Tuesday, February 07, 2006

For the love of the game!

To all fans of The NFL...regardless of who you cheer for keep the pressure on the NFL!!!

Just got off the phone with the league office!!! 212-450-2000 ask for the PR department and voice your opion about the the REf's! It may take awhile as the phone is ringing non-stop but it's worth it! This has nothing to do with who won the game...and everything to do with the state of the game! By the way an offical statement is due out by weeks end as they are reviewing the tapes now!!

20 comments:

  1. exactly, i think people have this issue underrated...

    as a Seahawk fan---that hurts the most...but for everyone else, and secondly for me---this league is going downhill with this crap

    i dunno how they can stop these refs or whatever, but they need to at least do some investigating...

    also, keep this going:

    http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?nfl12006&13101

    13,000 people already signed it...most of course NOT seahawk fans...we're not alone on this one...and its ok to be pissed about it...we got treated like crap...and its gonna continue until this city's supporters grows some balls and take some action...but this time, we got everyone else on our side!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree. Here's the text of an email I fired off to Mike and Mike on ESPN after hearing them say that Holmgren shouldn't have said what he did at yesterday's rally, and in fact, should have sucked it up and help the league put a happy face on things:

    can't believe you both said that Holmgren should have helped the league "sweep this under the carpet" in terms of the bad officiating.

    If Holmgren had information that someone was pilfering from the league, should he sweep that under the carpet too? What about if he knew of sexual harrassment? Unfair hiring practices? Drug use by key personnel. (oops, I forgot ESPN still employs Michael Irvin, my bad!)

    This is a scandal of no less proportion and it should be talked about, otherwise nothing will get done.

    Shame on you both for feeling he should help the league "cover up" for the most aggregiously officiated game in the history of the game.
      

    Posted by alba

    ReplyDelete
  3. Big Ben said on Letterman that he told the coach his helmet crossing the goalline wasn't a TD...

    im still stunned 

    Posted by adp

    ReplyDelete
  4. After re-watching the game a few times, I�ve broken down the film, and consider this the ultimate List of Grievances.

    1) DJack�s first TD � A questionable call. After the QB broke the pocket, DJack was grabbed first, and was brushing away the hand of the DB that was grabbing him. Most of America doesn�t think it should have been called. 4 point swing.

    2) Holding call against Locklear on Stevens catch at the 1 yard line. 1st, it wasn�t clear there was a hold at all. 2nd, and more importantly, Locklear was out of position when the defender was indisputably offsides. (confirmed by freeze frame slow mo.) 7 point swing, as Seattle would have had first and goal from the 1 yard, line and was the best team in the league in that situation by far. (FYI, Same defender was indisputably offsides again on the very next play, a Hasslebeck sack.)

    3) If the Locklear �hold� hadn�t gone down, Hasslebeck wouldn�t have thrown the interception on a 3rd and long, which, along with the phantom �15 yard low block� tackle, set the Steelers up at mid-field for the trick play for a TD. 7 point swing.

    4) "No call" on the egregious Heath Miller hold against Bryce Fisher during Willie Parker TD run. Didn�t anyone wonder why Parker was untouched? 7 point swing

    5) Running TD by Rothlisberger. Ref wasn�t sure it was a touchdown at first. 2 seconds later, he made an, �Oh, what the hell, I guess it�s a touchdown� signal, after Rothlisberger gave him a pleading look. After the Game, Rothlisberger said he didn�t think he got in. He also said they would have gone for it on 4rth and inches. No way to know if Seattle would have made the goal line stand. That�s a play I�d dearly have loved to see. Possible 7 point swing.

    6) DJ's 2nd TD. Indisputable video evidence shows DJack�s left foot in bounds, while his right foot kicks over the pylon. A 2002 rule change says that this is a touchdown. Here is the rule: ""A player will be ruled in bounds if he touches the pylon at the goal line before going out of bounds. For example, a pass would be considered complete if one foot touches the pylon and the other foot is in bound."� The refs didn�t even review the play while it was under 2 minutes. 7 point swing.

    These were the calls that directly affected the score. That is potentially a 39 point swing in an 11 point game. Of course the Hawks dropped a lot of balls, managed the clock poorly, missed 2 field goals, failed to pin the Steelers deep on at least 4 punts, and didn't defend a 3rd and 28 pass well. But they could have done all those things and won by 21+ if the refs hadn't screwed them.


    There were other significant plays that killed Seattle drives, and extended Steelers drives:

    1. �No call� on Rothlisberger calling for a time out 2 seconds after the play clock expired, on a 3rd and six play. Big difference between 3rd and 6 and 3rd and 11. Steelers picked up 7. This extended the drive, giving the Steelers another three downs to kill the clock.

    2 Spot of the ball after Mack Strong clearly gained a first down with the initial spot. Another ref moves it back about 6 inches. Seattle misses the first down by about 1 inch. Yellow stripe on the ground shows the ball was moved while the camera had cut away from the ball.

    3. No call on the hold against Bryce Fisher during the Randle El touchdown throw.

    4. Etric Pruitt was called for holding on the Warrick long punt return. Madden was wrong, the foul wasn�t called at the line of scrimmage. The foul was called much later in the play when there was incidental contact. Replays couldn�t find the penalty.

    5. "No call" on the horse collar tackle against Alexander. Doesn�t this count?

    6 Grant Wistrom blocked in the back and knocked down on the play where Rothlisberger picked up the 3rd and 27. I�m not sure if this was illegal or not. Some said it was, and I�m open to taking this off the list.

    7 Hines Ward �pushing off� several times in the second half, much more so than did DJack�s TD.

    8 There were many other plays where the Steelers appeared to hold more than Locklear �Held�. But those are there in almost ever down.

    I�ve promised my wife that I�ll delete this game by the end of the week, and never mention it again, but no doubt this will stay with me and my kids a long time.

     

    Posted by chris kaiser

    ReplyDelete
  5. All I know is that if they say you can call holding on EVERY play in the NFL, how do the Pittsburgh Steelers get through an ENTIRE game without getting flagged for it ONCE, and the least penalized team in the NFL gets hit THREE TIMES?

    They also say that in the Super Bowl the refs usually let the guys play, unless the calls are blatant, like the holding call on Gray.

    It seems that the Steelers got the benefit of that doubt, but we did not.

    I'm through arguing the merits of each individual call, or the number of plays where Pittsburgh could have been called for something.

    If they had been getting equally ticky-tack calls against them, even if it was only negating a 2-yard gain, I'd be happy. 

    Posted by alba

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is going to be wildly unpopular.

    Maybe the refs got the second DJack touchdown right.

    The rule change is quoted differently on the NFL site:

    "A player no longer can be ruled out of bounds when he touches a pylon unless he already touched the boundary line."

    This doesn't necessarily say that the pylon is considered in bounds. I don't know which is right, and which is wrong, but if I have to choose, I trust the NFL site more than the ESPN site.

     

    Posted by PaulieP

    ReplyDelete
  7. Link please?

    My feeling has always been that we're not understanding something about this ruling, since neither Hass, DJack or Holms,or any of the media pundits, went ballistic over the call. My guess is it wasn't a TD by rule, I'd just like to see that pylon issue explained. 

    Posted by alba

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/5153800
     

    Posted by PaulieP

    ReplyDelete
  9. thats the 'everybodys gonna hate me' comment, Paulie? lol

    no worries...i thought you were gonna defend the refs to the death...

    take away 3 of those bad calls, and we still got screwed over 

    Posted by adp

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'm certain the refs were on the take, from big bettor money that paid them like, 5 times their annual salary - which is not much compared to players.

    apparently it happens all the time in soccer. and figure skating, who doesnt know that.

    it was bad all right. nasty, & ugly. and in full view of millions. whew.
    crime sucks. this was criminal. the ref should be prosecuted. watch the guy buy a big new boat or a new swimming pool. criminal is criminal. I hope they find a way to catch proof.
     

    Posted by robert godbout

    ReplyDelete
  11. Paulie, you may be right on that, yet even Peter "I hate the Seahawks" King is saying that it should have at LEAST been reviewed.
    THat is MY problem with that play, I don't know if the rule as Clayton stated it is right or wrong, but I would have liked to see it get reviewed. We didn't even get that curtesy.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks for the link...now what the hell does this mean?

    A player no longer can be ruled out of bounds when he touches a pylon unless he already touched the boundary line.  

    It seems to say that touching the pylon used to be an automatic out of bounds, although I never say it called that way before.

    Since DJack didn't already touch a boundary line, does this me he can no longer be ruled out of bounds when he touched the pylon, thus completed pass? Or does this rule solely apply to runners and not pass receivers?
     

    Posted by alba

    ReplyDelete
  13. One other bad no-call - on one of Stevens' misses, he was hit by not one, but two Steelers well after the 5 yard line. Should have been defensive holding, 5 yards, automatic 1st down. I believe it was in the first half, but all the bad calls blend together.... 

    Posted by highwatermark

    ReplyDelete
  14. great minds think alike, tami, I posted the exact same idea on the ST forum a few days ago. 

    Posted by alba

    ReplyDelete
  15. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  16. interesting...even Ray Lewis was bashing the refs...im so glad others are taking up for us, as fans we'd be considered whining, and as Seahawk players...they have to stay classy, or they'll be in trouble...but the rest of the world is awake...

    ...and the revolution ive been talking about for quite some time is rising...biasedness will always be there...doesnt mean people will have to take it forever... 

    Posted by adp

    ReplyDelete
  17. As I interpret it, the rule states that a player is not out of bounds when he touches a pylon, but he's not in bounds either. his next step will determine it. If DJ had touched his next step in bounds, he would have been in bounds. Since he didn't, he was out.

    I actually have a huge problem with the Jury selection process. It lends itself easily to biased opinions and bad calls. Remember that these guys get paid per game. If they get picked for the superbowl, they get paid more. They will want coaches to choose them, so they'll cater to the coaches they think will have a shot at the superbowl.  

    Posted by PaulieP

    ReplyDelete
  18. Paulie - great interpretation of the pylon rule, you might very well be on the money there.

    I disagree though that the Jury selection process would increase bias. Coaches would choose refs based on their professionalism and equity of calls, and black ball guys who either made bad calls against them, or are plainly incompetent.

    I doubt there's a ref out there that could be tagged as Pro-Steeler, Pro-Cowboy or Pro-Raider, but there's probably more than a few who could be tagged as Anti-Raider or Anti-Seahawk, or just plain blind, like Phil Luckett.

    At the very least, the NFL should revise the SB Official selection based on these two rules:

    1. anyone born in, living in, or anyhow connected to either represented City/State should be omitted from consideration.

    2. the best rated crew should be selected in total, and not the best rated official at each position, unless where someone needs to be omitted due to Rule #1. 

    Posted by alba

    ReplyDelete
  19. This log is really great. We cannot let this topic drop. I am not a Seahawks fan at all...I am a fan of the Game. The game is tainted and unauthentic. I've started a discussion group at www.fixedgame.com.

    I am also conducting an investigation of NFL officials. I invite all suggestions and comments. 

    Posted by Fixed Game

    ReplyDelete
  20. I had to write in here since I too have been an NFL fan,and a Seahawks fan since I was a kid.This SuberBowl really did ruin the NFL for me especially since the NFL(NATIONALFELONELEAGUE) had the balls to come out and say no mistakes were made.That still makes me sick to my stomach when I think about it.This is how I will deal with it though, first off therapy...lol, then I will just watch seahawk games and not buy anything with the NFL logo on it!!! Fine you might get my money again for tickets but not for that ugly NFL logo.I look at it and it makes me sad cause I simply can not and will not support something so dishonest. I really will pay attention this year and if it doesn't get a 100% better I wont even go to a game anymore...BOYCOTT THE NFL logo and you too will feel some relief my friends..

    ReplyDelete