Football Did Officiating Sway the Outcome of Super Bowl XLIII?

**Buck** · 02-02-2009, 12:17 PM

Yes or No?

Poll to follow.

P.S. No Gaz option.

**Buck** · 02-02-2009, 12:22 PM

Ok, now why I think it did.

1. The mystery second that ticked off the clock before the first 2 minute warning.

2. The iffy facemask called on Rodgers-Cromartie (that could have just as easily been called on the Running Back)

3. The bad Roughing the Passer Call

4. The questionable call at the end of the game (Warner forward pass)

Not to be biased, I don't think there was enough evidence to overturn Roethlisbergers 1st drive TD that was called back.

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 02-02-2009, 12:24 PM

I don't think so at all. The refs were flag happy, but I don't think they were discriminatory like they were in SB XL.

Mama Hip Rockets · 02-02-2009, 12:24 PM

i see a worse-officiated game than this every week. i don't understand what people are complaining about.

the facemask on rodgers-cromartie was completely obvious. the roughing the passer call was iffy, but it happens every week. the play at the end of the game was a fumble.

i don't see the problem here.

Lex Luthors · 02-02-2009, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckinKaeding

4. The questionable call at the end of the game (Warner forward pass)

What forward pass?

Oh, you mean the play where the ball was knocked out of his hand and landed at his feet, well before his arm started going forward?

EyePod · 02-02-2009, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

I don't think so at all. The refs were flag happy, but I don't think they were discriminatory like they were in SB XL.

They tried to give the Steelers a TD AGAIN! Just like in SB XL!! I mean, if it's that close, you don't give the score, and then you let the review work it out (like they did on the non-safety call during the play before the penalty-safety). Also, does anyone know if a QB has to have possession of the ball to make a forward pass? I've heard differing arguments, but if a QB can "throw" the ball just by pushing it forward, then that last play would have been an incomplete pass.

BigCatDaddy · 02-02-2009, 12:29 PM

I don't know if they made a difference, but I saw more of them then I would like in a game as big as this.

**Buck** · 02-02-2009, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lex Luthor

What forward pass?

Oh, you mean the play where the ball was knocked out of his hand and landed at his feet, well before his arm started going forward?

Actually the ball was not slipping out of his hand until his arm was moving forward. The way the defender was touching the ball was keeping it in the control of Warner's hand. By the letter of the law, I believe it was a forward pass.

Take a look at it again. The ball did not land at his feet, and the ball was not slipping before his arm was moving forward.

EyePod · 02-02-2009, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lex Luthor

What forward pass?

Oh, you mean the play where the ball was knocked out of his hand and landed at his feet, well before his arm started going forward?

This is what I was asking. Does a QB need possession of the ball to complete a forward pass? I think everyone can agree (unless they're completely stupid) that Warner lost possession of the ball, but the pushed it forward (I like to use the term "shot put."). If a QB doesn't need possession to make the forward pass, then it should have been incomplete. I was hoping someone could back this up with an actual rule...and I looked in the 2006 rulebook and couldn't find anything saying that you needed to have possession to throw the ball (I know it sounds counter-intuitive....).

EyePod · 02-02-2009, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckinKaeding

Actually the ball was not slipping out of his hand until his arm was moving forward. The way the defender was touching the ball was keeping it in the control of Warner's hand. By the letter of the law, I believe it was a forward pass.

Take a look at it again. The ball did not land at his feet, and the ball was not slipping before his arm was moving forward.

The ball was spinning before his arm went forward. At least that's the way I saw it.

**SAUTO** · 02-02-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyePod

This is what I was asking. Does a QB need possession of the ball to complete a forward pass? I think everyone can agree (unless they're completely stupid) that Warner lost possession of the ball, but the pushed it forward (I like to use the term "shot put."). If a QB doesn't need possession to make the forward pass, then it should have been incomplete. I was hoping someone could back this up with an actual rule...and I looked in the 2006 rulebook and couldn't find anything saying that you needed to have possession to throw the ball (I know it sounds counter-intuitive....).

IIRC the Qb HAS to have possesion

EyePod · 02-02-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyePod

The ball was spinning before his arm went forward. At least that's the way I saw it.

And the worst part is that if everyone can't agree about it now, after seeing a bunch of replays of it, how could the replay assistant quickly ascertain whether or not he had control?

EyePod · 02-02-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

IIRC the Qb HAS to have possesion

Right, I figure the same thing, but I was hoping for a link.

**SAUTO** · 02-02-2009, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyePod

Right, I figure the same thing, but I was hoping for a link.

sorry no linky, but i'm about 99% sure

**OnTheWarpath15** · 02-02-2009, 12:32 PM

I don't think it was an issue, but if anyone should be bitching about calls, it should be Pittsburgh.

It sure looked like the ball hit the ground on Fitzgerald's first TD, and the holding call in the EZ was reeruned.

Notice who made the call?

The Umpire, who from where he was standing couldn't possibly have seen holding - he only could have assumed it.

Had that flag come from the Referee, who had a PERFECT view of the play, I could understand the call.

View Poll Results: Did officiating sway the outcome of the game?
Yes	72	54.14%
No	61	45.86%
Voters: 133. You may not vote on this poll

02-02-2009, 12:17 PM
Buck Take a Chill Pill Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: South Carolina Casino cash: $5980295	Did Officiating Sway the Outcome of Super Bowl XLIII? Yes or No? Poll to follow. P.S. No Gaz option.
Posts: 44,607

02-02-2009, 12:22 PM	#2
Buck Take a Chill Pill Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: South Carolina Casino cash: $5980295	Ok, now why I think it did. 1. The mystery second that ticked off the clock before the first 2 minute warning. 2. The iffy facemask called on Rodgers-Cromartie (that could have just as easily been called on the Running Back) 3. The bad Roughing the Passer Call 4. The questionable call at the end of the game (Warner forward pass) Not to be biased, I don't think there was enough evidence to overturn Roethlisbergers 1st drive TD that was called back.
Posts: 44,607

02-02-2009, 12:24 PM	#4
Mama Hip Rockets You don't faze me, Gobble. Join Date: Dec 2005 Casino cash: $9915644	i see a worse-officiated game than this every week. i don't understand what people are complaining about. the facemask on rodgers-cromartie was completely obvious. the roughing the passer call was iffy, but it happens every week. the play at the end of the game was a fumble. i don't see the problem here.
Posts: 13,675

02-02-2009, 12:29 PM	#7
BigCatDaddy The Beast Inside Your Head Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Parts Unknown Casino cash: $-1810878	I don't know if they made a difference, but I saw more of them then I would like in a game as big as this.
Posts: 26,275

02-02-2009, 12:32 PM	#15
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $2051115	I don't think it was an issue, but if anyone should be bitching about calls, it should be Pittsburgh. It sure looked like the ball hit the ground on Fitzgerald's first TD, and the holding call in the EZ was reeruned. Notice who made the call? The Umpire, who from where he was standing couldn't possibly have seen holding - he only could have assumed it. Had that flag come from the Referee, who had a PERFECT view of the play, I could understand the call.
Posts: 60,758