Unfreaken believable. That has got to be the worst call in the history of ref'ing. No way that was an incomplete pass...
Yes, no excuses, but between the non-pass interference call in the first half and that overturned INT, this officiating crew has done everything to keep the Colts in this game.
This is an example of how a team should win despite the refs. Pittsburgh was getting screwed all game (the non-call by the officials - which was really a false start), but they came through and performed when it mattered. Congrats Pittsburgh!
hmmm okay u remeber that first into by polamulu the one where he sucured but then as he fell it hit the ground? This into was the same thing the guys knee was down therfor he was still on the ground when the ball came out he never had full possetion. Pittsburg might win the afc championship if Mcfadden and Faneca dont get caught.
no but he clearly had it caught rolled over and as he was getting up he kicked it out of his hands and then recovered the fumble i dont think it hit the ground as he was rolling so i dont understand how they could make that call
what was the ref talking about? he dropped ball or what not before his foot got off ground... i was like WHAT?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J-E-T-S 1083)</div><div class='quotemain'>did anyone catch the officials explaination for that call i'm curious to what he said</div> I was wondering the same thing, I didn't catch the explanation either. That sure did look like an INT to me though.
The explanation was that his right knee was still on the ground when the ball came out, therefore incomplete. If you can make sense out of that, then let the rest of us know - I always thought that he only needed to have full possession...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>The explanation was that his right knee was still on the ground when the ball came out, therefore incomplete. If you can make sense out of that, then let the rest of us know - I always thought that he only needed to have full possession...</div> In order for it to be an INT he has to make a "football move" while maintaining possesion. Since he knee was on ground during entire "roll" he never completed that football move with possesion. Thus, no INT. Do i agree? NO. I dont
The part about the play that I didn't understand is that if he would have just stayed down, it would have been an INT. That makes zero sense.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Steelerfan_2005)</div><div class='quotemain'>The part about the play that I didn't understand is that if he would have just stayed down, it would have been an INT. That makes zero sense.</div> If he had stayed down and held onto ball, if he stayed down out of roll, but ball popped out, it wouldnt have been an int. But, like i said, i dont like rule
If the Colts had won that game, this would have been far worse than any 'tuck' ruling IMO. The league needs to look at the rules here and clarify it for a situation like this - or add some 'leniency' ruling for the ref. If the ref 'technically' called this right, then he needs to be given the leeway to determine whether the receiver had full possession of the ball (which he did) before the ball came out.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (vikingfan)</div><div class='quotemain'>If the Colts had won that game, this would have been far worse than any 'tuck' ruling IMO. The league needs to look at the rules here and clarify it for a situation like this - or add some 'leniency' ruling for the ref. If the ref 'technically' called this right, then he needs to be given the leeway to determine whether the receiver had full possession of the ball (which he did) before the ball came out.</div> agreed. They missed so many calls this weekend. I know it isnt the reason the bears lost, but steve smiths first TD, he pushed tilman to the ground and caught the ball and scored. It was blatant offensive interference, and it was called defensive interference.
