[Hatteras]

"Call on the field was a TD. The replay was inconclusive -- I would say it was not clear enough to overturn the call either way (i.e., had it been ruled short, the replay would not have been enough for a TD, either). Pittsburgh would likely have gotten the 0.1 inch needed on 4th down anyway."

The problem was that the call on the field was called a touchdown. You saw the same angle as the referee and the referee should not have called it a touchdown because the ball did not clearly cross the plane. As a matter of fact, the referee did not even signal a touchdown until after big Ben pulled the ball out from under his belly and placed it across the line.

Not a fan of either team, just ticked off that I wasted time with another poorly played (and officiated) game.

[kevkrom]

The problem was that the call on the field was called a touchdown. You saw the same angle as the referee and the referee should not have called it a touchdown because the ball did not clearly cross the plane. As a matter of fact, the referee did not even signal a touchdown until after big Ben pulled the ball out from under his belly and placed it across the line.

TD signals are frequently late. I'm not sure why -- officials are checking to make sure there wasn't a fumble? I dunno, but the late TD signal happens in almost every game I watch.

For the record, I thought he did get the nose of the ball to the goal line. But what I think vs. what can be proved on replay are not necessarily the same thing.