|
|
TheMalcolmConnection 02-10-2006, 10:22 AM i thought that picture showed that ben clearly DID NOT score. it looks like his right arm is not fully across the goal line, since he has the ball in his right arm there is no way the ball crossed if his arm didn't.
This call was basically the anti-Alstott call. Based on physics alone Alstott's arm could not have been in, even though no one could clearly see the ball. Based on PHYSICS ALONE, Ben's arm with the football SHOULD have been in even though no one could clearly see the ball.
The correct call was made because touchdown was the call on the field and there was not enough evidence to overturn it.
offiss 02-10-2006, 01:53 PM This call was basically the anti-Alstott call. Based on physics alone Alstott's arm could not have been in, even though no one could clearly see the ball. Based on PHYSICS ALONE, Ben's arm with the football SHOULD have been in even though no one could clearly see the ball.
The correct call was made because touchdown was the call on the field and there was not enough evidence to overturn it.
Personally I thought he was in, but my contention is that the play was I believe ruled inconclusive [don't remember] but when the line judge making the determination of whether or not he was in, he ran in pointing to the ground to spot the ball, then once he gets close to Ben when Ben was clearly on the ground behind the line he watches Ben reach forward and stretch the ball across the line, he then rules a TD, how do you make that switch when your first inclination is that he didn't get in? You then wait until he's down and pushed behind the line to call a TD? I believe he got the call right, but had the wrong intentions. You have a clear view of that play, rule it down outside the goal line, to only then deciede after you get to your spot rule that it's a TD, sorry I ain't buying it!
skindogger47 02-10-2006, 02:17 PM Who cares????Fans of competitive football, like myself.
skinsguy 02-10-2006, 02:56 PM Fans of competitive football, like myself.
Oh pleeassee...you wouldn't be making a case if it was Dallas being the "victims."
TheMalcolmConnection 02-10-2006, 03:32 PM Why are we even making a case because it was Seattle as the "victim"? And if I could make those " " marks about a 72 pt. font, I would.
wolfeskins 02-10-2006, 05:18 PM Oh pleeassee...you wouldn't be making a case if it was Dallas being the "victims."
to me, it doesn't matter who was playing. the officiating was just very bad and seemed to be one sided. i just don't like to see the refs determine the winner and loser of a game, in any sport. i feel that they definately determined the outcome of the superbowl. you may disagree with me and thats fine but thats just the way i feel about it.
wolfeskins 02-10-2006, 05:21 PM Personally I thought he was in, but my contention is that the play was I believe ruled inconclusive [don't remember] but when the line judge making the determination of whether or not he was in, he ran in pointing to the ground to spot the ball, then once he gets close to Ben when Ben was clearly on the ground behind the line he watches Ben reach forward and stretch the ball across the line, he then rules a TD, how do you make that switch when your first inclination is that he didn't get in? You then wait until he's down and pushed behind the line to call a TD? I believe he got the call right, but had the wrong intentions. You have a clear view of that play, rule it down outside the goal line, to only then deciede after you get to your spot rule that it's a TD, sorry I ain't buying it!
thats exactly how i feel about it. i'm not so upset about the replay not overturning the call on the field, i'm more upset in the way the line judge handled it. OFFISS did a perfect job of describing it.
81forHOF 02-10-2006, 06:28 PM I could care less about either of those teams but if you couldn't see that Seattle was getting screwed all night long then you weren't watching the same game as me.
dmek25 02-10-2006, 07:00 PM if seattle makes the field goals,and stephens catches a couple of balls,and hassleback manages the end of half clock better,no matter how bad the officiating was,seattle did not do enough to deserve to win
wolfeskins 02-11-2006, 04:22 PM if seattle makes the field goals,and stephens catches a couple of balls,and hassleback manages the end of half clock better,no matter how bad the officiating was,seattle did not do enough to deserve to win
well since you want to play the IF game....
if you have good officiating, seattle did more than enough to win.
they kinda go hand in hand.
|