Steelers win--with an asterisk

[Travis Munday]

I'd sign that petition TJR.



JohnnyO-

A single stille frame proves NOTHING. Did you even read the rule? Hands ARE allowed to the outside of the body, as long as they are retracted and not 'held' there.



Also, it's pretty hard to tell that a pylon is/not moving from STILL images. Even still, you can clearly see that the pylon is deformed, it no longer points straight up and down. The pylon is inbounds, and thus, a TD. Stealers fans want us to give them a TD because their QB had the football that "braised" the Goal Line, but won't give the Seahawks a TD when the WR has the ball, has one foot inbounds, and then "braises" the inbound pylon? Give me a break....

 

[Thomas Rogers]

BTW, Isn't "braise" something you do when brown meats or vegetables? As for a pylon, being hit by a leg, wouldn't that be either "brushed" or "grazed"?

 

[Travis Munday]

Hence the quotation marks, lol.



You "braze" metals together as well.

 

[Shawn Hennessy]

Dan E. Moldea, a DC journalist, has a work in progress on corruption, titled, CONFESSIONS OF A GUERRILLA WRITER:

Adventures in the Jungles of Crime, Politics, and Journalism



He commits <a href="http://www.moldea.com/Five-3.html" target="_blank">a section</a> of <a href="http://www.moldea.com/" target="_blank">his book</a> to the <a href="http://www.moldea.com/PartFive.html" target="_blank">NFL's corruption</a>.



"In another game-fixing conspiracy, the head of Project Layoff, an IRS gambling investigation in Nevada, provided me with evidence, indicating that two referees had allegedly participated in the fixing of no fewer than eight additional NFL games."

 

[Shawn Hennessy]

A writer for Scout.com wrote an <a href="http://mb8.scout.com/fseahawksinsiderfrm1.showMessage?topicID=27428.topic" target="_blank">interesting piece</a> which deals squarly with this issue.

 

[Mark Grumpy]

Stonemiser -

Official in the NFL are just human and are going to make mistakes.

Yep. One mistakes lots of humans make is accepting bribes, kickbacks, fraud, etc. Which brings me to what I already said: A bus can haul a lot of money.



JohhnnyO

Also I believe that any sport that uses judges to score points in a subjective manner is not a sport.

Subjective - def 4 - Existing only within the experiencer's mind and incapable of external verification



The very definition of subjective is what allowed Ben's touchdown. You better stop watching this non sport.



grump

 

[Johnny O]

Johnny, I must say, that was very big of you to actually post that link to the still shots of the Jackson touchdown. It shows him so clearly having one foot down, one hitting the pylon, and the football secured. Thank you for supporting our cause.

That's exactly correct. One foot was in bounds when he had possession of the ball. In college ball one foot is okay, in the NFL you need two. Does one foot in bounds and one leg brushing the pylon without the foot being down count as in bounds? I couldn't say, but I do know he didn't have two feet down in bounds. The pylon counts as the goal line but does it count as the ground? I don't know. Regardless, if that's 7 points they're still down 4.

But when the a HUGE majority of fans across this country (i.e. not Seahawk fans) are disgusted by the lopsided flag-throwing...it is far more than the Steelers simply getting 3 solid plays.

The HUGE majority of fans are wrong, and influenced by what John Madden said. Madden is an idiot who has nothing good to ever say about the Steelers because of the Immaculate Reception in 1972 that knocked his Raiders out of the playoffs. BTW, film is inconclusive but given the direction he was traveling, the ball would have had to have hit Jack Tatum in order to bounce to Franco the way it did, making Franco's catch legal under the rules at the time. Fuqua just keeps "his secret" because it gets him attention and occasional interviews.



Grump: Ben's TD was a TD. I already posted that pic. On his initial dive, the ball was clearly over.

Tiger: What I'm saying is that Locklear had Haggans' arm wrapped up. It's holding. If he hadn't held him, Haggans would have had a sack. So doing what a good OL does, he held the defender and hoped he didn't get caught. I saw a better video of it on TV from a field-level camera.



I can happily keep this going as long as ya'll can. As you can tell by now, I'm pretty tenacious. I'm never one to shy away from a good argument, especially when I know I'm right. I'm always right. Other people can be right too if they agree with me. Still, duty calls and I'll be out of town on business for a few days and without internet service. More accurately, given a choice between the hotel's free computer in the lobby or the hotel bar, I'll take the bar every time.



I'm out, have a great weekend everybody! For the Pro Bowl, GO AFC!

 

[Travis Munday]

OK....MAYBE Locklear did get beat -- by a defender who was offsides. Not only one, but two. One one the play before. What about those? Oh, right, that's an OK missed call because it helped the Stealers. There was still no hold. Shoot, even Ray Lewis, a Linebacker who's job it is to get at the QB during a blitz says there was no hold. Why on earth would a LB side with the O-line? When the officials got it wrong. I'd be interested to see this play again, to see when the flag was thrown.



Or what of the time out call AFTER the play clock ran out? Right, another one that's OK because it helped the Stealers.



Madden is an idiot, no doubt, but don't think the rest of the world is as biased as he is just because it helps your cause.



The game was bunk, and the NFL keeping mum about it proves that the majority is right...the better team on Sunday was smitten and robbed.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

JohnnyO, one of the posts above claim the "rule" to be:

A player will be ruled in bounds if he touches the pylon at the goal line before going out of bounds. For example, a pass will be considered complete if one foot touches the pylon and the other food is in bounds.

And, JohnnyO, you said:

Does one foot in bounds and one leg brushing the pylon without the foot being down count as in bounds?

Therefore, by the wording of the rule there is only one way to answer your question...and the answer is "YES! Not only is the player in-bounds, but it would be inches from a TD as well."



JohnnyO then said:

I couldn't say, but I do know he didn't have two feet down in bounds

See the rule definition above. The whole pylon is in-bounds. Any part of one foot touching the pylon with the other foot in bounds means the player is in bounds, and since the pylon as also part of the end zone, it means either a TD or inches from it.



I really don't watch much football, but based on what I saw and the rules as described, I don't see how anyone can conclude differently.



As for the comment:

Regardless, if that's 7 points they're still down 4.

Right, and if the Hawks were allowed to keep this possession/TD and the Stealers were not GIVEN the TD that was questionable, what then would the score be?



TJR

 

[Johnny O]

The Steelers TD was not questionable. Ben was over. The picture shows it. Get over it.

No flag for blocking Ben in the back. No PI calls at least twice on the Seahawks. Bad calls and non-calls both ways. You got yours too. A good team could put better than 3 points on the board. Seattle's 7 was a gimme from a 76 yard INT return. I could hear Hasslebeck's sphincter tighten up as the field got shorter. Didn't see Alexander get his 100 yards. Pittsburgh played mostly bad on offense, defense was okay, but Seattle showed me nothing. Jerramy Stevens wussed out, he could catch a TD pass with no one around but wouldn't fight for a ball with a defender nearby and dropped everything that came his way then.

 

[Travis Munday]

I'm simply amazed....

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Hey, Tiger, it's JohnnyO's world and we and the HUGE MAJORITY of NFL fans that are WRONG while HE IS RIGHT just live in it.



TJR

 

[Eric Pennal]

JohnnyO,



The picture of Ben's goal line dive shows a bright-orange mark, on the blocker's shoulder pad, touching the line. It doesn't look like a football to me. Do you have any "un-doctored" pictures proving this was a touchdown?



Ben even admitted to Dave Letterman that he didn't think he had made it.

 

[Bill V]

JohnnyO and TJR--



Any contact with the pylon counts as being in bounds, and in the endzone. Therefore, if a player has one foot down, the other foot contacting the pylon, and has possession of the ball during this (which JohnnyO seems to be conceding is the case), then it is a touchdown.



Regarding the Roethlisberger touchdown, EricP is correct--the photo you posted of his initial surge is inconclusive, either way. But the sideline official pretty clearly ruled that this initial surge came up short of the end zone when he ran in from the sideline to mark the play down short of the goal line. He then changed his call when Roethlisberger pushed the ball forward across the line well after he was lying flat on the turf. Replay was inconclusive about whether his initial surge crossed the line--but it was conclusive that he was clearly down by contact prior to that second surge crossing the line. And seeing that the sideline official was basing his call on this SECOND surge, not the first, that call should either a) have been reviewed based only on the second surge, and thus reversed, or b) it should have not been allowed to be changed on the field in the first place, at which time a replay could have occurred to determine if the first surge crossed the goal line, which as we indicated, would have been inconclusive, and the call of fourth down would have stood.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

BillV, wouldn't it only be a TD if the ball (not just a body part) crossed the plane? For example, I couldn't simply slide into the pylon feet first with ball tucked and at the point I hit the pylon it is a TD?



I am asking?

 

[Bill V]

I don't have a printed copy of the rules handy, but here's a paraphrase of my understanding--the pylon is considered to be part of the end zone, and by rule, any contact with the pylon by the ball carrier's foot/feet or the ball (while in the ball carrier's possession) is automatically a touchdown, regardless of the position of the ball at the time. (Provided, of course, that he has legal possession of the ball at the time, and hasn't been determined to be out of bounds or downed by contact prior to that.) The pylon may be used to establish that legal possession of the ball--as is the case here.



This has led to some odd looking-but-correct calls recently. I remember one where Michael Vick was running to the the end of the goal line, was falling out of bounds, but managed to get one foot inside the goal line and the other to contact the pylon before he had any contact with the ground out-of-bounds. The ball crossed the goal line a couple feet outside the pylon--but because a foot made contact in bounds (he got both feet, but only needed one), it was a TD. Similarly, I remember a play where the receiver was at the front corner of the end zone, and caught the pass while falling forward, across the goal line, coming back out of the end zone. The ball never crossed the goal line, but because his feet were establishing his position in the end zone, it was properly called a touchdown.



The pylon being part of the end zone also applies in other situations, such as the Denver/New England game where the interception return was fumbled, and according to reports I've heard (I missed the game, and haven't seen the replay, so I have no opinion myself) hit the pylon as the first contact out-of-bounds. This is part of the end zone--and a fumble that goes forward into the end zone and then out of bounds is a touch back, it should have been New England's ball if that's what actually happened.



If a player slides into the pylon, as your question asks, generally it won't be a TD, as a sliding player is giving themself up, can't be hit, and is ruled down at the point the slide started. Anything after that (including pylon contact) is considered to be after the play is completed, and therefore irrelevant.

 

[Shawn Hennessy]

LEt's look at the Ben phantom TD from a different perspective. Had the (paid off) ref NOT called it a TD, would the booth ref find sufficient evidence (i.e. conclusive) to over-rule the field official? Not in the slightest. I have reviewed this over and over...what is being labled a ball (from the stillers.com images), looks like D.D. Lewis' forearm (he punched the ball loose as Ben fell to the ground).



I watched this game and reviewed every play from scrimmage. I counted a 9:1 ratio (Stealers:Seahawks) of holds by the tackles and gaurds. Yet, only the Hawks were penalized...and at criticak moments.



Johnny...you are blinded buy your passion. That is good. Don't take this as a personal affront. The folks on Stillers.com are borderline psychotic and seem as though they'd resort to assault in their <i>defense</i> of this tainted game. That is just plain crazy.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

BillV, I am pretty sure the official rules indicate that the BALL must touch or pass the goal line, not just a part of the player holding the ball.



That is why I made the comment that the play in question MIGHT have be considered either a TD or an "inches to goal" situation based on how the ball, not the player traveled. Clearly, based on the rules, it was a completion prior to going out of bounds. The question in my mind is did the ball pass the goal line or go out of bounds?



Oh, and I did find these rules, on this fora (see link):

Section 2 TOUCHDOWN

Article 1

It is a touchdown:

(a) when a runner (3-38) advances from the field of play and the ball touches the opponent's goal line (plane);

or

(b) while inbounds any player catches or recovers a loose ball (3-2-3) on or behind the opponent's goal line.



Section 38 TOUCHDOWN

A touchdown is the situation in which any part of the ball, legally in possession of a player inbounds, is on, above, or behind the opponent's goal line (plane), provided it is not a touchback (11-2).



As far as the question of whether the pylons are inbounds, the Rulebook states:

The four intersections of goal lines must be marked at inside corners of the end zone and the goal line by pylons mounted on flexible shafts. Pylons must be placed at inside edges of white lines and should not touch the surface of the actual playing field itself.

TJR

 

[Bill V]

TJR, if the paragraph you typed before quoting the rules were the case, any time a player catches a pass in the end zone while leaning/falling out-of-bounds, but gets his feet in bounds, would be ruled to not be a touchdown, as the ball was already out-of-bounds when it was caught. And that clearly doesn't happen.



It's not just "a part of the player" that is good--otherwise, there would be tons of touchdowns called where the players helmet has crossed the goal line even though he was carrying the ball lower on his body. I can't say for certain how the rule is worded, but I know the NFL consistently has called it a touchdown when a runner who establishes possession of the ball inbounds then establishes position in the end zone by having one or both feet make contact there prior to making any contact out of bounds.



Let's expand the hypothetical--say a player is running down the sidelines with possession of the ball, gets hit, sways his body and the ball over the out-of-bounds territory near the 30 but never makes contact with the ground out-of-bounds, regains his balance, and runs further downfield, before being completely knocked out-of-bounds at the 10. Where do you mark the ball down? Clearly at the 10. The fact that the ball passed through the out-of-bounds plane at the 30 is irrelevant, as no contact out-of-bounds was made. Same thing applies on this play--If the ball goes out of bounds, but his feet stay inbounds until he enters the end zone, (which he does when one foot gets down in bounds and the other makes contact with the pylon), then it's a touchdown, regardless of where the ball crossed the out-of-bounds plane.



Unfortunately, the rule quoted in that thread (whose validity is unknown, but I'll take it at face value for now) doesn't speak to inbounds/out-of-bounds situations--for which there is a whole separate section of rules, and it's those which are critical in this situation.



The most succinct answer to this may be this post in that thread...

The plane of the goal line extends indefinitely as long as the ball carrier is in contact with the ground in the field of play. If the ball carrier is airborne, the dead ball spot will be where the ball crossed the sideline.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Okay, so than it's a TD given the situation (ONE foot inbound on ground, ONE foot touching pylon, ball under control) and given the rules. I agree with you.



And, JohnnyO agreed to the situation; so I guess the only thing left is to find the rules from an official source.



TJR