Are we complaining too much

[denverpatsfan]

about the officiating? Just read the Globe online and there is NO mention of ANY marginal calls from what I read. Also Peter King had this to say:

"Heard too many Seattle people grousing about the officials after the game. There were a couple of marginal calls -- the Darrell Jackson end-zone pushoff, which negated a touchdown, most notably -- but Seattle did quite enough to lose the game."

Just thought I would throw that out there. Not surprised about the Globe. Today's cloumns were very poor IMO. But I read PK every week and he always has some good insight.

Another item I forgot to mention was the Seahawks TERRIBLE kicking game. The punter failed to pin the Stealers deep on ALL the occassions he had a chance to AND the kicker missing those 2 FG's. Yes they were long, but he was indoors on turf. Got to criticize Holgram again here. I would have gone for the 1st down instead of attempting the 2nd one.

 

[NEPatriot]

about the officiating? Just read the Globe online and there is NO mention of ANY marginal calls from what I read. Also Peter King had this to say:

"Heard too many Seattle people grousing about the officials after the game. There were a couple of marginal calls -- the Darrell Jackson end-zone pushoff, which negated a touchdown, most notably -- but Seattle did quite enough to lose the game."

Just thought I would throw that out there. Not surprised about the Globe. Today's cloumns were very poor IMO. But I read PK every week and he always has some good insight.

Another item I forgot to mention was the Seahawks TERRIBLE kicking game. The punter failed to pin the Stealers deep on ALL the occassions he had a chance to AND the kicker missing those 2 FG's. Yes they were long, but he was indoors on turf. Got to criticize Holgram again here. I would have gone for the 1st down instead of attempting the 2nd one.

A good post. I don't think we're off base on the officiating. While I would have liked to see Seattle win, I was fairly neutral. And yet thru out the game I was surpsised by numerous callls. I wonder if Peter King watched on TV or live? I called my brother, who was there, and he was a little surprised when I mentioned the poor officiating as obviously he wasn't seeing what those of who watched on tv saw. Great point about the kicking, especially the punting. That said, there was one where the player could have downed it and seemed lost as to where he was.

 

[Brownfan80]

about the officiating? Just read the Globe online and there is NO mention of ANY marginal calls from what I read. Also Peter King had this to say:

"Heard too many Seattle people grousing about the officials after the game. There were a couple of marginal calls -- the Darrell Jackson end-zone pushoff, which negated a touchdown, most notably -- but Seattle did quite enough to lose the game."

Just thought I would throw that out there. Not surprised about the Globe. Today's cloumns were very poor IMO. But I read PK every week and he always has some good insight.

Another item I forgot to mention was the Seahawks TERRIBLE kicking game. The punter failed to pin the Stealers deep on ALL the occassions he had a chance to AND the kicker missing those 2 FG's. Yes they were long, but he was indoors on turf. Got to criticize Holgram again here. I would have gone for the 1st down instead of attempting the 2nd one.

We may be oversensitive to the officiating because of the Denver game, but no.. honestly I think that if anything we're not upset enough. The integrity of the game is falling into question because of the officiating in the 2005/2006 playoffs. From our game in Denver which was called horridly, to the Pitt/Indy game, and now the Superbowl.... it was horrible.

Bad officiating is one thing. Bad officiating means that both teams get bad calls against them. But what happened Sunday night was a different thing. It was like two different officiating crews were working for each team. Strict I-see-all-the-bad-things-you-do-and-even-some-you-don't officials for Seattle, and let-them-play officials for Pittsburgh.

It was blatant and obvious. I'm sure that as people break down the game film it will become even MORE blatant and obvious.

Horrible.

 

[BelichickFan]

I don't think so. To me it was just like the Denver game. The officiating alone didn't win the game. For us, we needed to play badly and have officiating against us. Unfortunately that happened. We could have won despite the officiating but that's not the way it's supposed to be. It was pretty close to as bad for Seattle. They could have won despite the officiating but it's tough to beat a good team and the officials.

 

[Michael]

about the officiating? Just read the Globe online and there is NO mention of ANY marginal calls from what I read. Also Peter King had this to say:

"Heard too many Seattle people grousing about the officials after the game. There were a couple of marginal calls -- the Darrell Jackson end-zone pushoff, which negated a touchdown, most notably -- but Seattle did quite enough to lose the game."

Just thought I would throw that out there. Not surprised about the Globe. Today's cloumns were very poor IMO. But I read PK every week and he always has some good insight.

Another item I forgot to mention was the Seahawks TERRIBLE kicking game. The punter failed to pin the Stealers deep on ALL the occassions he had a chance to AND the kicker missing those 2 FG's. Yes they were long, but he was indoors on turf. Got to criticize Holgram again here. I would have gone for the 1st down instead of attempting the 2nd one.

For me it's not just one game. It's the entire season. The officiating has been horrendous (and for whatever reason more often favoring one team over another) all season. And it's not just us. It was the main topic of discussion after week 2 in the post season on ESPN, Fox Sports you name it. When officiating is getting so much bad press from national media something has to be done. As far as yesterday's game goes it was an embarrassment across the board. The play, and the officiating.

 

[tdw777]

"would we be complaining about the officiating as much if the calls went against Pittsburgh and the Seahawks had won"?

 

[BelichickFan]

"would we be complaining about the officiating as much if the calls went against Pittsburgh and the Seahawks had won"?

I was, reluctantly, rooting for Pittsburgh so I would.

 

[nugsfan]

Yes! There was outrage over the officiating in the Indy/Pitt game and Pit has gotten the calls ever since! Yes Seattle could have overcome all the bad officiating in that game up to the point of the phantom holding call which would have meant first and goal at the 1, and probably a 17-14 lead. (forget the bad calls that came after- 15 yds for tackling for chrissakes and rothlisburger getting the TO a couple of seconds after a penalty should have been thrown, the non-call on Pit being offsides constantly etc etc, Could Pit have risen to the challenge of coming back? Personally I doubt it as Rothlisburger looked like he swallowed a turd the whole 2nd half. Gotta tell ya this is the sort of thing that turned me off to the NBA. I have never seen a conference championship or SB that was so one sided and in my opinion the refs determined the outcome.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

We may be oversensitive to the officiating because of the Denver game, but no.. honestly I think that if anything we're not upset enough. The integrity of the game is falling into question because of the officiating in the 2005/2006 playoffs. From our game in Denver which was called horridly, to the Pitt/Indy game, and now the Superbowl.... it was horrible.

Bad officiating is one thing. Bad officiating means that both teams get bad calls against them. But what happened Sunday night was a different thing. It was like two different officiating crews were working for each team. Strict I-see-all-the-bad-things-you-do-and-even-some-you-don't officials for Seattle, and let-them-play officials for Pittsburgh.

It was blatant and obvious. I'm sure that as people break down the game film it will become even MORE blatant and obvious.

Horrible.

Bingo - Brown gets bingo again!

The integrity of the game is on the line and unfortunately I don't think we can complain enough.

I read the Globe pieces last night as well as Prisco's and Judge's on CBS Sportsline and was floored both by their perception of the game and their failure to flag the officiating. Ditto King whose interview on WEEI I only heard a snipet of. Perhaps as suggested by Atlanta Patsfan it is a perception born of watching the game live in the stadium. If any of them was not in the press box (and they may not have been as seats are limited) and did not have access to replay, that could be a mitigating factor that shaped their view. But having now written around it I'd imagine each will become predictably entrenched.

But enough of the national media saw the same game feed we all did. Those who choose to carry the NFL's water and minimize the effect horrendous officiating had on the 2006 playoffs in general and the league's crown jewel in particular are not doing the NFL any favors. Perception is reality and NFL officiating is now perceived as incompetent or worse by an alarming number of it's employer's fanbase demographic. The hew and cry among the betting public alone should give them pause. It's gambling driven TV revenue that is the cornerstone of the NFL's multi billion dollar cash cow. Significantly erode that demographics trust in the integrity of the game and not having a CBA will become the least of the NFL's worries going forward.

 

[stcjones]

good post

We may be oversensitive to the officiating because of the Denver game, but no.. honestly I think that if anything we're not upset enough. The integrity of the game is falling into question because of the officiating in the 2005/2006 playoffs. From our game in Denver which was called horridly, to the Pitt/Indy game, and now the Superbowl.... it was horrible.

Bad officiating is one thing. Bad officiating means that both teams get bad calls against them. But what happened Sunday night was a different thing. It was like two different officiating crews were working for each team. Strict I-see-all-the-bad-things-you-do-and-even-some-you-don't officials for Seattle, and let-them-play officials for Pittsburgh.

It was blatant and obvious. I'm sure that as people break down the game film it will become even MORE blatant and obvious.

Horrible.

Couldn't agree more

 

[Garbanza]

I beleive the media has a self-serving interest to NOT complain about the officiating too blantantly. This is why I give big KUDOS to Michael Smith. Bravo. Although Seattle would probably have lost the game anyway (thanks to receiver droppsies, poor clock management and some head-scratching play calling) ....they sure as heck had an even tougher road to hoe with the abysmal officiating. Just awful.

 

[PATSNUTme]

NFL Officiating has been bad all year long. If the same calls last night went againts Pitt instead of Sea, I believe that we would still see the same # of post about it.

A fact is a fact. No one can dispute the fact that NFL offciating has been bad this year and carried over to the SB last night.

 

[Bella*chick]

NFL Officiating has been bad all year long. If the same calls last night went againts Pitt instead of Sea, I believe that we would still see the same # of post about it.

A fact is a fact. No one can dispute the fact that NFL offciating has been bad this year and carried over to the SB last night.

Agreed. I am one of those who believes Seattle made enough mistakes that their win was no guarantee even without the officiating errors. But I would have at least liked to see that game play out. That would have been dramatic and exciting, and a helluva lot more interesting than the mess we were subjected to last night.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

about the officiating? Just read the Globe online and there is NO mention of ANY marginal calls from what I read. Also Peter King had this to say:

"Heard too many Seattle people grousing about the officials after the game. There were a couple of marginal calls -- the Darrell Jackson end-zone pushoff, which negated a touchdown, most notably -- but Seattle did quite enough to lose the game."

If Seattle had played a superb game and lost on one of the "questionable calls," I would argue that Seattle fans could make a case for complaining about the officiating. But they played and coached a truly abysmal game: Penalties, dropped passes, poor punting by failing to kill the ball inside the 20 often, missed FG's (indoors you have to make one of those 50-yarders, poor positioning by a receiver on the out of bounds line TWICE near the goal line, to name just a few things. The Seahawks and their Fans should take their medicine, shut-up and try again next year.

 

[Na_polian]

about the officiating? Just read the Globe online and there is NO mention of ANY marginal calls from what I read. Also Peter King had this to say:

"Heard too many Seattle people grousing about the officials after the game. There were a couple of marginal calls -- the Darrell Jackson end-zone pushoff, which negated a touchdown, most notably -- but Seattle did quite enough to lose the game."

If Seattle had played a superb game and lost on one of the "questionable calls," I would argue that Seattle fans could make a case for complaining about the officiating. But they played and coached a truly abysmal game: Penalties, dropped passes, poor punting by failing to kill the ball inside the 20 often, missed FG's (indoors you have to make one of those 50-yarders, poor positioning by a receiver on the out of bounds line TWICE near the goal line, to name just a few things. The Seahawks and their Fans should take their medicine, shut-up and try again next year.

Wow. You make it sound like Pittsburgh dominated teh game - Pittsburgh played just as bad, if not worse, than Seattle. The only real difference in teh performance was simply that Pittsburgh's 3 or so big plays stood, while each of Seattle's were called back.

Other than that, Seattle outplayed the Stealers.

 

[Brownfan80]

Wow. You make it sound like Pittsburgh dominated teh game - Pittsburgh played just as bad, if not worse, than Seattle. The only real difference in teh performance was simply that Pittsburgh's 3 or so big plays stood, while each of Seattle's were called back.

Other than that, Seattle outplayed the Stealers.

Another ticky tacky penalty was the callback of the 34 yard punt return by Peter Warrick. The 'hold' was marginal and could have gone either way. I saw MUCH more obvious holds at much more critical times (this hold was at the snap of a long return, not at the breakaway point of that return) that went uncalled by the Pitt OL all night long. That play would have been huge for both field position and momentum. Snow Job.

 

[DaBruinz]

Another ticky tacky penalty was the callback of the 34 yard punt return by Peter Warrick. The 'hold' was marginal and could have gone either way. I saw MUCH more obvious holds at much more critical times (this hold was at the snap of a long return, not at the breakaway point of that return) that went uncalled by the Pitt OL all night long. That play would have been huge for both field position and momentum. Snow Job.

Actually, if you watched the replays, there was a shot of Pruitt at the LOS holding a Pitt player's jersey. That was one call I didn't mind them making.

 

[The Gr8est]

I've been checking out other teams messageboards, including the Steelers, and the Steelers are the only ones who are saying the refs didn't hand them the game.

Unfortunately, when the euphoria of the win wears off there are going to be some pissed off Steelers fans. Some are saying that in a couple of weeks, once the controvery has died down, all anyone will remember is that the Steelers won the Superbowl.

I respectfully disagree. The officiating has caused an uproar among NFL fans across the country, and I don't think the "asterisk" will ever be removed in the eyes of NFL fans.

That is why the Steelers should be pissed. They were favored and with their fan base had essentially a home game. Odds are they could have won the game on a level playing field, but now the refs have robbed them of a Superbowl win that they could have savored.....AND been congratulated for by NFL fans across the country. They could have won this game and enjoyed the great season they had. Getting to the Superbowl as the #6 seed and winning three tough games on the road is a great accomplishment, and the whole country was behind them in decrying the horrible officiating that almost cost them the Indy game.

...but this Superbowl win will be forever tarnished, and they'll be defending it forever. They will NEVER hear the end of it...and once the Steelers realize that they have been jobbed as well, they will join us in the outrage.

 

[Brownfan80]

Actually, if you watched the replays, there was a shot of Pruitt at the LOS holding a Pitt player's jersey. That was one call I didn't mind them making.

Agreed, I saw that. But to me it was brief and could have gone either way. It was no worse than the many times I saw Pitt OL nearly undressing Seattle DL (such as on the Big Ben draw up the middle where the OL more or less had the DT in a headlock). My point is that with what they weren't calling on Pitt, that call was ticky tacky for Seattle. If they were going to call that holding, then by comparison, holding should have been called five or six obvious times on the Pitt OL. But it was not.

 

[stcjones]

the answer is ......

"would we be complaining about the officiating as much if the calls went against Pittsburgh and the Seahawks had won"?

YES!!.....I would have liked to see Seattle win their first SB...but basically didn't care who won........but would have been aghast at the DEPLOREABLE officiating....no matter which team it was AGAINST. Fact of the matter is.....LET them play....or at the least.......MAKE THE CALLS EVENLY.......what happened last night was a travesty..........taking away HUGELY important plays on minor (if even) contact........or just plain blowing the call........GAVE the game to the squealers....or maybe now they should be called the .....STEALERS!!!!