Pittsburgh Steelers fans (hi Sam!) can all thank their lucky stars for instant replay. In a game that was, to quote Jim Ross, “bowling shoe ugly”, the Steelers used a stifling defense and a little bit of luck to beat the Baltimore Ravens 13-9 yesterday to claim their 4th AFC North title in the last 5 years.
After stuffing each other multiple times, the Ravens clung to a 9-6 lead, and with under 1 minute to go in the game, the Steelers were knocking at the door. At 3rd and goal, Ben Roethlisberger scrambled left and right, and finally tossed a quick pass to Santonio Holmes. Santonio’s feet were clearly in the endzone, but he had to fall forward to catch the ball, so the original call was no touchdown since the line judge believed the ball hadn’t crossed the goal line. With time running down, Head Ref Walt “Tuck Rule” Coleman stopped the clock to check the call on replay.
Now for it to be a touchdown, the ball has to only get to the front of the End Zone line while the player is in bounds, and CBS showed several angles that were blocked or inconclusive. However, one did show that Santonio had possession at literally the last possible moment where it would still be a touchdown, another molecule or two and he would’ve been out and the call would have been correct. When he came back, he said the ball had crossed the plane and the catch was a touchdown. So, the Steelers escape with one and get to go home and celebrate their divisional championship — perhaps with some Roethles-burgers?
The video is here, so check it out and see, what do you think? Touchdown or not? And remember, to overturn, it has to be an obvious error on the part of the referee who made the call.
It’s unbelievable to think, a play that was this close, along with the Tennessee Titans shocking loss, has now opened the path to the Steelers getting homefield advantage throughout the playoffs. Just shows you, this game of inches, can be a game of millimeters. Gotta love football.
on Dec 15th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Apparently the head ref felt the ball crossed the line…case closed!! Do I see a divisional playoff game between the Steelers and the Dolphins?
on Dec 15th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
After all the bitching from Ravens fans and pundits, I assumed it was on fourth down, but that was only third down! Even if it was not called a TD, the Steelers would have had a down to punch it in.
For my money, it looked like a touchdown.
on Dec 15th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
“Even if it was not called a TD, the Steelers would have had a down to punch it in.”
That is true, but I think they would have kicked the FG and gone to OT. Against Indy and Dallas, the Steelers had 4th-and-goal from the 1 and got stuffed both times. The way the Ravens’ offense was not moving, the Steelers would have taken their chances in OT (plus, a tie would have been fine with Pitt. as far as the tiebreaker goes).
I hated the overturn. The standard is “indisputable” visual evidence to overturn and there was not that. Had they initially ruled a TD and upheld it, I would have been fine with it. But after looking at the play 20 times you still can’t say INDISPUTABLY that it was a TD. But Walt “Tuck Rule” Coleman loves changing the outcome of games!
on Dec 15th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Um, the tuck rule game was the correct application of the rule. A crappy, dumb rule, but it was correct. And it looks like he got this call correct. Good for him.
on Dec 16th, 2008 at 2:08 am
Nope, in each case there was not indisputable evidence to overrule the original calls — Brady fumbled and Holmes was just short. I hope Walt Coleman doesn’t ref any playoff games this season!
on Dec 16th, 2008 at 9:29 am
I think the official did his best to get the call right, regardless of the so-called indisputable evidence as a pretext for over-ruling.
My take is that the catch was more likely a TD, than not, which is what most non-Baltimoreans think. That’s why it’s the right call, regardless of how it was called on the field.
on Dec 16th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Well we’ll just have to disagree. I think in the end he got both calls right, so good for him.
on Dec 16th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
I agree with Cyd, sorry Jim. It looked like a touchdown to me as well initially and on the replay. The overriding principle should be to get the call right. Coleman had the ability to freeze frame the catch in hi def, while the official who ruled it at the 2 or 3 inch line was clearly looking around another player from the far sideline.
Actually I’m a little surprised the NFL hasn’t provided an enlarged shot of the catch. I assume Mike Pereira (head of officiating) will have one tomorrow night during his weekly appearance on Total Access. Pereira - who’s admitted to referee mistakes before - said Coleman’s call was correct.
on Dec 17th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
In order for instant replay to have any credibility over the long term, “indisputable” evidence for overturning a call on the field has to be the standard. The “overriding principle” of getting the call right adds more potential for controversy based on who is the deciding official (as illustrated by your secondary points regarding Walt “Tuck Rule” Coleman). It shouldn’t be the job of the head official to set the universe back in order by making the fair call. If the indisputable evidence standard is not kept, I’d prefer to go back to having no instant replay at all.
If the call on the field was no touchdown and all replay angles save one were inconclusive and the last was questionable at best, the call should stand.
On a side note, why doesn’t the NFL insist that permanent cameras be stationed at the goal line in all stadiums for use in instant replay? Or better yet, why doesn’t the league have its own system for instant replay (cameras, camera men, etc)? It seems that the cameras each network uses are never positioned exactly on the end zone and thus make these calls even more difficult and controversial.
on Dec 17th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
On almost all replay calls, one angle will be more definitive than the others.
Watching the catch in slow motion and freeze framing it, the call isn’t even close. Almost three quarters (3/4) of the ball is over the front edge of line when the catch is made and the receiver’s feet are down. Coleman had to know how significant the call was, and if he wasn’t certain he wouldn’t have overturned it.
I agree that the NFL should remedy the problem with more goal line cameras (or a chip in the ball). This isn’t the first goal line controversy they’ve had and it won’t be the last.