Seahawks/Steelers Super Bowl XL Referee Controversy - Steelers Rebuttal

A couple years ago, when I was working odd hours and had a LOT of free time, I was reading a non-football related website and there was some remark about the refs being crooked in the Steelers' Super Bowl. All the top comments supported that assertion... The Steelers were handed the game, the refs cheated, the refs were crooked, we never woulda won if not for blah blah blah... It really bothered me that the general public was so stupid that they honestly believed that we didn't deserve to win that game (okay, we sucked for a lot of it, but we at least deserved it more than Seattle). I had the time, so I decided to break it down for them, not that it would do any good. I just found it again, so I thought I'd put it here in case anyone wants to use it as a resource someday, should you feel the urge to tell someone why they need to shut the hell up, but don't have time to explain every detail. Parts of this might make for a good copy/paste.

*****

Actually, there were a series of calls that Seattle fans and coaches point to as evidence that the referees handed the game to the Steelers, either from incompetence or just straight conspiracy. There were minor ones here and there that went for both teams, but let's discount those, as well as any that favored Seattle, and just focus on the major questionable calls that went Pittsburgh's way. These are the calls that had the largest impact on the game, and the ones fans complain most about.


Offensive pass interference on Darrell Jackson:

This one is open and shut. Seattle WR Darrell Jackson pushed Steelers FS Chris Hope in the chest with one hand, causing Hope to hop a step backwards while Jackson ran toward the ball in flight. That is offensive pass interference and a 10 yard penalty and a negated touchdown. Was it a huge push? No. Did he even need to do it in order to score? Probably not. Did he do it anyway? Yes. Most Seattle fans will even concede that this was a penalty. Their issue is that it was barely a penalty. Like a, "There's always some contact" kind of thing. While touching and incidental contact is often allowed, pushing is not. While offensive players usually get away with it, they're not supposed to. The referees made the rare, correct offensive PI call.

How important was this call?

Seattle failed to advance the ball from their 1st and 20, and kicked a field goal on the drive. A difference of 4 points, had the PI call not been made. In my opinion, Seahawks fans need to drop this gripe from their list, because they are factually wrong. The "Come on, it's the Super Bowl, you can't call PI in the Super Bowl" attitude is making them look like butthurt losers instead of valid victims.



Pittsburgh QB Ben Roethlisberger's touchdown run:

On 3rd and goal from just outside the 1, Ben did an old fashioned QB sweep, dove for the endzone, and was hit by linebacker D.D. Lewis. By the time Ben landed on the ground, the ball was short of the goal line. He then moved the ball forward until it was way across the goal line. The linesman making the call appeared to at first, for about one second, rule that Ben would be short of the goal, but then ruled touchdown after seeing the ball well across the goal line (after Ben had moved it). There's no denying that the linesman butchered the call. Clearly he didn't know what the hell happened, and was just guessing. That's not what you want to see from a ref in a Super Bowl. The call was reviewed, and the head referee upheld the touchdown.

When looking at the replay, you can see that although the ball is short when Ben hits the ground, there is a moment before he hits the ground when it is very close to the goal line, just as he's being hit by Lewis. You cannot see the ball go over the line, but you cannot see the entire ball, either. The part of the ball closest to the goal line is obscured by Ben's elbow, which is across the goal line. So you literally have to use your imagination to extend the ball with little dotted lines inside your head until you make a complete football, and then decide if that crossed the line. Furthermore, the goal line in the replay is not straight; it veers slightly to the left, because the camera is not exactly on the goal line. The camera is coming from across the goal line, inside the end zone. That's important because it means that the ball is, in reality, closer to the end zone than it looks. So even if your dotted-line completed football is a hair short of the goal line, you have to give it a little bit more because of the angle from which we're viewing. The tip of the ball is tucked in the crook of Ben's elbow. His elbow is in the end zone, but of course there's the width of his arm to worry about. Did the tip of the ball make it, or not? When taking all of these factors into account, and freezing it at the perfect frame (it has to be perfect because it was so fast), I believe it did touch the goal line. But that's an opinion, and everybody's is different. As for the head ref's review, he ruled the only thing that he could: the ruling on the field would stand because there was no conclusive visual evidence to overturn. Both teams can agree that if the original call by the linesman had gone the other way, that call would have stood after replay as well. So did the linesman ruin it for Seattle? He definitely made the call in the wrong way, by contradicting himself. But whether or not he actually made the right call is what's important, and that remains up for debate.

How important was this call?

Had it gone the other way, it would have been 4th down and one millimeter to go. The Steelers could have kicked a field goal (difference of 4 points), but everybody on the planet knows Bill Cowher would have gone for it, and he would have called a QB sneak. QB sneaks are usually successful at gaining at least a foot or yard or so. It's rare to see one that loses yardage, so the odds are it would have been a touchdown on the next play. In addition, the Steelers had the best LG in the league at the time, and one of the league's best centers, both excellent run bockers. Their RG was also a good player whose strength was as a physical run blocker. Their quarterback was the biggest, strongest QB in the league, and in his athletic prime, and very experienced with QB sneaks. The Seattle defensive tackles were capable players, but not in the same class as their competition for a play like this. I put the Steelers' chances of converting on 4th down at 95%. It would have to be something crazy - a fumbled snap, a false start, the quarterback deciding to retire right in the middle of the play, to really do them in.



Clark Haggans & Sean Locklear - offsides/holding:

On a play that would have put the Seahawks inside the Steelers' 5 yard line, Seattle RT Sean Locklear was called for holding Pittsburgh LOLB Clark Haggans. Holding is a less clear-cut penalty than pass interference, so there is more disagreement here. I believe the general consensus is that - similar to the PI call on Jackson - Locklear did hold Haggans, although it was fast and not flagrant. Most people will say that what Locklear did was holding, but it's the kind of holding that happens 20 times per game and goes uncalled. While it's true that a lot of holding gets missed, it is easier to see when you are way out in the open like these two players were, and the closest players on the field to the referee. Haggans was clearly slowed down and stumbled due to Locklear's hook on his shoulder from the side, ending what would have been a chance to get to the quarterback and affect the throw. Locklear was also called for holding Haggans in the 1st quarter, on a non-controversial call. It's doubtful that factored into the ref's subconscious, but it's possible.

This, and the Jackson PI call, are generally accepted by neutral fans as "ticky-tack" calls. Calls that are penalties and technically correct, but often go uncalled by some refs. Some fans (and refs) may make the argument that one shouldn't be such a stickler in the Super Bowl so that the players decide the outcome. By the same token, some fans (and refs) may say that the Super Bowl is the best time to be a stickler about rules, and that committing penalties as a player is part of determining the outcome. Letting things go because it's a big game gives an advantage to whichever team commits more penalties (see: Ravens and 49ers in Super Bowl 47 -- among other lesser examples in this game, Cary Williams shoving a ref and the blatant hold in end zone on final safety, each one of the most obvious penalties in Super Bowl history, but left uncalled because refs didn't want to be seen as influencing the outcome... 49ers fans argue that not calling blatant penalties also influences the outcome, plus they're not doing their jobs). This is a real debate in sports, and all refs are different.

On the same play, Seattle fans argue that the reason Locklear had to hold Haggans was that Haggans was offside. Haggans did get an extremely good jump on the ball, and it's very hard to tell if he entered the neutral zone before the ball was snapped, or after. I've viewed it many times - in HD on a big screen - and it took me many times before I could make a decision. I thought he wasn't offside, but it's easy to see why one would think he was. He definitely begins moving his body before the ball is snapped. For a few frames before the ball first moves, he starts crouching, moving his arms, and extending his legs, the way one does when they start running. But although he's moving early, he doesn't necessarily move forward early, at least not to the point of crossing that imaginary line at the nose of the football. He does eventually get there, but I believe the ball had already started moving. It is not a penalty to flinch early on defense like it is on offense, so in my opinion this was a good no-call. I'm not sure what the general consensus is on this one. I think it's pretty up in the air. I can't find a youtube clip that has strong enough quality. It's too hard to see when the ball starts moving. Some Seattle fans commit very strongly to this no-call, saying that Haggans was clearly offside by a mile. In fact, most of them freely admit that Locklear did hold Haggans, but argue that he had no choice because Haggans was offside. But they aren't looking at it from a technical standpoint. Correctly guessing the snap count and taking off fast creates an illusion of offside. The Steelers' own Troy Polamalu has done this a number of times. A player with 100% confidence that takes off before the ball is snapped but guessed the snap count correctly always blows by the defender. Casey Hampton actually did it on the same play as Haggans, which no one seems to notice or care about. Looks like they are offside by a full yard, but they're not. Haggans' play is about as close as it can get, and you need the best technology and appropriate angle to even have a chance at deciding if he was on or off.

How important was this penalty and non-penalty?

If the holding hadn't been called, Seattle would have advanced the ball about 18 yards to the Steelers 1 1/2 yard line. Instead they had 1st and 20 from the 29. Over the next few plays, they got sacked and threw an interception, getting zero points on the drive. If both penalties had been called, the play would have negated completely and Seattle still would have lost its gain. The call took away 7, 3, or 0 points from Seattle.



Matt Hasselbeck's "low block" penalty:

This is the only unquestionably bad call in the whole game that went against the Seahawks. After throwing an interception, Seattle QB Matt Hasselbeck tackled the man who intercepted him, Pittsburgh CB Ike Taylor. There were some bodies flying around and some confusion, and the referee mistakenly thought that he didn't hit Taylor, but rather another Steeler, CB Deshea Townsend, who was running right next to Taylor when Hasselbeck made the tackle. Had Hasselbeck really hit Townsend, that would have been a penalty. The quarterback may have grazed Townsend, but not enough for a penalty to be called. I don't know exactly how the ref made the mistake. Maybe he got the numbers of the players confused in the chaos. In any case, everyone knows this one was a blown call.

How important was this bad call?

Had the play been called correctly, the interception would have stood and Pittsburgh would have the ball on its own 28 yard line. Instead, Pittsburgh got a 15 yard bump and got the ball on their own 43 yard line. Later in the drive, the Steelers scored on a long-range reverse pass, 43 yards long. The play definitely would have scored if it was from 15 yards farther back, and although with Chaos Theory can always be taken into account, what doesn't change is that the Steelers had that play in their pocket and the Seahawks had a backup safety in the game - it's highly likely they would have scored anyway and the bad call had no effect. In any case, bad calls that only add or subtract yardage and don't immediately add or take away points happen all the time. The fact that this happened where it did on the field and didn't change who had possession of the ball or the number of downs Pittsburgh had makes it about the least impactful 15 yard penalty possible. Sucks for the Seahawks here, but that kind of stuff happens.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There were also some questionable calls that went the Seahawks' way that you never hear about, because Steelers fans don't gripe about them (because they won; I'm not claiming they are better sports). Stuff bigger than the one bad call that went in favor of the Steelers. At one point, Seahawks' TE Jerramy Stevens caught a pass, took three steps, got hit and dropped the ball. It should have been ruled a fumble that the Steelers would have recovered, but instead was ruled a drop. The Seahawks did punt on that drive, but the Steelers lost an unknowable amount of yardage by not being able to return the fumble. And had the Seahawks gone on to score, irreparable damage would have been done.

An interesting one occurred when Matt Hasselbeck was scrambling, lost his balance by himself, fell down all by himself, and fumbled the ball, which the Steelers recovered. The referees eventually made the correct decision that the Seahawks should keep the ball, because Hasselbeck was grazed by Steelers ILB Larry Foote's finger while he was still running, but stumbling. It's a little known rule that barely ever surfaces, but even though Hasselbeck stumbled on his own, fell on his own, and fumbled on his own, the fact that a finger touched him while he was in the beginning of that process meant he was down by contact. Of course, technically speaking, the refs followed the rule and the Steelers had no right to the ball... except that Larry Foote "barely" touched Hasselbeck. Had the ball incorrectly gone to the Steelers at that point, it would have drained time and likely put points on the board for Pittsburgh, and Seattle's chances of winning would take a major blow. So it was also a big play, correctly called, in line with Jackson's PI and Locklear's hold. Foote barely touched Hasselbeck, but if the Steelers had lost that game, I wonder who would have taken that argument seriously.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Overall, it was unfortunate that this game had so many close plays that forced the refs to make decisions, but if you're keeping score, Seattle has one bad call to complain about that had little to no effect on the game, one botched handling of a call where the facts of whether the call was correct or not is still a mystery (and in all statistical likelihood wouldn't have had an effect on the game), and two calls that were made correctly ("barely penalties"), but hurt Seattle's chances to win. They also had a couple missed field goals, a brutal turnover, they allowed a 3rd and 27 conversion, a 75 yard touchdown run, and a 43 yard TD thrown by a wide receiver. And they displayed some of the worst clock management ever. It's too bad that they committed penalties at the exact same time they were making big plays on offense (partial coincidence only), but they've got no one to blame but themselves. The Seahawks lost 21-10 in a pretty standard game, and the outcry is a result of Seattle's poor timing when it came to committing penalties. This game was FAR from rigged, and if anyone "handed" Pittsburgh the game, it was Seattle.

A lot of people cite things they see on TV, like announcers and sports writers saying what was and wasn't a penalty. They use stuff like that as evidence ("John Madden said..."). I'll let you all in on a little secret: those guys don't know anything more than us, especially when it comes to things we can see on camera. Their eyes aren't better. On top of that, they get paid to talk and talk fast, often without seeing a replay or having real time to take a look, and NEVER admit when they are wrong, no matter how embarrassing. John Madden called for James Harrison's ejection in Super Bowl 43 for a brutal demolition of an opponent, when in fact, after close review, Harrison didn't break a single rule on the play. He just kicked a guy's ass in a way we rarely see. Plus, announcers and writers are encouraged to stir up any drama they can find. And anytime you see a clip from a controversial play in the Steelers/Seahawks Super Bowl, I can just about promise you the voices you are hearing are that of Seahawks radio announcers.

It should be noted that 4 years after the game, the head referee Bill Leavy apologized to the Seahawks, saying that he blew two calls in the 4th quarter. The only ones that those could be are the obviously bad low block call, and the holding call on Locklear. But since many people do admit that Locklear held, including some Seattle fans, one can assume that Leavy was either talking about something else no one cares about, or regrets having thrown the flag because of the impact it went on to have. Perhaps after seeing replays he came to the conclusion that the hold wasn't as bad as he thought, and he should have let it go even if it was a penalty, a la the refs in the Ravens/49ers Super Bowl. Or maybe he changed his mind about what holding is. It should also be noted that by specifically saying he was apologizing about calls in the 4th quarter, he stood by his calls on the Jackson PI and Ben's touchdown run, which both happened in the 1st half. He made no mention about blown calls that went against the Steelers, because... why would he? He was addressing the Seahawks.

This is not a case of referee bias at all, let alone the worst. It's not even a case of bad officiating - at least not more than what occurs on any normal Sunday.

 

And here is a response that I left after some guy made some argument I don't remember, but apparently included the Shaun Alexander run in which Joey Porter may have horsecollared him. This post has some repeated information, but also new stuff too.

*****

Didn't we just talk about this? Throw out the "ticky-tack" calls. You push a guy in the end zone while the ball is in the air, a flag should be thrown. You hold a guy on his way to the quarterback, a flag should be thrown. Just because those calls are often missed doesn't mean they should be. Both of those particular fouls occurred right in front of refs who had a perfect view. Jackson and Locklear gave the refs no choice. Suppose he doesn't throw a flag on Jackson's shove. Don't Steelers fans have an even bigger gripe? Dude clearly pushed the safety right in front of the ref. How does the ref miss that?? The refs have enough to worry about, so let's not get on their cases for doing their jobs, okay?

The low block penalty is confusingly bad alright, I'll give you that. But we're talking about 15 yards in the middle of the field and it had no effect on possession or downs. A shockingly bad call, sure, but it had minimal effect. That kind of effect happens on bad calls all the time, every game. How many BS defensive PI calls happen every Sunday? That's 50 yards at a time, and half the time it's a bad call. The low block call was horrible, but small potatoes.

If you're looking for an equally astounding bad call (even worse in my opinion) that had major consequences, check out what happened 2 games earlier, when Troy Polamalu intercepted Peyton Manning. That was called correctly on the field and then overturned upon review, the official basically making a new rule up on the spot to overturn it. Troy catches the ball, gets two feet down, then a knee, two arms, a face, an ass, a back, rolls over, gets up and fumbles. The ref ruled that because one of his knees was still on the ground before fumbled, that made it incomplete. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. No one had heard that one before, or since, and the NFL apologized. Instead of the game being over, the Colts scored, and would have forced overtime if not for a shanked field goal.

The horse collar rules were different for the 2005-06 season. It was the first year of being in effect, and the rule was that you were allowed to grab jersey up there and pull down; you just couldn't get your hands all the way inside the shoulder pads. Only two horse collar penalties had been called all season long to that point. The rule was changed after this game to include jersey pulling. Unfortunately, I can't find a good shot of the play right now, just one from far away, so I can't see if Porter got just jersey or all shoulder pad. He pulled him down hard for sure, but he was pretty close and a strong dude, and could have done that with just jersey. But like I said, with only two horse collars called all season, a no-call is pretty consistent with the officiating at the time. That play isn't even one Seattle fans complained about at the time. It seems to have sprung up lately, with the new horse collar rules.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You just said a while ago that the refs erroneously took a turnover away from the Steelers in the 2nd quarter. The way the game happened to play out AFTER the bad call (Seattle punting and, more importantly, Pittsburgh going on to win), it didn't wind up making a difference, but the call itself is still bigger than everything we're talking about with Seattle. Pittsburgh got a turnover, and the refs took it away and gave it back to Seattle. That's bigger than an iffy horse collar with iffy rules, and it's bigger than a bogus 15 yard low block penalty that didn't carry significant impact.

I don't say that to complain. I say that to show that there were errors on both sides, and what people don't seem to understand is that errors on both sides doesn't necessarily make it a poorly officiated game. It makes it a standard game that just happens to be on a big stage, with many of the calls occurring on what ultimately became major plays. More attention was drawn to the flags because of when they occurred, but the refs had nothing to do with that. Seattle's the one that committed two "small" penalties on plays that essentially would have earned them 14 points. This was a weak Super Bowl not because of the refs, but because both teams played like crap, after both having spectacular playoff runs. I'm a Steeler fan and their 2005 playoff run was one of the greatest ever, but the way we played in that Super Bowl, winning it was like taking your hand off your c**k right when you start to come. Still happened, but man, disappointing. And that's not because of the refs, it's because of how we played. Seattle did the same thing. The difference in the game was we didn't commit any penalties on our big plays, and they did. They should live with that instead of looking for someone to blame.

To call this the worst anything is nuts to me. The officiating in the most recent Super Bowl was far more disgraceful, because the refs were intentionally allowing players to break major rules left and right, just so they wouldn't be in the spotlight. Touching a referee is an automatic 15 yard penalty and ejection. Cary Williams shoved one full force in the chest and didn't get so much as a flag. That had a major impact, because Williams is one of Baltimore's best players and got an extra 2 1/2 quarters he shouldn't have. And he did make plays in that game, including breaking up a touchdown pass. On the second to last play of the game, Ed Dickson committed arguably the worst hold in football history, along with teammates committing several other egregious holds in plain view, and wasn't flagged for it. It probably wouldn't have made any difference, but it was blatant, right in front of the ref, seriously the worst ever, and no flag. Seahawks fans are asking for this kind of officiating. "Let stuff go, it's the Super Bowl..." In my opinion, not doing your job on purpose to try and make the league look better is far more embarrassing. The SB XL crew made the same mistakes that happen every week, but they did their best.

 

I thought it was safe to let some of this go, until the Seahawks were in the superbowl this year and commentators were talking about getting "balance" after getting bad calls in their last superbowl. Like it was just an established historical fact that Seattle were 'robbed' in 40.

I thought it was the victors who were meant to write the history!

So cheers for this, Snack... just sad that it's still arguments we have to make.

It's also a shame (and I said this after 43 as well) that, in an era of so much replay and TV coverage, games can't just be appreciated as games anymore. Can we talk about Parker's run? Randle EL's pass? No? Because they're somehow negated by refs upholding the rules of the game?

 

Just to add - this basically was what allowed them to win the SB eventually, as well.

We had the big debates about why we can't have a badass defense like Seattle's after the game... and the answer was, I think, fairly simple: the Seahawks got away with it. Now, it was fun to watch, don't get me wrong. But reffing can't be inconsistent like that.

 

There isan awesome yYouTube video that breaks down every call.

 

I could easily be wrong, but I don't think the linesman (or the replay) was using Ben moving the ball after hitting the ground. Ben clearly got knocked backwards by Lewis, and lands on the ground just short of the goal line. By my (biased) eye, the amount Ben got pushed back meant that the ball did break the goal line before the hit.

 

https://www.youtube.com/?app=desktop&persist_app=1

 

I agree he scored as he was getting hit, and I'm just speculating on the linesman's mindset based on the fact that after Ben hit the ground, the guy marked him short, and then about a second later, after Ben moved the ball over the line again, he changed his decision to touchdown. I still think the end call was correct, just that the guy butchered how he went about it. Seems to me the only reason for him to change his mind like that is if he was influenced by where the ball was when he got closer, after Ben had moved it.

 

Yeah thanks ttf

 

All I have to say to Seahawks fans is scoreboard.

 

This thread reminds me of seahags fans posting. We won. Game over.

 

[video=youtube;dsx2vdn7gpY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsx2vdn7gpY[/video]

 

maybe the medical mary jane is clouding their memories of how we kicked their arses. LOL

 

Seahawks fans need to stop whining about that loss the Steelers made the big plays in the game and they didn't. If they want to blame somebody blame their sorry defense in that game, they let Parker run for a 75yd TD untouched and slow Hines Ward get behind 2 defenders on the pass from Randle El. Also that big mouth TE Jeramy Stevens dropped like 3 passes in that game, I love that play when he caught it then Polamalu blasted him and he couldn't hold on to the ball.

 

Both teams played poorly. It might have been the worst game since SB V. That factors into Seahawks' fans mindset: how can the Steelers win that game playing so badly? Instead of realizing their team played even worse, it's easiest to point fingers at the refs. Bill Levy's recent comments didn't help matters, either.

But to me, the BIG culprit in all of this is Mike Holmgren. Holmgren was whining BEFORE the game that there were too many Terrible Towels available for sale in Detroit. Plus, he was whining about all the Steelers fans present. Then, after the game, we all know how it went down. I have ZERO respect for Holmgren. It's not too big a leap of logic to say that Holmgren created a whiny, sniveling locker room of entitlement. And we could see it in the Seahawks' body language and sideline demeanor after ANY tough call.

I get into it with Seattle fans all the time. Still. And I tell them this, which usually shuts them up: It wasn't the refs. It was the Seahawks lack of execution and mental toughness that cost them that game. The Steelers played terribly. All the Seahawks needed to do was at least a couple of the following: 1. Make one of their two missed field goals; 2. Pin the Steelers deep at least once in those first 20 minutes of the game, which the Seahawks dominated statistically; 3. Not throw a critical interception deep in their own territory after chewing up most of the third qtr. and part of the fourth; 4. And in the most overlooked play of the game: not allow Ben to convert a 3rd and 28.

The refs had ZERO to do with any of those things. Seattle made those mistakes all on their own. And Holmgren refused to acknowledge that and went on to whine about refs...presumably to cover his own arse.

 

Glad you reposted this. I remember this from the other message board. LOVE IT!!!! BRAVO!!!!!!!!