Pitt-Baltimore

[PatriotReign37]

The NFL F'd this up

the refs called it No TD and the video was very inconclusive, the call on the

field should stand

was hochuli the ref?

the head official should be suspended.

Walt Coleman

[afosomf]

Walt Coleman

He would have been my 2nd choice

[Sperm Edwards]

The NFL F'd this up

the refs called it No TD and the video was very inconclusive, the call on the

field should stand

was hochuli the ref?

the head official should be suspended.

Pretty much what Collinsworth said last night. Instant replay is there to overrule blatantly-obvious bad calls. Not calls that MAY have been right & may have been wrong. Conclusive evidence. As in you can see a good amount of the ball CLEARLY over the line. Or you can see the ball CLEARLY DIDN'T cross over the line. Or that a player's foot was CLEARLY in bounds or CLEARLY out of bounds. Or that a ball was CLEARLY a catch or CLEARLY hit the ground. It was never intended for this crap & shouldn't be used as such.

There are quick calls & non-calls all the time for pass interference & holding. Many of those would be overturned but for one thing: you cannot challenge those plays.

So what we're back to is what the rule was intended to be, and what I believe it SHOULD be: CLEAR, CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE. As in there is NO WAY for anyone to dispute what the officials determined by replay. Absolutely NO WAY.

Whatever. The officiating has been God-awful all season anyway.

The way to stop this is for a strong commissioner to say, via press conference, that starting NOW (not next season) the officials are going to be doing instant replay using that criterion. CLEAR, CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE. Anything short of that, and the ruling on the field stands.

[Borgoguy]

Pretty much what Collinsworth said last night. Instant replay is there to overrule blatantly-obvious bad calls. Not calls that MAY have been right & may have been wrong. Conclusive evidence. As in you can see a good amount of the ball CLEARLY over the line. Or you can see the ball CLEARLY DIDN'T cross over the line. Or that a player's foot was CLEARLY in bounds or CLEARLY out of bounds. Or that a ball was CLEARLY a catch or CLEARLY hit the ground. It was never intended for this crap & shouldn't be used as such.

There are quick calls & non-calls all the time for pass interference & holding. Many of those would be overturned but for one thing: you cannot challenge those plays.

So what we're back to is what the rule was intended to be, and what I believe it SHOULD be: CLEAR, CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE. As in there is NO WAY for anyone to dispute what the officials determined by replay. Absolutely NO WAY.

Whatever. The officiating has been God-awful all season anyway.

The way to stop this is for a strong commissioner to say, via press conference, that starting NOW (not next season) the officials are going to be doing instant replay using that criterion. CLEAR, CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE. Anything short of that, and the ruling on the field stands.

Just like a dangerous intersection that does not get a traffic light until a number of pedestrians are killed, the inept, gutless NFL--"led" by King Fraud, Goddell--will do nothing until a blown call, as we witnessed yesterday, alters a Super Bowl. Make no mistake, that day of reckoning is on the horizon. I've said this before, I want to see Goddell explain his way out of that one to all the good folk that have serious money on the game.

[#27TheDominator]

The way to stop this is for a strong commissioner to say, via press conference, that starting NOW (not next season) the officials are going to be doing instant replay using that criterion. CLEAR, CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE. Anything short of that, and the ruling on the field stands.

A press conference never solved anything. Isn't that the standard now? They've still been ****ing it up all year.

[Sperm Edwards]

Just like a dangerous intersection that does not get a traffic light until a number of pedestrians are killed, the inept, gutless NFL--"led" by King Fraud, Goddell--will do nothing until a blown call, as we witnessed yesterday, alters a Super Bowl. Make no mistake, that day of reckoning is on the horizon. I've said this before, I want to see Goddell explain his way out of that one to all the good folk that have serious money on the game.

No argument from me on that.

[JohnnyHector]

Pretty much what Collinsworth said last night. Instant replay is there to overrule blatantly-obvious bad calls. Not calls that MAY have been right & may have been wrong. Conclusive evidence. As in you can see a good amount of the ball CLEARLY over the line. Or you can see the ball CLEARLY DIDN'T cross over the line. Or that a player's foot was CLEARLY in bounds or CLEARLY out of bounds. Or that a ball was CLEARLY a catch or CLEARLY hit the ground. It was never intended for this crap & shouldn't be used as such.

There are quick calls & non-calls all the time for pass interference & holding. Many of those would be overturned but for one thing: you cannot challenge those plays.

So what we're back to is what the rule was intended to be, and what I believe it SHOULD be: CLEAR, CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE. As in there is NO WAY for anyone to dispute what the officials determined by replay. Absolutely NO WAY.

Whatever. The officiating has been God-awful all season anyway.

The way to stop this is for a strong commissioner to say, via press conference, that starting NOW (not next season) the officials are going to be doing instant replay using that criterion. CLEAR, CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE. Anything short of that, and the ruling on the field stands.

I agree 100%... Going a step further, I think the review should be done completely in the booth and not on the field. Having the head official on the field reviewing calls that he or one of his crew made is not an effective system of checks and balances.

[JohnnyHector]

Say the referee makes the right decision and the call on the field stands... 4th and maybe 2 inches, down by 3 on the road, and you're Mike Tomlin - what do you do?

Personally, I go for it.

[#27TheDominator]

Say the referee makes the right decision and the call on the field stands... 4th and maybe 2 inches, down by 3 on the road, and you're Mike Tomlin - what do you do?

Personally, I go for it.

I'm not sure, but Roethlisberger wasn't telling. He said that he knew what they were going to do, but nobody was going to find out "unless Mike tells them".

[Borgoguy]

I agree 100%... Going a step further, I think the review should be done completely in the booth and not on the field. Having the head official on the field reviewing calls that he or one of his crew made is not an effective system of checks and balances.

Think about the absurdity of asking the field referee to stop the game, walk over to a monitor--cartoonishly outfitted with a "cloak of secrecy" that Buck Henry invented on Get Smart--and make the binding decision. Meanwhile, the booth official is upstairs with state-of-the-art monitors and replay tools. We all know the system is a disaster, so ask yourself why Goddell and company allow it to be the gold standard. What are they hiding? Why won't they adapt to better the flawed system?

[Sperm Edwards]

A press conference never solved anything. Isn't that the standard now? They've still been ****ing it up all year.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I meant a decree from the commissioner to the refs to call it that way from now on, and augment that with a PC so there isn't as much outrage at the next NON-reversal.

[#27TheDominator]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I meant a decree from the commissioner to the refs to call it that way from now on, and augment that with a PC so there isn't as much outrage at the next NON-reversal.

It's not a matter of you being clear. It's a matter of me not accepting that these douchebags will be able to put together a cohesive plan and stick to it when that policy is already in place and they can't follow it. This administration is a joke and it has been like that for ages.

It's a fine plan. I just don't think they have the horses to make it work.

[Sperm Edwards]

It's not a matter of you being clear. It's a matter of me not accepting that these douchebags will be able to put together a cohesive plan and stick to it when that policy is already in place and they can't follow it. This administration is a joke and it has been like that for ages.

It's a fine plan. I just don't think they have the horses to make it work.

Meh. You're probably right. By 2010 they'll allow red flags thrown on the field to challenge non-calls on the OL holding.

[StillerPaul]

Say the referee makes the right decision and the call on the field stands... 4th and maybe 2 inches, down by 3 on the road, and you're Mike Tomlin - what do you do?

Personally, I go for it.

Win or lose i would have gone for it too. The way both defenses were playing i would think overtime would be the last thing either team wanted.

IMO what won my team the game was that sequence in the 4th where the ravens forced Ben into a fumble giving them FG range before their offense stepped on the field. How did my Steeler D respond? They forced the ratbirds OUT of FG range and made em' punt. That right there was a HUGE statement IMHO.

[BIGASS JETS FAN]

I thought the ball passed the goal line, its very close, and the whole ball doesn't have to pass it.

Anyway I would of gone for it

a QB sneak with Roethlisberger.

[Irish Jet]

I thought the ball passed the goal line, its very close, and the whole ball doesn't have to pass it.

Anyway I would of gone for it

a QB sneak with Roethlisberger.

For a big strong QB Ben is absolutely horrible at QB sneaking. One thing I've always noticed about him.

Not the play I would have called.

[StillerPaul]

For a big strong QB Ben is absolutely horrible at QB sneaking. One thing I've always noticed about him.

Not the play I would have called.

Actually my Steelers short yardage game leaves ALOT to be desired overall. But i would have still went for it there. I just think when your on the road against a great defense and you have one freakin' inch or face overtime ya gotta go for the win there.

BTW, Steelers also had the advantage of knowing a loss there would not have cost us significantly in the division race.

[124]

[BIGASS JETS FAN]

For a big strong QB Ben is absolutely horrible at QB sneaking. One thing I've always noticed about him.

Not the play I would have called.

Steelers have been stuffed a few times in the last few weeks against the Colts and Cowboys using Gary Russell and Mewelde Moore, I honestly think Ben could of got an inch or 2 for the TD.