[Super Bowl] Does Any One Else Suspect The Game Was Rigged?

You make a piss-poor case for yourself. Pittsburgh was handed the game.

Here's an interesting read:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5310192

This is the space where I get to crow about the frightening precision of my Super Bowl prediction.

Where I get to remind everyone that I guaranteed the Steelers would win the title after they beat the Colts. That they were the only championship-caliber team among the final four. That they would dismantle the Broncos in Denver and waylay whomever the NFC sent at them.
This is the space where I get to wag a finger at my colleague Ian O'Connor, with whom I'd waged a dueling columns battle of opposing prognostication. He picked the Seahawks and made a very strong case for them.


This is the space where I get to say, I told ya so. But I won't. I can't.

I've never felt so empty being right. I feel dirty. I wish I'd been wrong. The Steelers did not deserve to win this game. They were not the better team. O'Connor was right. Seattle was the better team.

So, Paul Tagliabue, how does a team lose when it outgains an opponent by 57 yards, controls time of possession and wins the turnover battle?

Like a crazed CIA analyst running through the halls of Langley screaming into open offices about some impending calamity, I've been shrieking hysterically about the terrible officiating in the NFL and warning that some day the brutal calls were going to affect the outcome of the Super Bowl.

That some day was Sunday.

Every single questionable, marginal or outright bad call went against the Seahawks.

Their first three big plays were all wiped out by penalty calls. On their second drive, Darrell Jackson caught an 18-yard pass on 3rd-and-6 that would have given Seattle a first down at the 23. But Chris Gray was called for holding James Farrior. When Farrior pushed upfield, Gray did hook him with his right arm, and Farrior went down. When referee Bill Leavy flagged Gray, it was a bad omen for the Seahawks. Instead of being on the edge of the red zone, they came away without any points.

On their third drive, the Seahawks looked to take a 7-0 lead when Jackson separated from Chris Hope in the end zone and Matt Hasselbeck delivered a perfect strike to his outside shoulder. The back judge looked uncertain — sound familiar, Patriots fans? — then finally jerked his flag out and called offensive pass interference to wipe out the touchdown. The replay showed receiver and defender hand-fighting, with Jackson getting the slightest push into Hope's chest before turning to catch the ball. ABC's John Madden thought the call was dubious. FOX analyst and all-time great offensive lineman Brian Baldinger had no doubts, calling it "absolutely horrendous" on his FOXSports.com Super Bowl Instant Analysis. ESPN's Steve Young and Michael Irvin also had no uncertainty, dismissing the call as ticky-tack and insisting the Seahawks got robbed of a TD.

Then came a huge call on the first play of the second quarter. Peter Warrick ripped off a 33-yard punt return to give Seattle the ball at the Steelers 46. But Etric Pruitt was called for holding. How clear was it? Well, Madden thought the call was for Pruitt holding the gunner at the beginning of the play. It wasn't. The flag came in during the runback and it looked pretty minor. Another example of an official searching to make a call.

So despite totally dominating the first 20 minutes of the game, the Seahawks led only 3-0.

Then came Pittsburgh's first touchdown. Whether you think Roethlisberger broke the plane of the goal line seems to depend on which team you were rooting for. The odd part was the line judge seemed to have determined that Big Ben had come up short as he ran in from the sideline. Since Roethlisberger had been pushed back well short of the goal line I don't know what he could have seen as he got closer to the pile that would have made him change his mind. But up went the arms. Had Roethlisberger been ruled short of the plane, that call would no doubt have stood too. But you figure the Black and Gold would have pounded it in from the two-inch line on fourth down so there's not that much here for Seattle fans to complain about except for the continuing storyline that every single call was going the Steelers' way. And the worst was yet to come.

The Seahawks were on the verge of taking a 17-14 lead early in the fourth quarter when officiating disaster struck. Hasselbeck had drilled a pass down the seam to Jerramy Stevens to set up first-and-goal at the one when suddenly Leavy appeared in the middle of the screen to call the play back on account of holding on Sean Locklear. No less a source than newly minted Hall of Famer John Madden came right out and said it was a bad call. This penalty was beyond ticky-tack. Baldinger called it "another terrible call" and added that the Steelers were offsides on the play. It was yet another official searching for a call, desperate to throw his flag, yearning to impact the action. Why, why, oh, why? That's 14 points the officials simply took away from the Seahawks. Incredible.

After a sack, Hasselbeck threw a pick and then was penalized 15 yards for making the tackle. I'm not kidding. The same thing happened in the Indy-Pittsburgh game in the regular season. It's like the officials become so discombobulated during the change of possession that they just randomly start throwing flags. The call was that Hasselbeck had thrown an illegal block below the waist on the return. Never mind that Hasselbeck wasn't trying to block anybody and did, in fact, make the tackle. Just another terrible call that cannot be reviewed in Paul Tagliabue's NFL.

The Steelers took quick advantage of their enhanced field position and just like that it was 21-10 Pittsburgh when it should have been 17-14 Seattle.

But the stripes weren't done.

First, they blew a fumble call on the field — of course against Seattle — before overturning it after replay. Then, with the Steelers trying to run out the clock, Leavy granted Roethlisberger a timeout, even though the play clock clearly read zero before the quarterback signaled for time. It ended up being the final bad call in Seattle's coffin.

As Madden and Al Michaels watched the replay they shared a laugh about a similar bad non-call in an earlier playoff game between the Bears and Panthers. This is what it has come to: Announcers comparing the bad calls happening before them to the bad calls from earlier rounds of the playoffs. Is this really what the NFL wants?


Did the refs get this Ben Roethlisberger touchdown call right? It's certainly up for debate. (Elaine Thompson / Associated Press)


With Cris Collinsworth lobbying for pass interference to be eligible for review on Inside the NFL after New England got jobbed in Denver; Joey Porter inveighing against the league after the game in Indy; Young and Irvin railing at halftime of the Super Bowl; Baldinger being spot-on with his Instant Analysis critique of the officials; and Madden and Michaels wondering aloud about the officiating during the game ... is anybody in the league office listening?

Or can we pretty much count on next year's playoffs being dominated by the officials too?


In other notes ...

Poll


Was that Mike Holmgren or Mike Martz?
The one area where most people agreed Seattle might have an edge was on the sidelines. Mike Holmgren was supposed to be a better game coach than Bill Cowher. But a funny thing happened to Holmgren at the end of the first half (and again at the end of the game): He became Mike Martz. Not once, but twice, Holmgren basically ran the clock out on himself.

One other decision Holmgren made should haunt him. After Mack Strong did a shameful job of not stretching out for a first down — on a tackle by a cornerback no less — the Seahawks faced 4th-and-inches at their own 26 with a 3-0 lead in the second quarter. The situation reminded me of when Bill Belichick went for it in a similar situation against the Colts in the playoffs three years ago, made it and sent a statement. Despite having an MVP tailback who was 16-for-16 on 3rd-and-1 this season, Holmgren went the safe route and punted. The Steelers scored and Seattle never led again.


Darrell Jackson, what might have been
After tying a Super Bowl record with five catches in the first quarter, Darrell Jackson was shut out. But, oh, what might have been. If not for a holding call, a marginal offensive pass interference penalty and a momentary lapse of knowing where he was on the field, Jackson could have had eight catches in the first half for 124 yards and two touchdowns.

As it turned out, his five catches for 50 yards will be easily forgotten.


Joey Porter vs. Jerramy Stevens
Joey Porter was pretty invisible. Jerramy Stevens wished he was. Despite scoring a touchdown, Stevens had three huge drops, two of which were drive killers when the Seahawks were marching deep in Steelers territory. Porter may have had only three tackles and no sacks, but the "soft" label he hung on Stevens sure seemed to fit as the 6-foot-7 tight end short-armed several passes and seemed to be hearing footsteps all night.

 

And that is the straight TRUTH!

Awesome find, Fatty.

 

Never thought I'd see the day FFB and I agreed on something, it is here

 

LOL

And I heard there was only 1 of 7 referees with super bowl experience, why dont they sent more referees with more experience.

 

So the Steelers didn't overcome the worst call in the postseason in Indy?

Lincoln Kennedy said that he thought the holding call on Locklear was a good call. The Hasselbeck penalty was bad, but it hardly changed the game. I'd rather talk about the terrible pass by Hasselbeck. Bens TD was debateable but it looks like the ball breaks the plane before Totupu ever hits him...

The Seahawks and Steeler haters can b**** all they want. Bottom line...One for the thumb.

 

I don't think it is asking too much for a game, hell the BIGGEST game in sports, to have the players decide it and not for the officials to get so much "face time". Before the Super Bowl, I had no idea who this Bill Leavy guy was - but that isn't the case now. You can call it "hatin'" all you want but there is something wrong when neutral observers are making comments about the calls. The Super Bowl should be a game where people look back and say, "Damn, that Steelers team of 2005 was a dominating force." They shouldn't say, "Well, the Steelers played awful, their QB had a 22.6 passer rating, their defense gave up almost 400 yards, they turned the ball over more than their opponent, but they got some great breaks from the officials."

And as I said before when people look back at this Super Bowl - they aren't going to remember much (it was a really crappy game) other than the shaky (at best) officiating. And all I am saying is it shouldn't have been that way - as an NFL fan, you would expect in the biggest game of the year that the officiating would be better than what we saw this past Sunday.

 

I love the Steeler fans whining about the whining about the officials. Hell, one of their own players couldn't stop b****ing about the officials even after they beat the Colts.

 

I just went to ESPN's website and they had a poll - asking 10 questions. Looks like there are "a lot" of Seahawk fans and/or Steeler haters...


1) What grade would you give referee Bill Leavy's officiating crew for Super Bowl XL?


50.6% F

24.8% D

13.9% C

8.7% B

2.0% A


2) How do you rate the overall state of officiating in the NFL?


34.1% Average

32.8% Bad

19.1% Good

12.0% Abysmal

2.0% Excellent


3) Did the officiating in Sunday's game unfairly favor one team?


79.0% Unfairly favored the Steelers

16.3% The right calls were made

4.6% Unfairly favored the Seahawks


4) Which played the biggest role in determining the outcome of the game?


57.5% Officials missing calls

28.3% Seahawks not making plays

14.2% Steelers making plays


5) Do you think the official made the right call on Darrell Jackson's offensive pass interference in the endzone, negating a Seattle touchdown in the first quarter?


73.8% No

20.5% Yes

5.7% I'm not sure


6) Do you think the football broke the plane of the goal line on Ben Roethlisberger's touchdown run in the second quarter?


59.3% No

25.9% Yes

14.8% I'm not sure


7) Do you think the official made the right call on Sean Locklear's holding penalty in the fourth quarter, negating an 18-yard reception to the one-yard line by Jerramy Stevens?


74.3% No

15.3% Yes

10.4% I'm not sure


8) Do you feel that you understand what constitutes a ''football move'' on plays involving potential fumbles?


64.6% Yes

35.4% No


9) How much would creating full-time officiating positions, instead of the current part-time positions, help improve the quality of NFL officiating?


45.0% A lot

42.5% A little

12.5% Not at all


10) Which major sport has the best officials?


44.9% MLB

23.3% NHL

20.4% NBA

11.4% NFL

Total Votes: 117,744


http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/sport...60659&question14850=60661&question14851=60665

Close to 118,000 Seahawk fans and/or Steeler haters!!

 

As a texan fan, I'm unbiased... as I'm assuming most of us are. But while I was watching that game, something didn't seem right.

To be honest, I don't think either team played good enough to win... both played equally bad! Seattle dominated statistically, but couldn't get any big plays converted. Pitt couldn't get anything done on offense. Erase 3 big plays, the Steelers would have scored 0 points and really never moved the ball.

If possible, you'd like the quality of the officiating not to be a factor in the game... but its hard to defend that it wasn't a factor. Sure, the big 3 plays everyone is talking about are questionable calls.
1. Ben's TD.
2. DJack's offensive PI
3. Locklear's Holding call
All of these calls went against the Seahawks. They were all questionable calls and could have easily went either way... but its just unfortunate all 3 went against the Seahawks. Imagine if they all went against Pitt instead... that's at least an 11 point turnaround (assuming Pitt went for the FG & Seattle made a FG from the 2). All of a sudden, we have a tie game at 17-17. You can't say that those 3 calls weren't questionable and could have easily went Seattle's way as well... but they didn't. The officials made the decision to go Pitt's way... and thus, the game.

Was the game rigged? I don't think so... but if it was, I think Seattle had to be in it as well. Something looked really odd on Seattle's side:
1. Jeramy Steven's dropped balls
2. DJack didn't seem to make too much of an effort of staying in bounds on that TD play.
3. Questionable coaching.
4. Offense was lackadaisical during the hurry up.

Eventhough I'm not a Seahawks fan, I was SCREAMING at them at the end of the 4th quarter. I saw no sense of urgency during the hurry-up offense. People were walking lazily back to the line of scrimmage... at the time, it was a long shot that they'd come back. But come on... you probably won't get another chance at a Superbowl. When you're there, give it your all and the game isn't over until the time runs out. It looked terrible!

 

People always say this - and it's never, ever true. I'm sure there's been bad referring in a Superbowl before - does anyone talk about Superbowl XII's refereeing? (just an example) The Lakers-Kings game 7 from several years had terrible officiating. Does anyone look back now and say the Lakers championship wasn't legit? No. At next year's World Series, will anyone talk about all the controversial ALCS calls that favored the White Sox? Of course not.

In a few years, no one will care what the officiating was like. No one will even care how Pittsburgh won the game. 15 years from now, no one will even remember that Seattle was the losing team. All that will be left is the Steelers won Superbowl XL as a 6 seed.

 

But that was an obvious bad call.

 

Had those games been in the championship series, I think they would still be talked about.

 

Of course it was. As were a few in the Seattle game (I don't think Ben's TD was a bad call). That's not their argument. The argument you hear is that despite the questionable calls (which nearly everyone outside of Pittsburgh and their fans admit were highly questionable), Seattle still had their chances to win.

Would Steeler fans still be whining about that call had Mr. Stabbed in the Leg cut to the outside and scored on that fumble return? Of course they would be. They were b****ing about it even after they won.

 

Bingo.

Personally, with the exception of the Hasselbeck 15-yard personal foul, I don't think there were any blatant missed calls Sunday. Debatable? Absolutely. Was it obvious in any of those cases (the offensive PI, the Roethlisberger TD, the holding) that the wrong call was made? Not by my book. There's a big difference in obvious and debatable.

And Manny, a huge majority of America wanted Seattle to win that game. That's no surprise.

 

What the hell? Where did you find this "nugget"? Please provide a link. Just about every poll had people pulling for the Steelers by a 70/30 margin.

Hell, the Stadium was 90/10 Steeler Fans.

Extremely dumb statement.

 

Can you name any NBA, MLB, NHL, or NFL Championship where questionable calls are still talked about? The only one I can think of is that St. Louis vs. KC (?) World Series, and that's just perpetuated because of that ref getting death threats and such. Is that the only game in sports championship history with questionable calls?

 

People still talk about the Braves/Marlins from 1997 (not World Series, of course). The "tuck" (not in the Super Bowl). The Immaculate Reception in the 70s. I'm sure there are others.

I don't recall a Super Bowl in recent memory with two huge very questionable calls that defintely cost the team 7 points (well, 4) and most likely cost them 11 total (unless you don't think Alexander would've gotten in from the one).

 

The unbiased fans generally root for an underdog. The people who predicted the Steelers in polls were betting on facts, not emotions and dreams.

Not so dumb of a statement

 

20% voted for NBA?

These NBA Zebras are stuffing the ballots!