys sure that they reviewed that last play? I thought the rule was that they only had to review scoring plays in the last 2 minutes. But I could be wrong on that.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,791
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Feb 3, 2009 10:37:35 GMT -5
I thought the refs were pretty biased in favor of the Steelers, and I have no skin in this game.
The Cards had a few calls go their way, but I can't remember an awful call for them.
The refs basically gave the Steelers an entire drive of questionable personal foul calls.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Feb 3, 2009 10:47:01 GMT -5
Boz - faceguarding is no longer a penalty. Hasn't been for a few years. As long as you're not physically impeding the receiver's ability to catch, you can face guard, wave your hands, do a jig, whatever. But he made contact while faceguarding. I thought that was an automatic flag. I am willing to be corrected on the rules, however. All I know is that the five guys I was in the room with (not all of whom were rooting for Arizona), all immediately yelled "Interference!" which was quickly followed by, "Holy #@$^!!! How did he catch that? " Then again, we had a lot of beer.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Feb 3, 2009 12:50:19 GMT -5
1. they can review any [reviewable] play they want in the last 2 minutes - it doesn't have to be a scoring play. For example, if Harrison had been tackled at the five yard line (meaning it wasn't a "Scoring play") they could reviewed if he stepped out at the 25 (if it appeared that he might stepped out).
2. I agree on the unsportsmanlike conduct and forgot to bring it up yesterday. While I think it's a stupid rule, it is a rule and they have to call that - no discretion. That would be a huge game changer with the kickoff at the 15 yard line (right?). Plus, Holmes should be penalized just for copying LeBron who stole that act from Jordan.
3. I don't think faceguarding has ever been a penalty has it? I thought you could do whatever you wanted as long as you didn't make contact. The issue seemed to be if there was minimal contact and the defender wasn't looking back at the ball, they were more likely to call pass interference.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Feb 3, 2009 12:59:08 GMT -5
Yeah, Buff beat me to it. Faceguarding isn't a penalty. The only time it ever really factors in is when there is slight/incidental contact. If the defender is looking back for the ball, then the refs tend to allow more contact, but if the defender is attempting to faceguard, then they are much more strictly on the little bumps.
|
|