The Pittsburgh Controversy

This is bound to be raised somewhere, so I might as well get it started.

The facts are as follows:

Roethlisberger tried a QB draw for a TD and got the ball knocked loose before it could break the plane of the end zone.
Players scrambled onto the loose ball, including Big Ben himself. A pile ensued.
The officials called a TD, but Miami challenged the ruling.
After review, the referee said the ball came loose before it broke the plane, therefore it's a fumble and not a TD. He added that there is no evidence on the tape as to who recovered the ball, therefore the Steelers keep the ball where it came loose.

The last is the controversial call, of course, which the Dolphins claim took the game from them (I don't believe it: Nareed's Laws of Football: a gmae lost in one play was lost by much more than one play).

Anyway, the NFL Total Access show on NFL Network invites the League's VP in charge of the officials to review and explain controversial calls, I think either on Mondays or Tuesdays. Last year the then current VP explaied that possesion of the ball is not up for revies, for the simple reason that it's rare for such a question to be settled by the replay. Whenever there's a pile after a fumble, you'll notice officals un-pile the lpayers before they rule.

The pile is one of the things the NFL rarely talks about. It ranks up there with the fact that most offensive playes begin with the QB touching the center's posterior. anyway, within a pile over a ball players will do things to make their opponents let go of the ball, including reaching for their opponent's eyes and, er, let's say family jewels (why do you think experienced pros wear a cup?)

So if such things are not subject to review, and if the call on the field was a touch down, then there was never any determination of who got the ball. Therfore it is Pittsburgh's ball because Ben had possesion the last time the officials kept track of it.

Of course I expect Miami fans to disagree. Bills' fans still gripe about an illegal forward pass in the Music City Miracle play, even though the tape clearly shows the ball going backwards from where it was thrown.

In any case the Dolphins dind't lose the game because the Steelers scored a field goal then. They lost because they coulnd't get more than 6 points off two Steeler fumbles near the red zone int he 1st quarter, and because they coulnd't drive the ball anywhere close to the red zone in the 4th after the Pittsburgh field goal.

They were only one point behind, after all. All they needed was a field goal. Or had Pittsburgh not scored a field goal when they did, who knows what would ahve happened? There was a lot of time on the clock, the Steelers might have intercepted the ball and scored, or stopped the Dolphins and scored on their next drive. The game was not lost because of that call, much as Miami fans wished otherwise.

BTW, Roethlisberger should avoid QB draws into the end zone. he always winds up mired in controversy when he tries. And Miami has lost all home games but won all road games. Tomorrow they should announce they're moving the team to Olrando. They'd still play at Miami, of course, but then those would be road games :P

This game was lost on that one play and Miami was cheated out of a win. Pittsburgh always seems to squeak by the right breaks and with the right refs, and the key ref in this one (big surprise) LIVES in Pittsburgh. They played a lousy Super Bowl against a lousy Seattle team when Ben scored the worst QB rating ever for a winning SB team, then they won vs. the Cardinals on a fluke just before halftime and a lucky break at the end of the game when they were clearly outplayed the entire 48 minutes.

You're in Miami, a skilled player on the Dolphins clearly made Ben fumble, and when a Dolphin comes out of the pile with the ball then no way do you claim you can't determine who recovered. Obviously, no one would EVER give the ball up coming out of a fumble in the end zone, esp. when those guys had no idea it was already stupidly called a TD and it means the game to either team. I saw where Ben claimed he was in control of the ball on the ground, but we already know he's a pathological liar so that tells the whole story right there.

Miami was robbed.

Quote: JerryLogan

This game was lost on that one play and Miami was cheated out of a win. ...

Perhaps it was divine intervention.

Quote: JerryLogan (from another thread)

Sure you can ridicule it but you can't disprove it.

Quote: Doc

Perhaps it was divine intervention.

Anything can happen for any reason....except for mkl654321's nonsense, of course.

Fumbles are handled very oddly in football. Very rarely does it happen that one player is seen to have possession and that's it. The assumption seems to be that no one can possibly have maintained confirmed control in a big pile without the officials peeling everyone off and seeing who has it on the bottom at that time.

This was not done in this situation. Note that the players are severely criticized when they make the assumption that a loose ball is a dead ball. They are coached to assume a loose ball is live [the failure to do this killed San Diego this weekend too, an assumed "incomplete pass" turned out to *not* be a "forward pass", the latter the only kind that can be ruled simply incomplete. I'm sure all fans saw that one too.] So, I say, the referees should come under criticism for not doing there job here, too. No assumptions that a loose ball is a dead ball by them either, please!

Quote: JerryLogan

This game was lost on that one play and Miami was cheated out of a win. Pittsburgh always seems to squeak by the right breaks and with the right refs, and the key ref in this one (big surprise) LIVES in Pittsburgh. They played a lousy Super Bowl against a lousy Seattle team when Ben scored the worst QB rating ever for a winning SB team, then they won vs. the Cardinals on a fluke just before halftime and a lucky break at the end of the game when they were clearly outplayed the entire 48 minutes.

That's football. You can playing lousy and not screw the pooch for 45 minutes and do enough to win. It doesn't matter if the QB play shitty, if you score more points, you win. I'm not a Steelers fan, and can't stand 'em really. If you out play a team... score more points. Simple really.

Quote:

You're in Miami, a skilled player on the Dolphins clearly made Ben fumble, and when a Dolphin comes out of the pile with the ball then no way do you claim you can't determine who recovered. Obviously, no one would EVER give the ball up coming out of a fumble in the end zone, esp. when those guys had no idea it was already stupidly called a TD and it means the game to either team. I saw where Ben claimed he was in control of the ball on the ground, but we already know he's a pathological liar so that tells the whole story right there.

Miami was robbed.

Crappy call, but Miami can't claim to lose the game on one single play, not can the Steelers claim to win it. Much the same as the Lions can't claim to have lost to da Bears in Game 1 due to a crappy call (both these calls are crappy, but both are by the letter of the football law).

I don't know. I watch an awful lot of football, and have never seen a crew not be able to tell who possessed a fumble.

Seems rather odd to me.

And I disagree, one play can and does determine the outcome of games. An inch here a drop there and the game changes.

Quote: avargov

I don't know. I watch an awful lot of football, and have never seen a crew not be able to tell who possessed a fumble.

Seems rather odd to me.

And I disagree, one play can and does determine the outcome of games. An inch here a drop there and the game changes.

But 500,000 years from now, when the earth is a lifeless cinder orbiting a white-hot, intensely radioactive sun, who's gonna care?

Quote: avargov

And I disagree, one play can and does determine the outcome of games. An inch here a drop there and the game changes.

In a very close game where both teams are near-evenly matched, that might be the case.

But in most games, including most close ones, that simply isn't the case. Take the Miami game yesterday as an aexmaple. The Dolphins failed to score a TD until the 4th quarter, despite repeated trips to or near the red zone. They decided no tto try a two-point conversion when they did score a TD, which would have tied the game at the time. And lastly after the Steelers field goal, they were stopped on downs. That's why they lost, not because of a bad call.

Well yeah, of.course the coin flip helps determine the outcome of the game as well. The effects of all the plays are cumulative. But, especially in close games, you can generally look to one play that 'caused' that outcome. Just ask San Diego, a few inches to the left, and tie game.

That being said, every offensive play is drawn up to be a touchdown. So the inability to have a 'sucessful' play every down affects the outcome of every game.

Perhaps we just have a philosophical disagreement.

Quote: avargov

Well yeah, of.course the coin flip helps determine the outcome of the game as well. The effects of all the plays are cumulative. But, especially in close games, you can generally look to one play that 'caused' that outcome. Just ask San Diego, a few inches to the left, and tie game.

In football you win by grabbing the lead as early as possible and not eltting it go. If you fail to do that, then you may or may not lose. But if you lose it won't be because of one play.

Any number of factors influence the game. Some you can control, others not. Some you can just influence.

Quote:

That being said, every offensive play is drawn up to be a touchdown. So the inability to have a 'sucessful' play every down affects the outcome of every game.

Not so. Most plays are designed for a specific range of yardage. A QB sneak on, say, 3rd and inches is designed to move the ball forward one yard at most. A screen pass to a runninback hopes for an advance between, say, 5 and 20 yards realistically. Sure sometimes the back will perform brilliantly, or the defense will screw up, or a blocker will get away with holding a defender, and the ayrdage may be impressive, but that's not the norm.

Quote:

Perhaps we just have a philosophical disagreement.

No. You're just wrong. :)

I wonder, respectfully, if.you have ever played or coached football. If you have, then you would surely know that every play in the playbook is designed to score a touchdown. The probability of.a QB.sneak going for 60 is very small, but if all offensive assignments are performed flawlessly, the ball carrier needs to beat one man for paydirt. Conversely, every defensive scheme is designed to stop the ball at the point of attack. Mostly, factors on both sides determine the outcome of the play.

As my old coach used to say, the most important play of the game is the one that is lined up now.

In most games, a small handfull of plays can be pinpointed in winning or losing.

Quote: odiousgambit

Fumbles are handled very oddly in football. Very rarely does it happen that one player is seen to have possession and that's it. The assumption seems to be that no one can possibly have maintained confirmed control in a big pile without the officials peeling everyone off and seeing who has it on the bottom at that time.

This was not done in this situation. Note that the players are severely criticized when they make the assumption that a loose ball is a dead ball. They are coached to assume a loose ball is live [the failure to do this killed San Diego this weekend too, an assumed "incomplete pass" turned out to *not* be a "forward pass", the latter the only kind that can be ruled simply incomplete. I'm sure all fans saw that one too.] So, I say, the referees should come under criticism for not doing there job here, too. No assumptions that a loose ball is a dead ball by them either, please!

I believe the initial call on the field was a Rothlisberger touchdown. This call made the post touchdown scrum meaningless to the officials. Overturning the touchdown on review is similar to a play being incorrectly called dead due an inadvertent whistle. The eventual ruling, while not popular, was correct.

Quote: avargov

I wonder, respectfully, if.you have ever played or coached football. If you have, then you would surely know that every play in the playbook is designed to score a touchdown.

I've never played or coached. But I've been watching NFL football for over thirty years. I can say that if every offensive play is meant to score a TD, then play designers should get out of the business, because the vast majority of plays fail then. Likewise for defensive plays. Sometime you mak eht other team lose yards, but msot often they will advance.

It's simply ridiculous and wasteful to expect results that experience shows you are rare.

Quote:

In most games, a small handfull of plays can be pinpointed in winning or losing.

Given how a game goes, you can point to a few defining plays. But that's erroneous.

When the Bills failed to make a field goal and lost the Superbowl, the question wasn't why the kicker failed to score, but why the Bills found themselves in the difficult position of having to score a field goal at the last second in order to win.

Quote: avargov

I wonder, respectfully, if.you have ever played or coached football. If you have, then you would surely know that every play in the playbook is designed to score a touchdown. The probability of.a QB.sneak going for 60 is very small, but if all offensive assignments are performed flawlessly, the ball carrier needs to beat one man for paydirt. Conversely, every defensive scheme is designed to stop the ball at the point of attack. Mostly, factors on both sides determine the outcome of the play.

I have, and only some plays were designed for big gains. I can think of many examples were the play is designed not to go for gold, but to get a first down, to set up future plays or to test out certain areas of the field. Yes, in some cases they may score, but that's a happy co-incidence. Now, Mike Martz might design every play for a TD, but Bill Belichick's possession football certainly isn't.

Quote:

As my old coach used to say, the most important play of the game is the one that is lined up now.

In most games, a small handfull of plays can be pinpointed in winning or losing.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Quote: thecesspit

I have, and only some plays were designed for big gains. I can think of many examples were the play is designed not to go for gold, but to get a first down, to set up future plays or to test out certain areas of the field. Yes, in some cases they may score, but that's a happy co-incidence. Now, Mike Martz might design every play for a TD, but Bill Belichick's possession football certainly isn't.

That is because the guy on the other side of the LoS gets paid as well. Down and distance plays a huge role in play selection. But I can assure you that the halfback dive over left guard is 'designed' to go 80.and a TD, however the strong side linebacker who shakes the seal block from the left tackle to blow up the B gap gives the play a 2 yard gain.

Quote: Ayecarumba

[I believe the initial call on the field was a Rothlisberger touchdown. This call made the post touchdown scrum meaningless to the officials. Overturning the touchdown on review is similar to a play being incorrectly called dead due an inadvertent whistle. The eventual ruling, while not popular, was correct.

ah, but they reviewed the play for 10 minutes to see if they could tell who wound up with the football. That was going to be it if it could be determined it seems. Thus it seems important to always establish this on the field. The whistle probably *had* blown.

Quote: avargov

That is because the guy on the other side of the LoS gets paid as well. Down and distance plays a huge role in play selection. But I can assure you that the halfback dive over left guard is 'designed' to go 80.and a TD, however the strong side linebacker who shakes the seal block from the left tackle to blow up the B gap gives the play a 2 yard gain.

We will have to disagree to agree then. The design of the play you describe is aiming to gain some short yardage on the ground. It might have the consequence to go 80 yards, but the coach isn't working out the X and O's in the case to go 80 yards. Not in my experience of watching, playing and reading about the game. I'll note, however, I didn't play at any US level, so maybe life is different where I learnt the game... but field position was a driver.

I actually think we are.on the same page. I am only stating that o plays are designed to make a td. That would require perfect execution. That isnt possible, so plays are selected based on a number of factors. Field position, down and distance, opponent weakness...but in the playbook, they all go for a td.

Coaches notoriously go the conservative route. Up the middle on 3rd and 1.

Quote: avargov

Coaches notoriously go the conservative route. Up the middle on 3rd and 1.

The shortest distance between two points is a straight line... Unless you're MKL.. then it is a curve... or Nareed, in which case, chaos makes it better to go in any other direction...hehe

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: Ayecarumba

[I believe the initial call on the field was a Rothlisberger touchdown. This call made the post touchdown scrum meaningless to the officials. Overturning the touchdown on review is similar to a play being incorrectly called dead due an inadvertent whistle. The eventual ruling, while not popular, was correct.

ah, but they reviewed the play for 10 minutes to see if they could tell who wound up with the football. That was going to be it if it could be determined it seems. Thus it seems important to always establish this on the field. The whistle probably *had* blown.

Do they have sound under the replay hood? I know that the official puts on a headset, but I always thought that was to communicate with the replay technician. Even if they did, I would think it unreliable since the whistle could have come from a fan.

Let me clarify something...I am not saying the expected value of each play called is a touchdown. I am merely stating that when the play is drawn up, it is designed to score.

I guess it is expected value vs theorhetical value.

Quote: Nareed

When the Bills failed to make a field goal and lost the Superbowl, the question wasn't why the kicker failed to score, but why the Bills found themselves in the difficult position of having to score a field goal at the last second in order to win.

I wasn't going to wade into this thread, but that Super Bowl is proof against exactly what you are arguing. Scott Norwood WAS run out of town for that one kick. Very few were blaming anyone but him. Jim Kelly didn't come out of that game as a goat. He lost 4 Super Bowls but he's a Buffalo hero. Norwood can't even go near Rochester without hearing the boos 20 years later.

Quote: Nareed

In a very close game where both teams are near-evenly matched, that might be the case.

But in most games, including most close ones, that simply isn't the case. Take the Miami game yesterday as an aexmaple. The Dolphins failed to score a TD until the 4th quarter, despite repeated trips to or near the red zone. They decided not to try a two-point conversion when they did score a TD, which would have tied the game at the time. And lastly after the Steelers field goal, they were stopped on downs. That's why they lost, not because of a bad call.

I happened to flip that game on right after Miami scored the TD to make it 17 -15. I couldn't believe they kicked instead of going for 2. That's exactly the situation where you go for 2. If I was a Miami fan, I wouldn't even be talking about what happened at the end.

That TD was in the second quarter, not the fourth. It is a better play to take the 1 point than go for 2 with half the game left.

I'm a Dolphins fan and hate the result of the fumble replay decision, but under the current rule, it was the right call. I would probably be fine, though, with a rule change so that whoever comes out of the pile with the ball gets it. As it's been stated already, the players DON'T stop on the whistle in this situation, and the refs almost never throw flags for failing to get off the pile, so just let them fight it out and earn the ball.

To me the most objectionable thing out of that game is Ben saying that HE recovered the football under the pile, but let it go. I hope he doesn't really think people will believe such a lie.