How much did Tomlin pay the refs?

what is 3 steps alex.

 

It's doubly dangerous since Ray Ray "Stabber" Lewis was at the game.

 

I am sure the Refs and Pittsburgh are going to take a beating this week, but I will take the Win.

On the call, I saw 3 steps taken, so it should have been a TD, as the announcers said on the broadcast.

 

He's probably still awake and mad.

 

I felt it was the correct call for a rule that doesn't make sense. I think the int that they overturned was more egregious tbh. I just don't think Aaron ever had control of the ball. I'll take it, but just saying.

 

Don't forget y'all. There was also others that were very questionable.

- Rodgers getting the ball knocked down and then back in his hands. And when his knees hit, the last view showed that ball only in one hand.
- lining up over center for a FG
- block in the back from punt

All the boardline calls went in our favor except porter PI.

 

The octopus will never get a break
Rep far exceeds him

 

yes. And because it was the Ravens, it made it a very glorious win.

 

Since he dropped the ball whilst pulling out his wee wee, he did not complete a football move for possession, thus same result, no TD.

If he’d hung onto it, pun not intended, it be a TD but they could call unsportsmanlike for taunting. After all ,you said he pulled out his wee wee and waved at them. Well, That’s just tasteless.

Technically speaking, of course.

 

The EZ is treated the same as any other part of the field when considering a catch (NFL rulebook). Let me ask you; if the pass was to the sideline and the receiver toe tapped both feet in but dropped the ball immediately after, is it a catch? No. We've seen that dozens of times in a season.

 

honestly I feel like that was the reason it was never considered a completed catch. The way the receiver was holding it out in front him was " Likely" the reason the refs did not consider it a catch.

 

That is not correct. He did not get his foot down for the third step. If he had, it would have been a touchdown.

 

The rules for what is a catch in the EZ and what is a catch in the field are not 100% the same. I'm not going to split hairs over catch or no catch there since it worked out for us.


Those of you wanting it to be a catch, what are you wishing for exactly?

 

On the third-down play before the field goal, Humphries got away with blatant interference. He was making contact with the receiver before the ball arrived and never turned around. The field goal penalty just made up for that bad call.

There was also the catch by the Ravens that should have been overturned on their first drive.

The Ravens got some breaks, too.

 

I agree with you on that one! Under the same rules, Martavis Bryant caught his TD in bounce with two feet and secured the ball behind his knee. They watched that one over and over to confirm it was a TD. Any movement would have been after he was out of bounds after securing it in bounds with two feet in the Endzone.

 

He pretty clearly lost possession before the third step... the ball was punched out and sliding just before the third foot is down.

The bigger issue is that the NFL has made it so hard to determine what a catch is anymore. On the Ravens' first drive there was a catch that Flowers had on the sideline where he got a knee in, but the ball was sliding in possession as he hit the ground, meaning he didn't survive the ground as he was going to the ground in the process of the catch. That was a pretty clear incompletion that was ruled a catch. Then they turn around and call this last one not a catch because a football move wasn't made after establishing control and two feet in, so essentially securing the catch it was punched out. Weird rules make for weird calls, and I'd be really mad if the Steelers lost the game on that call. While it was absolutely the correct call based on the letter of the law... it feels weak in practice that this particular play isn't called a catch. It feels like the Dez Bryant or Jesse James thing... Like yeah, if you follow letter of the law, then I can see it being ruled a non catch. But, common sense says all of these are catches.

Basically anymore when determining a catch on replay its, if I think its a catch... likely not. If I think it is going to be incomplete... it will likely be ruled a catch. A lot of it doesn't make much sense anymore.

 

The Rodgers one looked to be correct. Simultaneous catch, he went to the ground with possession, and then had it ripped away. That was right in my mind. Even had the jerseys been reversed and it was Jackson and not Rodgers, I would have agreed with that call.

The FG penalty I thought was for a head and neck when the player took his arm a swim moved over. It didn't look like it made contact to the head and neck area, so it was a blown call imo, but the ref thought that the player elbowed the snapper in the neck going over which would have been a foul. It was closer than the broadcast made it look because I don't think they knew what was being called... but it was wrong either way. I definitely would've been mad about that one had the jerseys been reversed. It put 4 extra points on the board for us, though we won by more than 4.

I don't remember the block in the back, but refs miss these all the time. There are dozens of ticky tack blown calls over the course of the game. Holds called/not called etc. Every team can gripe about something like this postgame. If you show me a bad NFL ref crew, I'll show you the best crew in the league.

The TD overturn was definitely the correct call on the letter of the law, but conventional wisdom says it should have been a catch. The NFL has so many ruled on what actually is a catch, that it gets into situations where catches that look like clear catches... aren't actually catches. In the first quarter Zay Flowers made a diving catch on the sideline where the ball shifted in possession as he went to the ground. We lost a challenge on that play, despite it being a pretty clear non-catch. Somehow that was ruled a catch and Likely's wasn't. Make it make sense NFL. Again... its the right call "letter of the law" but damn... its so hard to know what a catch is anymore in the NFL.

 

i suggested his 2026 salary.....said that at the end of the game yesterday to some friends.

 

This was a catch. Two steps + a third.

https://www.nfl.com/videos/can-t-mi...lson-for-high-point-catch-in-blanket-coverage

Likely lost the ball before the third step was taken. Milliseconds, but enough to warrant a reversal

 

The Flowers catch to start the game was slightly bobbled thus putting him out-of-bounds

That call did not go our way

 

This was a payback call from 20 years ago- remember the Polamalu interception in the playoffs against the Colts? Football move anyone?

 

Football move rule is generally stupid IMO. Way too subjective IMO. Although I think they've don't more to define it than a decade ago or whatever.

I know that this can't be the rule in a modern sport where you have 4k video and crazy slow motion replays, but basically if it wouldn't count when you're playing with your friends on the playground it shouldn't count.

I thought they would call it a TD by rule. But there's no way that counts when playing with friends.

FWIW, I also thought that the pass the Rats batted shouldn't have been a completion to Rodgers. I think there are a few frames where he has both hands on it with knees down. But if you go 2 frames ahead, he has no hands on it. I personally don't think that should count as control. But I'll take it when we get rule technicality breaks.