Steelers TD 2 Feet Down?
 

I can't see it? Help me out! Crossed the plane? No way man!

They made the right call.

yeah I just hate to sound like a arm chair ref but I could not see it at all. and I could care less about who wins this game, but after the 50th replay i just watched i agree.

now i am gonna watch as the world turns cowbys vs giants:D

I changed my mind, can't tell if the ball crossed the plane.

Bad call, from someone w/no dog in the fight.

The refs blew that one. I was rooting for the Steelers because I had a small football card with them but after the game it was hard to not feel like the refs stole the game for them.

There was an earlier call when they gave the Steelers a first down at the 30 and I couldn't see anyway he got to the 30.

The TD play was close, although I don't think he got in, but there definitely wasn't enough evidence to overturn a call.

I guess the ref had a plane to catch.

I am sure the NFL will admit they blew it, but that doesn't help people that gambled on it.

They should have made them play it out. It would have been exciting to see them go for it or the OT.

i admit up front i'm a Steelers fan...... the over head shot, the ball breaks the plane of the GL just as Holmes hands contact the ball. they showed it in slowest action. the camera on the left of the offense has it too, but it's VERY quick and not as good as the overhead. both had to be seen in the slowest of motion.:zz:
i first said NO WAY! i didn't understand the argument of his feet? he clearly drug both feet in the end zone.

The key to the play was the call on the field of no touchdown. There wasn't enough visual evidence to overturn it, therefore, bad call. Had they called it a TD on the field, it shouldn't have been overturned either.

it was a touchdown. i don't understand why, if his feet were in the endzone, that it matters where the ball is at? if you're on the sideline and drag both feet, the catch is in bounds, regardless of where the ball is located. also, forward progress, his feet were in the endzone.

A touchdown is defined by any part of the BALL crossing the goal line....or


Touchdown: When any part of the ball, legally in possession of a player inbounds, breaks the plane of the opponent’s goal line, provided it is not a touchback.

What I don't understand at this point is why they don't use a laser of some sort to validate "ball over line"....

i promise i won't put it in.

i just want to rub it slowly and gently against your smooth lasered goal line.

I am a Giants Fan who is struggling now but we have beat both of these teams.

That ball never got close to being a TD. Stop being a homer and admit you got a break.

The Steelers probably would have won, but they clearly didn't score a TD there, and what is even worse is the guys on the field said they didn't score and the guy overturned it with no real evidence.

The ref is going to get a slap on the wrist for screwing up, but he did screw up. The Ravens got screwed and that is part of the NFL.

The fact that he even referred to the guys feet makes me wonder if he even knew what the hell he was talking about. The feet don't matter at all. He was in the middle of the field, it wasn't like his feet were going to come down out of bounds.

This belief that if your feet are in the endzone but the ball isn't still makes it a TD is 100% incorrect. The ball has to hit the line, and clearly the ball never hit the line.

The real travesty is how often the NFL refs are screwing these games up. Earlier in the game they gave the Steelers a first down when the guy was about a full yard short of the 30. They reviewed it and he still screwed it up.

The NFL has an interest in seeing teams like the Steelers go far. They can say they don't but they do. Refs don't intentionally screw teams, but when the Cowboys, Giants, Steelers and a few others are involved these refs have a tendency to side with them. Same goes in the NBA with the star teams.

Just be happy the Steelers won, but admit they got a break.

different game and scoring system...

the play at mid-field was a complete joke! that in no way was first down. in the end it was no harm.

the ball touched the goal-line but i didn't say Holmes had postion of it. should it have been overturned, probably not.

it's the first i'd seen this.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shu...urn=nfl,129009

by this it's not a TD. the key word is "postion" or "control"........ i still think the ball broke the plane just before this and Holmes would not have had "postion" or "control".:wf :zz:

It was insanely close but i thought it was a TD though it was certainly not indisputable.

espn radio this morning, is saying that replay made the right call BUT it wasn't indisputable. i do agree it wasn't indisputable.

That is good because ESPN radio knows everything.

There is no way of knowing if that ball got in or not. Anyone that says they know for a fact that ball got in is a liar.

The real issue though is that the call on the field was no touchdown and the referee could not have possible saw something that made him think otherwise while reviewing the tape.

The ref screwed up. He should just admit it and move on.

I thought the replayed showed the ball crossing the line. I doubt I am lying about that. maybe my eyesight isnt 20/20 but it looked to me as though the end of the ball crossed the plane of the goal when he caught it. To say there is no way of knowing doesnt exactly support your position of it wasnt over either. It is still very hard to tell even after watching it. I dont really care either way though and if the ref thought it was over then he surely doesnt think he should apologixze.

the officiating in the NFL has been horrific. I didnt see this play.. but if you go by how every other call has been made the officials probably screwed up again.

they talked about it last night, and showed a replay-and drew a yellow line to indicate where the goal line was located. looked to me like the ball was on the line.

The ball should have to end up over the line anyway. The current rule sucks, reaching the ball over for a split second....gimme a break.

You made my point. The replay judge is only supposed to overturn the call on the filed if they are 100% certain based on the replay. Nobody could say with 100% certainty whether he got in or not.

The right call was to stick with the call on the field. If the guy on the field said it was a TD then that should have been the call they went with.

Replay is only to overturn calls that are indisputable. The NFL replay ref screwed up.

Obviously they were 100% certain it was the right call. You are saying that nobody could say with 100% certainty but the ref thought is was a TD with 100% certainty and his opinion is really all that matters.

No, the ref screwed up. Peter King, everyone at NBC last night, ESPN, etc. said they screwed up. No honest person could look at that and say they knew it was a TD. The guy must have had a plane to catch. He is the same guy that screwed up the tuck rule in the Oakland playoff game. He LOVES attention and the NFL has even said he seems to be involved in a ton of controversial calls. He likes to overturn his officials calls and make himself look smarter than everyone else. He won't be doing any playoff games this year.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...k15/index.html

I fail to see how honesty come into play. The ref thought that the ball crossed the line and made the call. Peter King says he believes the ball crossed the line. I agree that it was probably close enough to not overturn but that is my opinion and I am not a ref making the call.

You're close...the player broke the plane, that's the rule and that's that...

It's the ball that needs to break the goaline, obviously. Holmes touched the ball in the endzone, then switched the ball in his grasp as to possess it while coming forward(out of the endzone). As 9-1 said, its the call on the field that makes all the difference. There is ABOSLUTELY no way, that the call should have been reversed. Not enough evidence to support such a move. They should have stuck with the call on the field, which was on the gash hair line. Who ever said this sport isnt a game of inches?

PS. I love the call in the sense that it makes the Ravens more hungry for a win next week and goes into D-Town and bangs them up before the Birds put the nail in Dallas' coffin.

Bob Ryan on Around The Horn had a GREAT IDEA. Install a chip and sensors at both goal lines - no question then when the ball crosses the plain.

The Steelers historically have never had calls go there way. Mike Renfro?? Seahawks super bowl?? This call just made up for years of bad calls not going the Appalachians way. The fact that this was against the Rat Birds made it not so hard to take in all honesty!!!

i listened to the game on the radio and it sounded like a touchdown to me.

I'm just pissed we couldn't see if they would have gone for it on 4th down...now that would have been fun to watch.

The Seahawks were the ones screwed when the Steelers won the superbowl.

Maybe I am a little worried about the Steelers, as a Giants fan, but they should never have been given a TD. They should have had to go for it on 4th down and live with the outcome. The refs blew it. Indisputable means indisputable.

WRONG. Learn the rules before you go making ridiculous statements like that.

True, the only thing that matters is the ball...I watched the replay a dozen times and couldn't tell, saw the still photo and couldn't tell...was the camera EXACTLY on the goal line? Reminded me of a dead heat photo in racing...I tend to agree that they should have stayed with the call made on the field...perhaps they had a higher quality pic than what we saw...still, we'll never know what the Steelers would have done on 4th down! Even a chip in the ball wouldn't help as that wouldn't determine possession, down by contact etc.

instead of being bothered so bad about the Steelers being "given" a TD...... maybe everyone should be more worried that the Steelers took the ball 92 yds against the 2nd best defense in the league to win the game late...... Again!:tro:

True that...great drive by Ben and the boys!

All of those that say the call on the field should have stood are correct. There has got to be indisputable evidence to the contrary in order to change an on-field ruling and there clearly wasn't in this case. If it was, then everyone that has seen a replay or photo would be in agreeance. The fact that we are not means it's not indisputable and therefore it should not have been overruled. If the on-field call had been touchdown, I'd be saying the same thing if they had reviewed it and overruled that.

Basically a variation of my laser post. What's bizzare is that tennis has this conquered with results in less than 10 seconds with the little ball and line computer thing but the NFL billion dollar machine can't get replay right to the satisfaction of any.

Again, football much more complicated....in tennis the only question is whether the ball hits the line, in football you have possession and down by contact issues.