Come on, you're defending the personal foul call on Hasselbeck? We're supposed to at least pretend we're trying to be objective when we defend our teams. Well, anyway it's been fun visiting Steeler Nation but I have to take off for the day. Have fun all.
The questionable calls:-- Replays on the offensive interference call showed that Jackson's arms made contact with Pittsburgh's Chris Hope and that they separated afterward. Under the rules, pass interference took place but sometimes the call isn't made.
-- The first TD of the game scored on a third-down rollout by Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger late in the first half. Roethlisberger appeared to come down short of the goal line, but it was unclear on replay whether he had gotten the ball to the line before going down. Referee Bill Leavy upheld the call because there was not enough incontrovertible evidence to overturn it.
-- Holding call on Sean Locklear in the fourth: Locklear's penalty erased an 18-yard completion from Matt Hasselbeck to Jerramy Stevens to the Pittsburgh 1 that would have put the Seahawks in position to go ahead 17-14 with around 12 minutes left. It was a close call that was difficult to see on replay.
-- One call that clearly appeared erroneous came after that penalty, when Hasselbeck threw an interception to Pittsburgh's Ike Taylor, then made the tackle but was called for a block below the waist, giving the Steelers an extra 15 yards. They scored soon afterward on a pass from Antwaan Randle El to Hines Ward. Replays showed Hasselbeck never made contact with the player he was supposed to have hit illegally, instead going straight to Taylor to make the tackle.
The Super Bowl crew headed by Leavy was comprised of officials who graded out best at each position during the regular season.
I do agree that the call on Hasslebeck was a bad one.
Yes, I am. Defending the rules is the definition of "objective." It's a dumb rule, I've said thrice now. But if it is going to be called against us in the regular season, it should be called in the playoffs, too.
SD
That's the rule. I disagree with the rule but the rule as called in the SB is exactly how it was called against Pitt in Indy (by Leavy's crew BTW) and the next week against Pitt again when Cinci intercepted the ball. I hate the rule, I think it's poorly written because it ignores the idea that a tackler might need to go through a blocker to make a tackle, but that's the rule and it was called according to the rule.