Did Rothlessberger score?
 

Did you all see uncontrovertable proof that the ball did not cross the plane before Rothlessberger bounced back a yard, and his arm touched the ground?
I didn't. I wouldn't have overruled the ref's call. Was it a close call? Sure. Could the ref's call gone either way? Sure! But the call shouldn't have been overruled.

Again what the poster wanted was for the review booth to ignore the rules. Even better, posters want what Belichick has requested, cameras on the pylons, and more cameras focused oalong the goal line. Are the posters right? Of course, they are, with regard to needing more camera angles.

Ask Big Ben. He'll tell ya: "I don't think I got in, but I would have on teh following play of the refs didn't gimmee the first one...".

He knew. He knew at the time, when he moved the ball forward afterwards. You could see the look on his face. He knew.

That settles that argument, I would think.

The person LEAST likely to know what happened was the player at the bottom of the pile. Of course, Ben moved the ball forward after he was down. The question is whether the ball crossed the plane before he was moved back, and whether there was incontrovertable proof that the ball did not cross the plane, as was ruled on the field.

What I see now is that the refs should not bother to ref. they should simply ask the players what they think happened.

Na. I'd like them to ref - but I'd like them to do it fairly, in a consistent manner. If you are calling "Holding" on one team, you damn well better be calling "Holding" on the other team when they do it. Anyone else here think that the Stealers never would have had that 70+ yard run for a TD if there was no holding on the line? I bet if we look at the film again, we'd see blatant holding on that play. Was it called? No.

How many penalties did the Steelers have? Two False Starts in the first quarter, and one other one? Yeah, like I believe that is legitimate. Just like I believe that the Colts are so disciplined that they had no Pass Interference calls against them for the entire season until the ONE they got in the playoffs - and it was a meager 5 YD penalty or so. Yeah. Like I believe that was legitimate.

Secondly, with regard to Ben - the ref really looked unsure of himself. He ran in, like he was gonna spot the ball, and then when he got near Ben he raised his other arm to signal the TD. So, no, I don't think he got in, or got the ball even a millimeter over the line. Neither did the ref, at first, apparently.

Na polian is correct when he points out how the original official waffled on the call ... and thus cancelled the spot of the ball he already was in the act of making.

Mgteich is correct that the replay presented no "indisputable visual evidence" upon which to overrule.

This play was important to the game. But it is NOT important to the question of How Badly Did The Refs Do?

Now that i've seen some general-interest messageboards discussing this play, a remarkable fact has become clear. Folks defending the officials are acting as if ... merely because there was insufficient evidence to overrule this one call ... that makes all the gritching and hair-pulling about the officiating simply sour grapes. "Get over it!"

You wouldn't know it from our board, but that appears to be the Steelers' fans' motif.

In a case like this, I think you really have to go with the insticts of the official on the field. At the time, he called the touchdown, apparently believing that the edge of the ball crossed the edge of the line. I personally didn't think he got it, but I was watching from TV. I wasn't there.

Calling a TD is the safe call, since the replay can always overturn it if it's a mistake. But in this case, the replay didn't offer indisputable proof, so you have to uphold the call on the field.

So was it a TD? Yeah, technically, sure. But I can't prove that the ball actually broke the plane, and neither can anybody else. It's like determining who has posession after a fumble under a scrum. Unless you have x-ray vision, you can't really know. Everyone is fighting for possession under the pile. The ball may technically already be down, but they still fight for it. You have to go with the judgement of the officials. No way around it.

Just my opinion

He didn't get in. I dont think it should have been overturned. That's that.

None of us has any problem with going with the eyes on the field. But we do tend to develop problems when the linesman comes loping in from the side ... marking an intended spot with his right hand ... before he changes to a touchdown signal overhead.

Innumerable replays show that this must have happened just after R'burger - flat on the ground - shoved the ball a yard forward across the line ... and looks imploringly at his pal in stripes.

Just like the backjudge didn't call offensive PI ... until the safety begins lobbying ... pleading! ... for an unwarranted flag.

I thought on the replay the ball MIGHT have crossed the front edge of the goal line while Ruthlessburger was in the air, before he was knocked back. That said, the camera was not on the goal line, so a straight, undistorted view wasn't available.

The ref ran down the line with his right arm up indicating 4th down...THEN when he saw Roth with the ball over the line he signaled TD...stop making crap up...THAT's what happened...he NEVER signaled TD while Roth was up...NEVER HAPPENED