Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SD/PITT ENDING

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SD/PITT ENDING

    Why was the TD taken away from Pittsburgh? Does anyone have any idea what the call was?

  • #2
    Illegal forward pass. It obviously wasn't the second lateral, because that was definitely backwards. It had to have been the first lateral which was probably forward.....fuck! That cost me money and a FF loss probably.

    Comment


    • #3
      BTW, Pittsburgh would fit right in with the SEC because they SUCK!

      Comment


      • #4
        Neither laterals were forward. Not even close. They totally blew the call. And they ruled that the play was dead with the phantom forward lateral!

        Pitt could have challenged. And point differential can be a tie breaker for the playoffs. They should have challenged.

        Comment


        • #5
          what illegal forward pass? collins to the WR was legit....the WR flipping it back to the 2nd WR was legit.......the 2nd WR flipping it backwards to Polamaulou was legit.....some cocksucking thief in the replay booth had bet SD or was playing against a Pitt fantasy defense.

          and dont be so jealous of the SEC.......some day some other conference will be as strong

          Comment


          • #6
            I agree....that was very weird. It's like someone wanted to get out of there quick and sneaky like.

            Comment


            • #7
              Add to this the fact that the refs took away a TD before the field goal for holding, yes it was clearly holding but the type of holding that goes on on every play. This stinks to high heaven and will be discussed all week. Look for the league to issue its "Aw, we made a mistake" press release some time around Tuesday. There was absolutely no forward pass of any kind during the play!

              Comment


              • #8
                I think somebody made a little money under the table there.

                Comment


                • #9
                  As far as a challenge, by rule in the last two minutes of the game the only review is handled by the review official in the booth. Pitt could not have challenged even if they wanted to.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Just as wildstrides points out, there could be a point differential involved in a tie breaker. Although unlikely to come into play, you never know.

                    These fucking cocksuckers that get away with fixxing these games need to be held accountable. I didn't have the Steelers minus the points, just the Pitt defense in fantasy, but sure feel like I got ass-raped by some dickhead in the review booth.

                    I would love to find out who the cocksucker is and post his God damned name all over the place.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      norm, you're right I guess there are no challenges in the last 2 minutes. So Pitt couldn't do anything unless they asked for a rules interpretation and found something there.

                      But is it true that a play is dead as soon as there is an illegal forward lateral? And the other team can't advance it and decline the penalty?

                      If there is an illegal forward lateral and the refs see it, do they blow it dead and stop the play?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        how about this stat.... the steelers had 13 penalties called on them and the chargers only had 2. One of the 2 that was called on SD was the bogus forward lateral at the end of the game.... which gave the chargers the cover.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Wow...thought I stole one from the betting gods. I marked it as a win...only to see your post and find out it was a lost.

                          Luckily I didn't have money on it, but would have loved to be in a sports book and see all the reactions from both sides...bet that was a sight to see.

                          If anybody was there, I would love to hear a play-by-play on what you saw.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The refs are now admitting they blew it and the explanation is just as confusing.

                            http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/foo...ast_recap.html

                            "Green, in a postgame interview with a pool reporter, said that call was errant - even though his explanation for the confusion was almost as confusing as the play itself. ''We should have let the play go through in the end, yes,'' Green said. ''It was misinterpreted that instead of killing the play, we should have let the play go through.''

                            Green said the confusion occurred because there was a misunderstanding about whether Rivers' pass or Tomlinson's lateral was in question.

                            ''The first pass was the one that was illegal, but it only kills the play if it hits the ground,'' Green said. ''That was incorrect to have killed it at that point. The ruling should have let the play go on. That's just the way that it played out. We believe the second pass (by Tomlinson) was legal.''

                            Green was asked why, since the first pass by Rivers did not hit the ground, the officials decided after huddling that the play should have ended there.

                            ''We didn't kill it on the field,'' Green said. ''After (the) discussion we decided ... there was some confusion over which pass we were talking about and it was decided that it was the second pass that was illegal that did hit the ground and therefore we killed the play there.''

                            However, the officials realized afterward they erred.

                            ''I know,'' Green said. ''The rule was misinterpreted.''

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I had Pittsburgh -5.5 in the NFL GOW contest and I am (was) in contention for the lead. Anyone gonna give me a "W" for this?

                              Didn't think so.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X