When will they play the last .05 seconds?

[JDSal45]

That looked like an incomplete pass on the last play to me. AT THE VERY LEAST, it should have been reviewed. With Pittsburgh committing a penalty, I think Arizona should have had one more play from about the 29. Or the 44 at worst.

But they didn't even review it. WTF????? Those plays should ALWAYS be reviewed.

But what makes it worse? NBC or ESPN NOT EVEN ******* MENTIONING that play SHOULD HAVE BEEN REVIEWED. Talk about being in the tank????? Chris Collinsworth et. al. you have ZERO credibility. You should be ashamed of yourself. That play not being reviewed SHOULD BE THE NUMBER ONE STORY IN AMERICA right now. Its a ******* travesty and very weird.

And the networks not mentioning the very weird NON-review is even worse.

Pathetic. What a farce the end was to an otherwise pretty good game.

J D Sal

 

[BelichickFan]

Someone said it was reviewed - kind of looked like an (ugly) incomplete pass to me - with the 15 yard penalty it could have given them one last shot.

 

[Warren94]

on top of the that. 15 yard penalty on Holmes and another 15 on some idiot removing his helmet


ball at the 14 two shots in the endzone. At least give az an opportunity.

 

[JDSal45]

Someone said it was reviewed - kind of looked like an (ugly) incomplete pass to me - with the 15 yard penalty it could have given them one last shot.

If it was reviewed, the refs should announce it.

I don't think it was. And I think, although somewhat close, Warner's arm was going forward and he never lost possession BEFORE the forward motion. Therefore...INCOMPLETE!!

Arizona should have had one more shot from the 29....with Fitzgerald....you never know.

What a disgraceful ending. For many reasons Goodell should be fired. This only ads to the reason.

 

[efeene]

I think it was Michaels as they were kneeling that said "They must have looked at it already and deemed it the right call" or something to that effect.. but the game wasnt stopped for them to review it officially

 

[DisgruntledTunaFan]

Hard to say-but it kinda looked like Warner didn't have control of it as he was going through his throwing motion.

Really-the Cards lost b/c they **** the bed on Pitt's last drive...no excuses. And the INT at the goalline before the half was also inexcusable-Warner SHOULD have known that 3 pts was in their laps.

 

[JDSal45]

I thought the exact opposite. The defensive player batted at the ball and hit Warner's arm affecting his motion but he NEVER lost the ball and his arm did go at least partially forward.

Incomplete.

Disgrace. And bigger disgrace the media isn't asking more questions.

J D Sal

 

[Lansdowne]

How about all the times an extra second ran off the clock after the whistle was blown, when the Cardinals needed every second? It happened on multiple occasions. Particularly on the Cardinals' interception prior to the 2nd quarter 2 minute warning. Should have been 2:01 and the Cardinals could preserve a timeout, but instead the guy running the clock notched it down to 2:00, even though the whistle blew well before that.

But whatever. It was a poorly officiated game all around, and the Cardinals didn't deserve to win with their defense pulling a matador on Santonio Holmes.

 

[Warren94]

they are two busy calling the steelers the team of the decade

 

[maverick4]

It is really weird how fast the refs, NBC, and the announcers tried to end the game as fast as they could. This is the Superbowl, a billion people watching, and you try to just hand it to the Steelers? I was shocked when they ruled a fumble, everyone I saw it with thought it was a clear incomplete before the refs ruled.

Also, Holmes used the football as a prop to celebrate, that was a penalty witnessed by hundreds of millions of people... no penalty??

 

[Richter]

The networks just keep carrying the NFL's water, and everyone knows things aren't right. That play should have been reviewed, period. There is no debate worth having on that fact, but it'll just be smothered and buried along every other injustice.

 

[Watson's IQ]

I think it was Michaels as they were kneeling that said "They must have looked at it already and deemed it the right call" or something to that effect.. but the game wasnt stopped for them to review it officially

I thought what they said was that they looked at it in the booth and decided not to ask for the review. That seems very strange to me, there's no reason not to let the official go under the hood. Get the call right, this is the Super Bowl.

 

[JDSal45]

Again, Michaels said "they must have reviewed it" because he was as confused as everyone. It seemed an obvious play to AT LEAST look at. But officially, THEY DID NOT REVIEW IT. That fact has been clear in post-game stories.

Here is one from Yahoo:

Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:27 pm EST

Officiating dictates Super Bowl XLIII to unreviewed end
By Chris Chase

It will go down as one of the most thrilling Super Bowls of all time. But, as has become all too common in the NFL, an officiating controversy threatens to overshadow the stellar play on the field.

On the final Cardinals play from scrimmage, as the team was driving for a potential game-winning score, Kurt Warner turned over the ball after his arm was hit by LaMarr Woodley. The play was ruled a fumble, and it may have been. Or it may have been an incomplete pass. The problem is, there was no official replay review to take a closer look at the ruling. Instead, the Steelers got the ball, knelt down for the win and earned the sixth title in franchise history.

Frankly, it's remarkable that there was no booth challenge to review the play. It was certainly close enough to warrant a look from upstairs. In all probability, the call on the field would have been confirmed. But why not appease the masses and nip any talk of controversy in the bud? (If the call had been overturned, Arizona would have had the ball on the Pittsburgh 29-yard line, certainly close enough to have had a reasonable shot at scoring a last-second touchdown.)

It was a night marred by questionable calls, but the game managed to make everyone forget about the disparity in penalties (106 yards for the Cardinals against just 56 for the Steelers) with its stellar play. And then came the unreviewed call. It's especially interesting that the play went without a second look considering the Cardinals correctly challenged two plays during the play (both of which should have been easy calls on the field but were botched by the refs).

The 11 penalties whistled on Arizona included a preposterous roughing the passer penalty on a play that wouldn't have been uncommon in touch football. That came on a drive that saw two ,pre personal foul penalties on the Cards, one of which gave the Steelers another chance to score from the goal line. For the evening, 18 penalties were called, the third-most in Super Bowl history. A missed call may have proven enormous also. After Santonio Holmes' game-winning touchdown catch he did an imitation of LeBron James' chalk move. Using the ball as a prop is an automatic 15-yard penalty on the kickoff.

Officiating controversies became way too prevalent in this league this season. Ed Hochuli's premature whistle dominated headlines in the early season and a missed delay of game penalty in the divisional playoffs aided in a Baltimore Ravens win. It's too bad a great Super Bowl followed down that path and may be marred by a decision that would have been easily remedied by a simple booth review.

 

[maverick4]

I'm thinking NBC basically said 'we have shows after this lined up, we're not deviating from schedule', and this filtered down to the NFL and its refs.

Just bizarre that they spent 10 minutes on the Holmes catch and don't even review the game ending incompletion/fumble

 

[JDSal45]

Honestly, I don't know what I am more amazed at. The lack of a review or NBC not EVEN MENTIONING IT!!!!

THAT IS THE FIX... the network NOT MENTIONING IT. Trying to shove it under the rug.

If it had been reviewed and called a fumble, fine. I think it was incomplete, but I suppose reasonable minds can disagree. It was close. But what really gets me is the lack of review and EVEN MORE SO, NBC and ESPN going along for the ride.

Afterall, they had a special edition of "The Office" to get to

: (

 

[DisgruntledTunaFan]

Just to play Devil's Advocate...

On Pitt's 1st scoring play, it didn't look like BR's knee hit the ground before he crossed the plane. Maybe I saw it wrong, but I was surprised when Madden said he thought so.

I was rooting for Zona too-but it wasn't like Pitt was getting every single call their way. The holding call in the end zone on Holmes' 1st down catch looked iffy too.

 

[JDSal45]

Just to play Devil's Advocate...

On Pitt's 1st scoring play, it didn't look like BR's knee hit the ground before he crossed the plane. Maybe I saw it wrong, but I was surprised when Madden said he thought so.

I was rooting for Zona too-but it wasn't like Pitt was getting every single call their way. The holding call in the end zone on Holmes' 1st down catch looked iffy too.

Disagree. I thought it was clear his knee was down.

But the issue is the LACK of a review. Not the result of the review. On the last play, it deserved at least a review. That is the issue. Not the result.

 

[brdmaverick]

To be honest I thought it was a fumble, but after seeing the replays I do see that there is a case for an incomplete pass. In fact, going by the rule, it should have been ruled incomplete.

My guess is that they wanted to finish the game so that they still had an audience for THE OFFICE.

The fashion in which the Cards lost tonight brought back shades of last year.

 

[BelichickFan]

The fashion in which the Cards lost tonight brought back shades of last year.

Way, way too similar

 

[Rob0729]

The booth reviewed it and deemed it wasn't worthy of a ref review. Considering it ended the game, they should have at least gone through the motions and reviewed it. But I thought it was a fumble. At the very least, I didn't think there was enough visual evidence to overturn the call on the field.