http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutd ... 49941.html
This writer is a little over the top with this article. I understand most NFL fans don't understand when and how a player retains possession of a ball. I have no problem with anyone questioning the call on the play either it is up for debate. Its just the way he writes this article is beyond bull shit. Not meaning to bring up a debate on if its a catch or not just this guys article is almost abusive.

He's just whoring himself for site hits.

The whole replacement refs thing is so out of proportion it isn't even funny. So many bad calls are made by the "expert refs" - but people were looking for scapegoats. There were an unusual amount of bad calls in that game and many others. But I'd go out on a limb and say that the frequency of bad calls was not much more than in any other normal NFL game. It was exacerbated because the replacement refs were much slower than the regulars when making tough calls. That being said, I'm on record as saying that the catch was a catch - but obviously that play never should have happened based on the last few possessions of that game. Lots of drive-extending calls and non-calls that should have kept that game in Seattle's favor. You gotta hand it to Seattle for making plays to win that game - no matter if you are a fan of replacement refs or Green Bay. Good teams put themselves in a position to win - both Green Bay and Seattle did that. Seahawks came out on top.

RolandDeschain wrote:He's just whoring himself for site hits.

Pretty much!

nsport wrote:The whole replacement refs thing is so out of proportion it isn't even funny. So many bad calls are made by the "expert refs" - but people were looking for scapegoats. There were an unusual amount of bad calls in that game and many others. But I'd go out on a limb and say that the frequency of bad calls was not much more than in any other normal NFL game. It was exacerbated because the replacement refs were much slower than the regulars when making tough calls. That being said, I'm on record as saying that the catch was a catch - but obviously that play never should have happened based on the last few possessions of that game. Lots of drive-extending calls and non-calls that should have kept that game in Seattle's favor. You gotta hand it to Seattle for making plays to win that game - no matter if you are a fan of replacement refs or Green Bay. Good teams put themselves in a position to win - both Green Bay and Seattle did that. Seahawks came out on top.

Uh.....no....the replacements were pretty bad. Yes, everyone makes mistakes, but real ref dont make conflicting calls at a crucial point in the game....They'll discuss first. Look at it objectively and i think its fair to say it was one of the worst calls in history.

I think the refs made the right call in that game, but I don't think they knew they did until later.

But the worst call? Even if it was wrong, it was far from the worst call. Someone, name one other time when that situation occurred. Multi possession in the end zone to end the game.

The push off was bad and blown, but again, where has it ever been called on hail Mary plays?

Another Seahawks favorite being the Testaverde Helmet TD.

There are many calls that were worse. I remember the Oilers getting SHAFTED in a playoff game on a TD that was called incomplete. The Megaton catch for TD that cost them the game comes to mind too.

At least that call happened in week 3, as much as the Packers hurt from it, they had a chance to recover and couldn't put it away when it mattered against Minnesota.

No way that call is the worst call.

bubbrubb wrote:Uh.....no....the replacements were pretty bad. Yes, everyone makes mistakes, but real ref dont make conflicting calls at a crucial point in the game....They'll discuss first. Look at it objectively and i think its fair to say it was one of the worst calls in history.

You know what's funny? The last time the Packers won the Super Bowl, they were the last seed in the playoffs and wouldn't have made it without TWO OBVIOUS blown TD calls that pushed them over the edge for a win over Minnesota during the regular season. I don't see any Packers fans saying they shouldn't even have made the playoffs that year, and that they shouldn't have that trophy. In case you think I'm full of it, read this link: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ight-game/

Then, go verify the NFC playoff seeding for that year. Packers had the 6th seed, AND there were two other NFC teams with the same win/loss record.

We could all go into awful nfl calls, I mean for the same season that are just as bad or worst. What I wanted this topic more to be about is how abusive this writer is over this call towards the ref and the seahawks. Its like he has only watched football for one year and is the most mainstream media person ever. That and how did this call become so main stream media in the first place. Cause theres a long long long list of god awful calls that are way ahead of this? I guess I know how because it was MNF and the replacement refs, but I mean enouph is enouph with the BS. Oh no the steelers, giants, packers, cowboys, patriots, got cheated out of a game im done with this shit.

Who gives a $$$$? The season is over and done with. It had no bearing on last season. It has no bearing on this comig season. Move on. Get over it.

SeaToTheHawks wrote:It had no bearing on last season.

That's for sure, considering the utter ineptitude of the Packers defensive schemes in their loss @ S.F. They did a great job of opening up 30-yard lanes for Kaepernick every other down.

Fork this article and the cornhole clown who wrote it I just wanna post in this thread to show off my new avatar

There where many worse calls in Superbowl XL

I say the tuck rule before it was a rule.

bubbrubb wrote:Uh.....no....the replacements were pretty bad. Yes, everyone makes mistakes, but real ref dont make conflicting calls at a crucial point in the game....They'll discuss first.

The two refs in the endzone didn't make conflicting calls.

One signaled TD, the other signaled time out.

Go back and re-watch the play.

Even if it was a bad call, most people now are looking at the play and at least acknowledge that it wasn't even close to the worst play in history. I was reading through the PFT comments about the story yesterday and even some Packers fans and other fans were saying that they see how it could have gone both ways.

Now that the heat of the moment is over, the average person still isn't saying it is the worst of all time or anything close.

The Testeverde touchdown, back in the day.

For some strange reason, that one just won't go away for me...

warden wrote:There where many worse calls in Superbowl XL

That is saying it mildly.

Worst call? In a match-up that was at the beginning of the season? Give me any questionable call during the playoffs or championship game...where one bad call WILL have more of an impact on an outcome.

If this one game is the reason Green Bay didn't win a Superbowl, I'd say they have some issues over there.

Refs got it right, and some people are too stubborn to alter their perception.

How can it be the worst call when it was the right call?

bubbrubb wrote:

nsport wrote:The whole replacement refs thing is so out of proportion it isn't even funny. So many bad calls are made by the "expert refs" - but people were looking for scapegoats. There were an unusual amount of bad calls in that game and many others. But I'd go out on a limb and say that the frequency of bad calls was not much more than in any other normal NFL game. It was exacerbated because the replacement refs were much slower than the regulars when making tough calls. That being said, I'm on record as saying that the catch was a catch - but obviously that play never should have happened based on the last few possessions of that game. Lots of drive-extending calls and non-calls that should have kept that game in Seattle's favor. You gotta hand it to Seattle for making plays to win that game - no matter if you are a fan of replacement refs or Green Bay. Good teams put themselves in a position to win - both Green Bay and Seattle did that. Seahawks came out on top.

Uh.....no....the replacements were pretty bad. Yes, everyone makes mistakes, but real ref dont make conflicting calls at a crucial point in the game....They'll discuss first. Look at it objectively and i think its fair to say it was one of the worst calls in history.

Did it cost a superbowl? NO
Did it cost GB the playoffs? NO
Was it clear and indisputable? NO
Do NFL referees make similar calls? YES in fact the real refs came in and made a similar call weeks later and no one said a word.
if you look at it objectively the seahawks were used as sacrificial lambs for the sports media to bring back the refs. replacement refs were a problem because they jeopardized gambling for the NFL.

HoustonHawk82 wrote:The Testeverde touchdown, back in the day.

For some strange reason, that one just won't go away for me...

That was beyond bad. And it happened again with Roethlisberger's b.s. TD in the Super Bowl, when the ball wasn't even close to the goal line.

I did not open the article. I don't want to give the guy an additional hit to his article.

HoustonHawk82 wrote:The Testeverde touchdown, back in the day.

For some strange reason, that one just won't go away for me...

As it shouldn't, that one sticks in my craw as well..

Safe to say this homer is not a seahawk fan... moving on.

Seeker wrote:

bubbrubb wrote:

nsport wrote:The whole replacement refs thing is so out of proportion it isn't even funny. So many bad calls are made by the "expert refs" - but people were looking for scapegoats. There were an unusual amount of bad calls in that game and many others. But I'd go out on a limb and say that the frequency of bad calls was not much more than in any other normal NFL game. It was exacerbated because the replacement refs were much slower than the regulars when making tough calls. That being said, I'm on record as saying that the catch was a catch - but obviously that play never should have happened based on the last few possessions of that game. Lots of drive-extending calls and non-calls that should have kept that game in Seattle's favor. You gotta hand it to Seattle for making plays to win that game - no matter if you are a fan of replacement refs or Green Bay. Good teams put themselves in a position to win - both Green Bay and Seattle did that. Seahawks came out on top.

Uh.....no....the replacements were pretty bad. Yes, everyone makes mistakes, but real ref dont make conflicting calls at a crucial point in the game....They'll discuss first. Look at it objectively and i think its fair to say it was one of the worst calls in history.

Did it cost a superbowl? NO
Did it cost GB the playoffs? NO
Was it clear and indisputable? NO
Do NFL referees make similar calls? YES in fact the real refs came in and made a similar call weeks later and no one said a word.
if you look at it objectively the seahawks were used as sacrificial lambs for the sports media to bring back the refs. replacement refs were a problem because they jeopardized gambling for the NFL.

Wow, that is actually a very cogent point. Never thought about it from that angle, but the sacrificial lambs part makes total sense. We're a team that doesn't tend to get national media attention, hasn't always been a perrenial contender, and doesn't have a powerful, nationwide fanbase (at least in large numbers....not discounting our Hawks brethren across the country). If you're going to throw someone under the bus, it would be that "insignificant team".

I think the Testeverde helmet TD is much worse. How the heck can you confuse a white helmet for a brown football?

Why is it that in a 4-th quarter, end of game, redzone cameras on, etc., a play is only shown from one angle, repeatedly, over and over again? Any other end of game play would be shown ten ways to Sunday. Why's that?

I love all the comments after the article.

Seeing another fan base soooo angry, instead of us is very refreshing.

In an offseason full of arrests and murders lets take time to write a blog article criticizing a charity event.

Seriously? I mean really did that just happen?

Hawknballs wrote:In an offseason full of arrests and murders lets take time to write a blog article criticizing a charity event.

Yea, hadn't thought about that. Pretty lame.

Stopped reading when I saw the writer talk about the regular officials being on strike. They weren't. It was an owner lockout.

Once more, a blogger pretending to be a reporter makes blogger mistakes.

if it's a charity event, anything short of having charles manson in a cage at the gate applying fingerpainted ketchup swastikas to children's heads should really be above reproach.

Technically, the call was correct. If the refs didn't throw a flag for offensive pass interference, then PI cannot be called retroactively. So the refs had to base the call (review) without PI, and in that case, both players go up with it and come down with it.

It's just a tough call period. If the ref throws a PI, then he gets lampooned for not letting them play, and if he doesn't, they're stuck with the result...

From the Niners' point of view, it turned out to be pivotal as it gave us a 1/2 game lead over the Packers... If the Pack had won that game, then our tie with STL would actually have mattered.

NinerBuff wrote:Technically, the call was correct. If the refs didn't throw a flag for offensive pass interference, then PI cannot be called retroactively. So the refs had to base the call (review) without PI, and in that case, both players go up with it and come down with it.

It's just a tough call period. If the ref throws a PI, then he gets lampooned for not letting them play, and if he doesn't, they're stuck with the result...

From the Niners' point of view, it turned out to be pivotal as it gave us a 1/2 game lead over the Packers... If the Pack had won that game, then our tie with STL would actually have mattered.

I still hang all the responsibility on the Packers for choking against the Vikes in week 17. They gave away home field in the final week.

I'm sort of glad this game helped show that aaron rodgers is sort of a big baby.

NinerBuff wrote:Technically, the call was correct. If the refs didn't throw a flag for offensive pass interference, then PI cannot be called retroactively. So the refs had to base the call (review) without PI, and in that case, both players go up with it and come down with it.

It's just a tough call period. If the ref throws a PI, then he gets lampooned for not letting them play, and if he doesn't, they're stuck with the result...

From the Niners' point of view, it turned out to be pivotal as it gave us a 1/2 game lead over the Packers... If the Pack had won that game, then our tie with STL would actually have mattered.

It was a tough call, for any ref. As you stated, once the PI flag wasn't thrown, it was academic. Now, even as a Seahawks fan, I could have lived if they called PI on that. It wasn't even subtle, it was flat out a push off.

The same crew called PI on Kamtrack for nothing, absolutely nothing, which as we know extended a drive that gave GB the lead anyways. So, in a sense, justice was done.

I actually like GB fans and understand their pain, but those that were calling for a payback game were just smoking rocks. If that game were Wilson's 13th and not Wilson's 3rd, that game would have been a total blowout. Not even close.

CK spotted GB 7 points and still had a field day against that team.

Even as a Hawks fan if I am being objective it was an awful call.
But I don't blame that on the refs - those men were in way over their heads and way under qualified. It was the NFL's fault for letting the Ref dispute get to that point and it shouldn't have a taken a catastrophe to get the regular refs back.

Plus, I was at that game and it made for a great ending and 'victory' for the good guys. Though I wish people would stop saying that game got the Hawks in the playoffs (they held the tiebreaker over both the Bears and Vikes).

I don't think it was an awful call at all. I think it was a tough call, even for a regular ref. If the ref would have called it an interception, Seattle fans would be PO'd. It was a simultaneous catch, and a tie goes to the receiver. So my opinion is that Tate was correctly awarded the TD. It was clearly a tie, so if they didn't give Tate the TD, then you're being subjective about simultaneous possession. Besides, the call was upheld by a non-lockout, regular replay official.

That article (if that even qualifies as an article), is complete garbage. It's just a bored blogger digging up the past looking for someone to blame for GB blowing it. But I think GB fans are smart enough not to blame Seattle for them not getting the #1 seed. First, they should have scored more points against Seattle. Second, they shouldn't have choked against Minnesota. Thirdly, they shouldn't have lost other games. To blame the entire outcome of their season on week 3 is pretty weak.

It wasn't an awful call, it could have gone either way, but the replacement refs weren't very well versed in the "garbage calls always go against settle" procedures of the NFL.

Hawknballs wrote:In an offseason full of arrests and murders lets take time to write a blog article criticizing a charity event.

I thought the same thing... showing the NFL fans in other markets an actual story about Richard Sherman running his own charity event would have been interesting just on face value. But I realize the media attracts more readers/viewers with hype rather than the boring truth.

I don't see how any call made before Thanksgiving can be the 'worst' call of a season, let alone 'ever.'

I get the sense that some of the old-timers and daily readers are a bit frustrated that this came up again... This may be an old topic, but I'm all in favor of allowing people to vent their spleens again. This was a really big call for the Seahawks in general - and important to the franchise (I realize this is a debatable point - but the reality is that RW might not have been a continued lock at starter had this game been lost). Lots of reasons to earmark this as a pivotal game in franchise history. The legend of RW and the mystique of MNF continued for the Seahawks.

It is probably one of the worst, but definitely not the worst. Some horrific calls that changed the outcomes of playoff games would be more horrific than the fail mary.

It was a bad call and we were on the right side of it for a change, but the hilarious thing behind all this is it didn't change a damn thing. We were locked into the 5 seed.. the Packers had a shot at the bye and blew it.

I don't know why this is so hard to grasp for so many people.

I'll take a page from the NFL's response after SBXL, it had "elements" of a TD. Therefor it was a justified call.

bubbrubb wrote:Uh.....no....the replacements were pretty bad. Yes, everyone makes mistakes, but real ref dont make conflicting calls at a crucial point in the game....They'll discuss first. Look at it objectively and i think its fair to say it was one of the worst calls in history.

Please got educate yourself before you make statements like this.

Read:

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/co ... git/17706/

http://lifexinxrewind.wordpress.com/201 ... eree-crew/

kobebryant wrote:Even as a Hawks fan if I am being objective it was an awful call.
But I don't blame that on the refs - those men were in way over their heads and way under qualified. It was the NFL's fault for letting the Ref dispute get to that point and it shouldn't have a taken a catastrophe to get the regular refs back.

Plus, I was at that game and it made for a great ending and 'victory' for the good guys. Though I wish people would stop saying that game got the Hawks in the playoffs (they held the tiebreaker over both the Bears and Vikes).

Sorry guys but you're wrong here. This was textbook simultaneous possession. Don't get hung up on the PI. That has happened tons of times and if you look at the end of this article it gives you examples of other end of game instances where PI in the endzone was not called.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/co ... git/17706/

twisted_steel2 wrote:I'll take a page from the NFL's response after SBXL, it had "elements" of a TD. Therefor it was a justified call.

Thanks Mike Pereira!

SeaWolv wrote:

kobebryant wrote:Even as a Hawks fan if I am being objective it was an awful call.
But I don't blame that on the refs - those men were in way over their heads and way under qualified. It was the NFL's fault for letting the Ref dispute get to that point and it shouldn't have a taken a catastrophe to get the regular refs back.

Plus, I was at that game and it made for a great ending and 'victory' for the good guys. Though I wish people would stop saying that game got the Hawks in the playoffs (they held the tiebreaker over both the Bears and Vikes).

Sorry guys but you're wrong here. This was textbook simultaneous possession. Don't get hung up on the PI. That has happened tons of times and if you look at the end of this article it gives you examples of other end of game instances where PI in the endzone was not called.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/co ... git/17706/

Exactly. Folks and many in the media need to read the "rules of possession" and the simultaneous possession rule. It was the RIGHT call, the call that was missed was the offensive PI on Tate, that is what the wailing and crying should have been over!