neva_scarred 10 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 (edited) not exactly. that first one warner's arm was goin forward then he lost it that was incomplete. but like i said he has to have control of the ball when his arm goes forward and warner lost it before his arm went forward. but yea it is the super bowl it shouldve been reviewed but id say the call would stand. Edited February 2, 2009 by neva_scarred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawgs86 10 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 not exactly. that first one warner's arm was goin forward then he lost it that was incomplete. but like i said he has to have control of the ball when his arm goes forward and warner lost it before his arm went forward. but yea it is the super bowl it shouldve been reviewed but id say the call would stand. Yea I was gonna say the same thing.. The difference in the 1st and 2nd situations is that Warner didnt have control of the ball when he was in a throwing motion.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBlueAlum 12 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 He scored on that INT return, if for no other reason than he rolled over Fitzgerald into the end zone, thereby never being down by contact. I've been on a lot of sports forums where there are a LOT of sour grapes this morning. I think the officiating was pretty spot on last night. There were a litany of penalties, but going back to the replay, the vast majority were very justifiable. Especially the THREE holding calls on the Cardinals LT. That's what stagnated the Cardinals offense as much as anything. There were exactly three poor calls the entire night (IMO), only 1 of which was indirectly material to the final result: 1. Running into the holder. 2. Not ejecting Harrison after the punch/shove. 3. Not reviewing Warner's incomplete pass at the end. And I do say incomplete pass. Warner's arm came back and was moving forward when the ball was disjarred. Part of the reason that the "fumble" went 7-8 yards. But again, it's only indirectly material: there's still only time for 1 heave at a 51-yard hail mary, which Fitzgerald might catch 5% of the time. How was running into/over the holder call a bad call? He definitely ran into/over him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBlueAlum 12 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 if you really wanted to you could call holding on every play just about. Now that LT did hold a couple times but i beleive it was the last one (when he held his hands in the air) that he didn't hold, and the dt didn't even bother to chase warner cause he was whining about the penalty. Don't get me wrong i don't like either team, I'm a packer fan, but i thought there was too many penalties. "Just let the boys play man. Just let them play. Ya cheater, cheater" haha I thought the same thing about the last holding call...I thought the play was called dead by the way the DE just stopped and started complaining right in the middle of the play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawgs05 10 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 The Super Bowl is the biggest stage and I'm disguted to see it end the way it did......I had no dog in this one because the 49ers cant seem to make the playoffs anymore but this game was poorly officiated...........Great Super Game...too bad the guys in Black and White rather than the ones in Black and Gold or Red and White decided this one Also, isn't the back your wrist considered down?? If so then Harrison is down at the inch line on the INT return Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenTrojan 10 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 The questionable call at the end deserved a review.. however..i don't think he had possession of the ball when his arm went forward. Therefore, I think it would have been a turnover anyway. The harrison INT should be a TD, no questions asked. Fitz ran the length of the field out of bounds to keep from being hit and when he got within tackling range, he runs out to make the tackle prior to the endzone. (if you don't believe me, watch any replay) Which like it was stated previously, harrison landed on fitz, the ball broke the endzone before he touched the ground. The penalties you can blame on the players for disreguarding the importance of mistakes, they should know better. The Cards held Harrison and Woodley ALL night, there really should have been more calls in that aspect. Running over the holder was an obvious one. Roughing the passer- once the ball left Ben's hands, he shouldn't have forcefully pushed him. However, I feel Harrison's foul was definetly uncalled for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBlueAlum 12 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 The questionable call at the end deserved a review.. however..i don't think he had possession of the ball when his arm went forward. Therefore, I think it would have been a turnover anyway. The harrison INT should be a TD, no questions asked. Fitz ran the length of the field out of bounds to keep from being hit and when he got within tackling range, he runs out to make the tackle prior to the endzone. (if you don't believe me, watch any replay) Which like it was stated previously, harrison landed on fitz, the ball broke the endzone before he touched the ground. The penalties you can blame on the players for disreguarding the importance of mistakes, they should know better. The Cards held Harrison and Woodley ALL night, there really should have been more calls in that aspect. Running over the holder was an obvious one. Roughing the passer- once the ball left Ben's hands, he shouldn't have forcefully pushed him. However, I feel Harrison's foul was definetly uncalled for. I thought the roughing the passer call was a little nit-picky, but I have seen the same call many times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie07 11 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 He scored on that INT return, if for no other reason than he rolled over Fitzgerald into the end zone, thereby never being down by contact. I've been on a lot of sports forums where there are a LOT of sour grapes this morning. I think the officiating was pretty spot on last night. There were a litany of penalties, but going back to the replay, the vast majority were very justifiable. Especially the THREE holding calls on the Cardinals LT. That's what stagnated the Cardinals offense as much as anything. There were exactly three poor calls the entire night (IMO), only 1 of which was indirectly material to the final result: 1. Running into the holder. 2. Not ejecting Harrison after the punch/shove. 3. Not reviewing Warner's incomplete pass at the end. And I do say incomplete pass. Warner's arm came back and was moving forward when the ball was disjarred. Part of the reason that the "fumble" went 7-8 yards. But again, it's only indirectly material: there's still only time for 1 heave at a 51-yard hail mary, which Fitzgerald might catch 5% of the time. 4. The refs not flagging Santonio Holmes for his Lebron-like celebration after catching the go ahead touchdown. Using the ball as a celebration prop is an automatic 15-yard penalty and it would have left the Steelers kicking off from their own 15-yard line, generating another potential "what if" scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefieldRocks 14 Report Share Posted February 2, 2009 Seems like every big game Pittsburgh plays in they get a favorable call or two... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublue 939 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Jason Whitlock article....."The Real MVP of SB XLIII" http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9168548/Here's-the-real-MVP-of-Super-Bowl-XLIII?MSNHPHMA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GetMoney55 11 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Yeah he's an idiot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trumpet1988 289 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 I think Pittsburgh got a break or two last night. That interception return at the end of the half had a questionable call. He did look like he was down but it probably was a TD. The fumble that was called with 5 seconds left was kind of questionable. That one should have at least been reviewed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefieldRocks 14 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 I think Pittsburgh got a break or two last night. That interception return at the end of the half had a questionable call. He did look like he was down but it probably was a TD. The fumble that was called with 5 seconds left was kind of questionable. That one should have at least been reviewed. That touchdown big ben ran in looked like a TD. They showed a replay and his knee wasnt down, or did I miss something? That would have been +4 points for pittsburgh considering they only got a FG out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted Account 5,203 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 That touchdown big ben ran in looked like a TD. They showed a replay and his knee wasnt down, or did I miss something? That would have been +4 points for pittsburgh considering they only got a FG out of it. Exactly, it goes both ways. I totally agree, my good friend and I watching last night could've sworn that at the very most, there was no conclusive evidence to overturn the call. And 24-7 is MUCH different from 20-7, as the football guys among us can attest to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefieldRocks 14 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Why couldnt this happen to me? By Alex Dalenberg Arizona Daily Star Tucson, Arizona | Published: 02.02.2009 Tucsonans watching the Super Bowl got more action than they bargained for when a short clip from an adult movie channel interrupted Comcast's feed with full nudity during the final moments of the game. Officials at Comcast said about 30 seconds from Club Jenna, an adult cable television channel, were shown on the local Super Bowl telecast. The company was still working Sunday night to figure out how it happened. Comcast had "no idea" at the time it happened how the porn may have gotten into its feed, said Kelle Maslyn, a company spokeswoman. The Star newsroom was flooded with calls from irate viewers who said that the porn cut into the game with less than three minutes left to play, just after Arizona Cardinals player Larry Fitzgerald scored on a touchdown pass from Kurt Warner to put the team in the lead. Callers said that the clip showed a woman unzipping a man's pants, followed by a graphic act between the two. "I just figured it was another commercial until I looked up," said Cora King of Marana. "Then he did his little dance with everything hanging out." Jeanene Piek said she was outraged that her granddaughter had seen the clip. "I was in a state of shock. I am totally disgusted," she said. The Super Bowl was being shown locally on KVOA. The station sends its signal to Comcast through a fiber line, said KVOA News Director Kathleen Choal. KVOA's signal didn't have porn on it when the station sent it over to Comcast, station president Gary Nielsen said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawgs05 10 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 That touchdown big ben ran in looked like a TD. They showed a replay and his knee wasnt down, or did I miss something? That would have been +4 points for pittsburgh considering they only got a FG out of it. You must've missed his knee hitting the ground before the ball crossed the plane of the endzone........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawgs05 10 Report Share Posted February 3, 2009 Exactly, it goes both ways. I totally agree, my good friend and I watching last night could've sworn that at the very most, there was no conclusive evidence to overturn the call. And 24-7 is MUCH different from 20-7, as the football guys among us can attest to. Big Ben's knee was clearly and absolutely conclusively down before the ball crossed the plane.....the refs got that one right....although it was the final replay that actually showed it correctly, all the others were way too inconclusive.... Also on Harrison INT return....the refs were correct, his knees were on Fitzgerald and were not down.....however, if the back of your wrist is considered down then Harrison is not in the endzone But I guess with the way the entire season has gone, its only fitting that the season end with a very questionable call Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghs84 10 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 Whats sad is the biggest play of the biggest game of the whole season goes unreviewed when CLEARLY Warners arm was going forward on that incomplete pass which was ruled a fumble.....Not saying the Cards would have won but its a pathetic way to end the NFL season! I am 100% disguted with NFL football right now.....terrible way to end the season! Looks like Pittsburgh has been given their 2nd in 4 years by the refs.....what a shame for football in general sorry but the NFL did review it and it was a fumble.they had a segment about it on inside the NFL on HBO.of course it was reviewed after the superbowl.and they also discovered that harrisons 100 yard int return for a td that their was an illegal block in the back on that play.it was a great game,i think if the steelers scored TDs when they got FGs it wouldve been a blowout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBlueAlum 12 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 sorry but the NFL did review it and it was a fumble.they had a segment about it on inside the NFL on HBO.of course it was reviewed after the superbowl.and they also discovered that harrisons 100 yard int return for a td that their was an illegal block in the back on that play.it was a great game,i think if the steelers scored TDs when they got FGs it wouldve been a blowout. The play should have been reviewed before the end of the game regardless of if it was a fumble or not...it was too close to call at first glance. I also saw that block in the back on the interception return, and told my step-dad about right after the play...of course he is a Steelers fan so he "didn't see it"...lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grundy10 10 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 I was pulling for the Cards in this game, but even if they had ruled Harrison down on the INT return, there was a penelty on the run back that would have given the Steelers 1 untimed down to end the half....They would have more than likely got points out of it either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPF 417 Report Share Posted February 7, 2009 I was pulling for the Cards in this game, but even if they had ruled Harrison down on the INT return, there was a penelty on the run back that would have given the Steelers 1 untimed down to end the half....They would have more than likely got points out of it either way. Yes there was a penalty, but it was on the Steelers not the Cardinals. Therefore the half would have been over. It was the difference in the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.01bb665814ffc257795fe158cb2045c7.png.8a531ac878a82772b21014d7a6167582.png){kind=logo}
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.