Troy's Non-Int

[henry296]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

they need to stop this all star officiating crew nonsense in the playoffs. Stick to the best regular crews during the season.

They stopped using All-Star crews a couple of years ago. This crew worked together all year.

[ChiMatt]

To me this was the same call they made in the Tampa game last week when the guy clearly caught the ball in the endzone and dropped it when he hit the ground. They called that an incomplete pass. The Steelers' play was the exact same thing except there was a flip involved.

I thought both should have been called catches but at least they were consistant. You must retain possession while on the ground after you make the catch. I don't know why the ground cant cause a fumble but can cause an incomplete pass but I guess that is the rule now.

I never remember it being called so strictly in the past but I guess with the replay the refs can see it more clearly now so they can make that determination.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

File this thread under the "what's the point of talking about this any more?" forum.

Because the teams that loses often has to find something to whine abou ... oh ... wait a minute.

[dixieflatline]

On the bright side this padded troy's "passes defended" stats.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by ChiMatt

To me this was the same call they made in the Tampa game last week when the guy clearly caught the ball in the endzone and dropped it when he hit the ground. They called that an incomplete pass. The Steelers' play was the exact same thing except there was a flip involved.

I thought both should have been called catches but at least they were consistant. You must retain possession while on the ground after you make the catch. I don't know why the ground cant cause a fumble but can cause an incomplete pass but I guess that is the rule now.

I never remember it being called so strictly in the past but I guess with the replay the refs can see it more clearly now so they can make that determination.

Sorry, but those two situations were not the same. You described the Sheppard play accurately, but you missed what happened in Polamalu's case.

Yes, Sheppard lost control after he hit the ground. But it happened as he hit the ground. But the ball didn't move from Polamalu's hands when he hit the ground. He held possession as he hit the ground and rolled over. As he got up to attempt his "football move" of advancing the ball, his knee hit the ball out of his own hands.

Not the same situation.

[ChiMatt]

I think it is the same situation though. Polamalu's knee was still down when the ball came loose, albeit after he rolled over. If his knee had come up off the turf it would have been a catch and fumble. If the rule is that you have to hold possession after falling both plays were called the same.

That had to be what the ref saw yesterday on the replay too. Unless Jerry Porter is right and the league is hell bent on getting the huge Indianapolis TV market in the Super Bowl.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by henry296

They stopped using All-Star crews a couple of years ago. This crew worked together all year.

They need to get rid these regular crews and bring back the All-Star crews.

[FrogMan]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

They need to get rid these regular crews and bring back the All-Star crews.

nope, they need to get rid of Jeff Triplette and his crew...

FM

[Desnudo]

NFL says Polamalu call was official's judgment; no comment on Porter remark

The NFL Comments

[Butter]

They need to sic Kimo von Oelhoffen on Porter's knees.

[WrongWay]

Could someone please post the NFL rule they are referring to?

I know it is an interpertation of the rule, but I would just like to see the actual written rule as it is in the rule book.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by stevew

...
Also, I dont understand the non-safety ruling. The ball appeared to be on the plane of the goal-line when mannings forward progress was stopped. I don't have the rulebook in front of me, but I just wonder why in every other situation, where the ball is, is what matters, EXCEPT for a safety?...

Forward progress.

[Vince]

Originally Posted by ChiMatt

I think it is the same situation though. Polamalu's knee was still down when the ball came loose, albeit after he rolled over. If his knee had come up off the turf it would have been a catch and fumble. If the rule is that you have to hold possession after falling both plays were called the same.

That had to be what the ref saw yesterday on the replay too. Unless Jerry Porter is right and the league is hell bent on getting the huge Indianapolis TV market in the Super Bowl.

Let me preface this with the fact that I think this was an asinine call.

But this quote is what makes the ref's argument stick. Polamalu was still on the ground when he lost possession. If a receiver makes a diving catch, but the ball pops loose as he hits the ground, or he traps it on the ground, then it's an incomplete pass. This is the same situation with the defensive player, it's just that his 'dive' took a lot longer, and he held onto the ball for the majority of it.

I think Troy clearly demonstrated possession, and that if he hadn't attempted to get up, it would have been ruled an interception (which is the STUPID part of this whole thing). Simply an asinine play.

[Kozure]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playof...ory?id=2294309

NFL says that ref made mistake.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Shows what I know.

[Vince]

Originally Posted by Article

"The rule regarding the performing of an act common to the game applies when there is contact with a defensive player and the ball comes loose, which did not happen here."

I didn't realize this rule was only in regards to contact with a defensive player.

[Kozure]

According to a pittburgh post gazette article just posted on the web site, the "must make a football move" rule to establish possession is only used when a player on the other team is making contact or has made contact with the pass catcher. The NFL director of officiating said that this wasn't the case with the Troy INT.

[Kozure]

Originally Posted by Vince

I didn't realize this rule was only in regards to contact with a defensive player.

just noticing that too, hence the post I just made after you. Shows you that officials do not know all the rules.

[ISiddiqui]

Thank God the NFL had some balls on this.

[stevew]

The question now is, what will the league actually do about this? Morelli should either be fired, or heavily sanctioned. There needs to be more of a check and balance with the replays. I think that there should be a booth official, and a field official, and if they both dont agree, then the call should stand.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Vince

I didn't realize this rule was only in regards to contact with a defensive player.

Me neither. I thought it was if the player was in stride or otherwise moving when catching the ball. Didn't know ti required contact.

Well there you go. Bad call.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by stevew

The question now is, what will the league actually do about this? Morelli should either be fired, or heavily sanctioned. There needs to be more of a check and balance with the replays. I think that there should be a booth official, and a field official, and if they both dont agree, then the call should stand.

But there is a booth official, and he helps the on-field guy make the call. The on-field ref makes the final call (which is as it should be), but the booth guy is telling him "OK, watch this, when I freeze it here you can see his leg..." etc.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

All I can say is that with the game on the line in the final 5 minutes,needing a desperate score, Manning threw a pick to Polamalu to end the game.

Now, they have instant replay to avoid bad calls that cause teams to lose championships. Getting back to my original post, how do you blow this call after taking 3 minutes and several slo-mo replays to look at it. The reason is obvious as stated by the NFL -- Morelli didn't know the rule. He should be fired. It's one thing to see it differently in the replay, it's another to not know a pretty basic rule with everything hanging in the balance in a billion dollar industry.

Can you imagine if Pitt had lost this game? OMG.

[PilotMan]

I think that what this comes down to is that the Steeler fans and football fans in general are upset that the game came down to the last play, when clearly, if some calls had been correct the game would have been over well before then.

[Clark]

[quote=Vinatieri for Prez]
Getting back to my original post, how do you blow this call after taking 3 minutes and several slo-mo replays to look at it. The reason is obvious as stated by the NFL -- Morelli didn't know the rule. He should be fired. It's one thing to see it differently in the replay, it's another to not know a pretty basic rule with everything hanging in the balance in a billion dollar industry.
QUOTE]

Good post, I agree he should be fired.

[Tigercat]

I can't believe so many can't see the refs interpretation as defenseable, even if they don't agree with it.

A football move is a move that the player intializes with the ball. The player did not intialize anything with the ball until he brought his first knee up off the ground, and in the process of, knocked the ball out of his own hands. Is the whole football move rule ridiculous? Perhaps, but the ref made a completely justifiable call, IMO.

[Desnudo]

Well the NFL disagrees.

[Tigercat]

And lord knows the NFL ALWAYS agrees with the best interpretation of the rule book after the fact.

Ever since the game, sports fans around the world have formed a collective mob against the ref and his interpretation of the play. You think the NFL wants to tell all those fans what they don't seem to want to hear/think about right now?

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

And lord knows the NFL ALWAYS agrees with the best interpretation of the rule book after the fact.

Ever since the game, sports fans around the world have formed a collective mob against the ref and his interpretation of the play. You think the NFL wants to tell all those fans what they don't seem to want to hear/think about right now?

Umm...they've done it before. See: The Tuck Rule.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

And lord knows the NFL ALWAYS agrees with the best interpretation of the rule book after the fact.

Ever since the game, sports fans around the world have formed a collective mob against the ref and his interpretation of the play. You think the NFL wants to tell all those fans what they don't seem to want to hear/think about right now?

If you read their decision, it clearly describes why the call was wrong.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

I can't believe so many can't see the refs interpretation as defenseable, even if they don't agree with it.

A football move is a move that the player intializes with the ball. The player did not intialize anything with the ball until he brought his first knee up off the ground, and in the process of, knocked the ball out of his own hands. Is the whole football move rule ridiculous? Perhaps, but the ref made a completely justifiable call, IMO.

I thought the Ref's stated interpretation made his call defensible...but some of the points brought up here earlier got me thinking. It became apparent that the "maintain control after contacting the ground for the duration of the play" rule was really only applicable when the play was over out of bounds or the receiver was down by contact. Since Pomalu wasn't down a different standard might apply.

However I wasn't sure what that standard would be? Are we back to where he has to complete(or is it initiate?) a football move? If that is the case, then I believe that rolling over with the ball is a football move. The league confirmed what we all felt we saw. INT.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Logan

Umm...they've done it before. See: The Tuck Rule.

There is a difference here, one that my own wording seriously screwed up with.

The "football move" isn't actually in the physical rule book. But its a guideline all pro officials are told to use. The tuck rule is supported by actual written lines. The NFL is going to be a lot quicker to defend something they have written on paper as opposed to something that they can lump on referee judgement.

The football move was put in place so that there are no cheap turnovers when a fumble occurs before a player establishes himself in the field of play by moving OF HIS OWN ACCORD with the football. In this case the defender was moving in accordance with the effort of making the INT before the fumble. His first any move of any kind with the ball was to bring up the knee and knock the ball out. It is in agreement with what these refs are taught that it was a case of losing the ball prior to completion of his first "football move," and thus an incomplete pass.

[Glengoyne]

Dola,

I don't think they should fire him. As far as I know, this was one mistake. Even if he was ultimately responsible for the no-call false start/offsides play, he shouldn't be handed his hat for a single bad day. It took several incidents, some in the playoffs, to have Phil Luckett(sp?) reassigned(has he retired now?).

Since the don't have the all-star crews anymore, I'm wondering if all crews rotate, or if the best rated crews do the playoffs. I'm guessing that since their union is involved it is a combination of the two...the best rated crews do the playoffs, but are limited to a single appearance or something. The result being that a nuber of lower rated crews are participating in the playoffs, collecting their paychecks. Making more of them money, but lowering the quality of the officiating.

[Tigercat]

Based on the NFL's response, the simple solution would be an addon to the football move guideline. Tell the referees that the football move crap doesn't matter IF a defender/reciever has secured the ball for a certain amount of time. That was the NFL's response to the matter, that the player held the ball for long enough. The problem is, time was never taught to the referees as something that impacted this type of situation.

[clintl]

I think you would have to see the exact words in the rulebook and the specific details of the training the refs get before you could conclude that Morelli even made a serious mistake, let alone a mistake deserving of anything more extreme than better training. The NFL's rules on what is and isn't a catch seem to have undergone an extra degree of complication the last couple of years - perhaps it's getting to the point where it's too difficult to keep track of how to apply the rules to real-life situations.

[ISiddiqui]

Frankly, the "football move" is supposed to be a guideline, not a be all and end all. The refs totally blew it. You are supposed to use a "football move" if it is not obvious that possession was established. In this case it was.

Yes, the refs call was indefensible, IMO.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I would guess that the NFL wouldn't have admitted anything if Indianapolis had won the game. They aren't under any obligation to admit anything in this case, so if the bad call had cost the Steelers the game, they would've kept quiet. Thankfully, this is all speculation because



(I didn't make these, but I thought it was funny enough to post here)

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

Based on the NFL's response, the simple solution would be an addon to the football move guideline. Tell the referees that the football move crap doesn't matter IF a defender/reciever has secured the ball for a certain amount of time. That was the NFL's response to the matter, that the player held the ball for long enough. The problem is, time was never taught to the referees as something that impacted this type of situation.

"I had the defender catching the ball. Before he got up, he hit it with his leg with his other leg still on the ground. He never had possession with his leg up off the ground, doing an act common to the game of football. He was losing it while his other leg was still on the ground. Therefore, he did not complete the catch. And then he lost the ball. It came out, and so we made the play an incomplete pass."

Under league officiating procedure, an "act common to the game" is defined as controlling the ball long enough to hand it, pitch it or pass it. But Pereira noted that this definition only applies when there is "contact with a defensive player and the ball comes loose, which did not happen here."

Why it's the wrong call

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

I can't believe so many can't see the refs interpretation as defenseable, even if they don't agree with it.

A football move is a move that the player intializes with the ball. The player did not intialize anything with the ball until he brought his first knee up off the ground, and in the process of, knocked the ball out of his own hands. Is the whole football move rule ridiculous? Perhaps, but the ref made a completely justifiable call, IMO.

Did you read the NFL statement? The football move rule does NOT apply here. It only applies when a defender makes contact with a receiver. No such contact occurred here. So, Morelli applied the WRONG standard to the play. He didn't even know the rule. That is very bad and quite frankly, it is indefensible.

[Z²+]

NFL official's home vandalized after Steelers callESPN.com news services


Someone threw a rock through Pete Morelli's window in Stockton, Calif., on Sunday after the NFL official's crew made a controversial call in the Steelers' win at Indianapolis.

During the game, an apparent interception by Troy Polamalu was reversed on replay, allowing the Colts to score their second touchdown during a frantic but failed rally in the fourth quarter. The NFL issued a statement Monday that the interception should have stood.

"It's kinda suspicious because of its close proximity to the game, but he doesn't know if it was related to his duties as a referee, his job as a high school principal or if it was a random act of mischief," Stockton police Lt. Thomas Wells told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on Wednesday.

Morelli, a high school principal, and his wife were upstairs getting ready for bed when they heard a loud crash and ran downstairs where they found broken glass and a rock, Wells told the paper.

Joey Porter, a Pro Bowl selection and one of the Steelers' co-captains, criticized the crew repeatedly during a series of postgame interviews following a 21-18 win in the AFC divisional round. Among other comments, Porter said, "The whole world wanted Indy to win so bad, they were going to do whatever they had to do."

NFL spokesman Steve Alic said there would be no fine for the remarks.

During his news conference Tuesday, Steelers coach Bill Cowher called Porter's remarks "ridiculous" and said, "Our officials are doing the very best that they can do."



http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2298135

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

Did you read the NFL statement? The football move rule does NOT apply here. It only applies when a defender makes contact with a receiver. No such contact occurred here. So, Morelli applied the WRONG standard to the play. He didn't even know the rule. That is very bad and quite frankly, it is indefensible.

Football move was instituted for one and ONLY one specific reason, you can ask any NFL ref this, to prevent cheap fumbles. One would think it would almost only apply to defender contact, because a play in which a player could so knock out the ball himself in an instance like this probably wasn't forseen. It does not mean that as a guidline to the refs it has no baring to this instance. Because it was NEVER told to the refs that it only applied to defender contact.

The NFL gave the refs a guidline to prevent cheap fumbles. The ref thought he used the guideline correctly. If you or the NFL wants it to be more than a guideline, make it a rule.

We have a family member that worked with NFL officiating crews who has told us the specifics of what and how the refs were taught these guidelines. He didn't agree with the overturning of the play, but has told us why it was consistent with the way this guideline is taught.