Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Didn't see this posted prior?? One of the few times they've come out and admitted they made a mistake. Was an Interception Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Didn't see this posted prior?? One of the few times they've come out and admitted they made a mistake. Was an Interception 570009[/snapback] Too late, NFL has already awarded NE several champions. Oh, wait, the report was refering to Polamalu's Intercepation, not the tuck rule or 5-yard bump rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 I guess they figure they can admit it since it ultimately didn't cost the Steelers a win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Here's the main distinction: "The rule regarding the performing of an act common to the game applies when there is contact with a defensive player and the ball comes loose, which did not happen here." So had a Colt touched Troy on the way down, apparantly it would've been incomplete. That's a pretty fine line. Instead of blaming the refs for everything, maybe it's time to simplify the rulebook a tad. Of course, this could be completely bogus. There was a case earlier in the season where there were reports that the league appologized for blowing a call (against Seattle, if I recall?), and it later came out that it was NOT true. Could be similar here. CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 ok guys tell me this.................according to the definition it was clearly a catch (as i did think it was all along so dont bash me) .....how does the official and replay official both misinterpret the definition it seems as though replay is making the human refs even worse than before...........they are indecisive and relying on the replay and then cant even get it right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 That was my initial reaction when I saw the play...that it was a catch. The NFL better take a serious look at their officials. It seems some don't even know their own rule book, and are making rules up during playoff games. Luckily it didn't cost the Steelers the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 ok guys tell me this.................according to the definition it was clearly a catch (as i did think it was all along so dont bash me) .....how does the official and replay official both misinterpret the definition it seems as though replay is making the human refs even worse than before...........they are indecisive and relying on the replay and then cant even get it right 570036[/snapback] Mostly because, in an continuing attempt to take human judgement out of the officiating, they keep adding complex and arcane rules that spell out in explicit detail what everything is...which means when situations not covered explicitly by the rule book pop up (e.g. Polamalu's interception), the officials aren't sure what specific arcane rule covers it. In other words...Fezmid's right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfladave Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Didn't see this posted prior?? One of the few times they've come out and admitted they made a mistake. Was an Interception 570009[/snapback] They don't often admit they've made a mistake, usually it is explained away by an obscure illogical rule. However they have admited being wrong several times. Last year the Travis Henry non TD against the Jets or Raiders(I can't remember which) comes to mind, they later said it should have been a TD. It would have been the difference in a win for us, and a playoff berth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 ok guys tell me this.................according to the definition it was clearly a catch (as i did think it was all along so dont bash me) .....how does the official and replay official both misinterpret the definition it seems as though replay is making the human refs even worse than before...........they are indecisive and relying on the replay and then cant even get it right 570036[/snapback] Its called functional illiteracy--very common in this country. A billion dollar industry cant hire an official with an education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullim4 Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 This is a very interesting response by the NFL. Everyone that I have talked to who officiates says Morelli's call was correct under NFL rules. Heck, even Mike and the Maddog said it was the right call. Until he gets up he's still in the act of catching the ball unless he starts moving forward. Under NCAA rules he'd have been down by contact since his knees were on the ground. Greg Aiello said earlier it was a judgement call but I guess Pereira disagrees - you'd think they'd get on the same page before coming out with statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullim4 Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 And I forgot to add... where's the explanation about that abysmal handling of the false start debacle? If the LJ and HL didn't catch the offense moving it was a defensive delay of game for making an unnatural football movement. That imo was the biggest officiating blunder in this game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Mostly because, in an continuing attempt to take human judgement out of the officiating, they keep adding complex and arcane rules that spell out in explicit detail what everything is...which means when situations not covered explicitly by the rule book pop up (e.g. Polamalu's interception), the officials aren't sure what specific arcane rule covers it. In other words...Fezmid's right. 570052[/snapback] agree..........cannot excuse not choosing to decide though..... when you throw a flag on either a offsides or false start....... there is no way you can pick it up and call no foul in the bears game......there is no rewording that'll help the fact that when the play clock reaches zero before the ball is snapped it is a dead ball foul something has to be done, and i'm not sure if the leauge is letting the lousy officiating go cause they think the replay will catch it, but there is definitely need to have good officials on the field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 This is a very interesting response by the NFL. Everyone that I have talked to who officiates says Morelli's call was correct under NFL rules. Heck, even Mike and the Maddog said it was the right call. Until he gets up he's still in the act of catching the ball unless he starts moving forward. Under NCAA rules he'd have been down by contact since his knees were on the ground. Greg Aiello said earlier it was a judgement call but I guess Pereira disagrees - you'd think they'd get on the same page before coming out with statements. 570069[/snapback] So Sullim...A DB 'catches a pass' thrown by the opposing qb...and as often occurs backtracks while running.Lets say he runs backward at a slight angle halfway across the field...then slips and the ball falls(knee on ground) out of his hands before he is touched by someone from the offensive team. All of this could take from..oh 4-8 seconds. Then by your definition he is still in the act of catching the ball because he has not moved forward.--after having had the ball for quite a while. ??? come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullim4 Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 something has to be done, and i'm not sure if the leauge is letting the lousy officiating go cause they think the replay will catch it, but there is definitely need to have good officials on the field 570076[/snapback] From what I understand Morelli's crew was one of the higher-ranked crews. Triplette (NE/DEN) and Winter (SEA/WAS) had the crews who snuck in. Interestingly enough from what I saw Winter's crew had the best weekend out of the four crews. Hochuli is pretty much a lock for next week, but my guess is that either McAulay (75-80% shot) or Kukar (20-25%) is going to get the other game so fasten your seatbelts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullim4 Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 So Sullim...A DB 'catches a pass' thrown by the opposing qb...and as often occurs backtracks while running.Lets say he runs backward at a slight angle halfway across the field...then slips and the ball falls(knee on ground) out of his hands before he is touched by someone from the offensive team. All of this could take from..oh 4-8 seconds.Then by your definition he is still in the act of catching the ball because he has not moved forward.--after having had the ball for quite a while. ??? come on. 570078[/snapback] "Moving Forward" doesn't literally mean forward. It just means that you've got to be intentionally making progress, left, right, north, or south. Direction doesn't matter. IMO, it was clear in this case that the rolling wasn't an intentional movement, it was still part of the act of the catch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tcali Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 "Moving Forward" doesn't literally mean forward. It just means that you've got to be intentionally making progress, left, right, north, or south. Direction doesn't matter. IMO, it was clear in this case that the rolling wasn't an intentional movement, it was still part of the act of the catch. 570086[/snapback] OK--good point.I WOULD like to see this in writing though...haven't seen it printed yet. I am sure the rule book has been scoured.I wonder why I haven't seen the actual rule.Makes me very suspicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis in NC Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 And in the Indy/Pitt game, how about the no call clusterfu@k where the Pitt OL flinched and several Indy DL jumped across pointing fingers. It was pretty crappy officiating, I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 they need to employ the "pornography" rule... You don't know what the definition is, but you know it when you see it. That was an INT and any rule that states otherwise is a bad one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 Luckily it didn't cost the Steelers the game. 570037[/snapback] Damn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ1 Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 they need to employ the "pornography" rule... You don't know what the definition is, but you know it when you see it. That was an INT and any rule that states otherwise is a bad one. 570109[/snapback] You could tell from the length of time Moronic took to make the call it was going to be in favor of Indy. He needed two minutes to compose his idiotic statement supporting the call. Unconscious bias toward the home team again, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts