FanHouse's resident referee will chime in quasi-weekly with thoughts on major topics relating to officiating. We call it The Zebra Report. Matt Snyder is a high school official with eight years experience. While this is like a third-year resident critiquing the work of a world-renowned surgeon, it's still better than someone who has never worn the stripes. First of all, congratulations to the Pittsburgh Steelers. That was one hell of a Super Bowl with a dramatic ending. The first thing I want to say about the officiating is that I believe it was a very well officiated game. We'll delve right into the alleged controversial calls and sort things out.
1. Ben Roethlisberger scores a touchdown, and the replay overturned the ruling on the field. I'm no more qualified to judge this play than any other football fan. I saw what you saw: A big amoeba where you can't tell exactly what happened or exactly where the ball was when Big Ben's knee hit the ground. This was a very tough call, and I can't imagine how tough it would have been for the linesmen to make a full-speed judgment. I have no problem with the call on the field or the ensuing reversal.
Also, on this play, it appeared an offensive lineman grabbed Roethlisberger and aided his move toward the goal-line. Some people wanted the officials to call an assisting-the-runner penalty. While it's true there is a penalty for this, it rarely -- if ever -- gets called. In order for someone to garner a penalty for this, they'd pretty much have to pick up the ballcarrier and walk them forward. Generally speaking, you are never going to get a call for garden variety pushing and pulling your teammate. That's just the way the game is called.
2. James Harrison takes an interception back 100 yards for a touchdown. I believe it was the correct call to give him the touchdown. Immediately when he hit the ground, the ball was touching the goal-line. This was another one where it was very close.
3. Karlos Dansby is called for roughing the passer. He appeared to take a step and push Roethlisberger to the ground a split-second after releasing the pass. Personally, I didn't care for this one. I thought it was "bang-bang" enough to let it slide. On the other hand, roughing the passer has been called quite tightly all season, so they need to maintain consistency in the biggest game of the year. Plus, it's pretty stupid to shove the quarterback after he's released the football.
4. Roughing the holder on Adrian Wilson. This had to have been the easiest call Terry McAulay made all season. To answer the hypothetical questions ... Yes, you can have roughing the holder. You can also have roughing the snapper (on punts and field goals). McAulay did not announce the penalty correctly, though. He said, "unnecessary roughness," which would have meant the penalty enforcement would come on the ensuing kickoff. Roughing the holder, however, gives the offense an automatic first down and continues the drive. They enforced the penalty correctly for the call, though, so that's really all that matters.
5. Harrison receives an unnecessary roughness penalty. He should have been thrown out of the game. That was a dirty, uncalled for, pathetic reaction from a great football player. There's no room for that crap in the Super Bowl. The only explanation I can come up with is that the officials didn't see his punch, and only saw the shoving afterwards, because a punch is an automatic disqualification.
6. Holding called on the Steelers in the end-zone results in an Arizona safety. That was a great, gutsy call. You can't just tackle a defender and get away with it, but sometimes those calls get missed. In this case, the Steelers were just about to ice the football game, but the officials hung in there and made the correct call. Great work, boys.
7. Santonio Holmes uses the football as a "prop" in his touchdown celebration, and is not penalized 15 yards. Really, the only explanation is that no official saw this, otherwise they just ignored what is deemed to be an automatic penalty. Those 15 yards would have been huge for the Cards, too. I'm sure it was quite hectic down there on the field in the aftermath of the play, especially since they were headed to the replay booth. When you can't review things like this, and there are seven human beings trying to watch 22 guys, things of this nature will happen.
Last, and certainly not least ... the end of the game. Kurt Warner's hand was clearly moving forward when he fumbled the football. This is the fact the naysayers are clinging to, while conveniently ignoring the fact that he did not have possession of the football when his arm started moving forward. Look, I'm a fan at heart, and I was rooting for Arizona. Initially, when I saw the play, I started going crazy thinking they got it wrong. When you watch the replay, and can distance yourself from any fanatical thoughts, however, it's obvious the call on the field was correct. Again, Warner did not have possession of the football when his arm was moving forward. That's a textbook fumble.
One thing to discuss in this situation, though, is that they didn't send the play to a booth review. I'm surprised they didn't just give a courtesy review. It seems like they usually review any close call in the last two minutes of big games, so I'm actually shocked they didn't give this one the same treatment. This isn't to say the officials or the NFL did anything wrong, because they don't have to review anything. I'm just saying that I'm surprised they didn't send it to the booth to be sure.
It matters not, though, because the end result would have been the same. Kurt Warner fumbled the football. End of discussion. The question everyone should be asking, instead of going after the officials, was why did Warner hold the ball in the pocket for seven seconds?
As I said, this was a very well officiated game. The only real questionable call, in my mind, was the roughing the passer call on Dansby, and that was in line with how the game has been called all season. So, really, the guys in stripes did their job in the biggest game of the season.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
2-02-2009 @ 2:14PM
Bruce Ciskie said...
I pretty much agree on all counts. Well done, Mr. Snyder.
A courtesy review of Warner's fumble would have been a PR move, but I think it was a worthy one. The league is going to catch a lot of flak for not doing it. Outside of that, I have few complaints.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 2:28PM
italys1son said...
"This isn't to say the officials or the NFL did anything wrong..." you wrote. OF COURSE NOT - you never do. Your writing all season has been 100% predictable - the zebras are NEVER wrong, and oh, if they are, 1) it's not their fault; or 2) It doesn't matter bucause it didn't affect the game.
What a tool you are. Is it hard to breath with your nose so far up the ref's rear ends?
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 2:30PM
Matt Snyder said...
Nah, I'm breathing fine. Thanks for the inquiry, though.
2-02-2009 @ 2:36PM
clydebraggs said...
Harrison did not make that touchdown his knee went down and the ball was around the one foot line maybe less I recorded the game and watched it about 20 times and you can see his knee touch and the ball is short.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 2:44PM
nabpdcop said...
The game was great. I had no stake about who won or lost, didn't matter. The CARDS should have won the game, BUT DUMB penalties, plus losing there cool in the second half, the sign of a young team. DON'T BLAME THE REFS, the football season is over. Time for the late show in LA......smile.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 3:06PM
mattso27 said...
What about the fifteen yard facemask called on Rodgers-Cromartie? To me it looked like a textbook 5-yard facemask which is no longer a penalty this year. He didn't drag by the facemask and Holmes wasn't even tackled on the play.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 3:15PM
Matt Snyder said...
Yeah, it wasn't bad ... but, as you said, the NFL did away with the 5-yard facemask penalty this year.
For the record, I think that was a ridiculous decision. There is a big difference between trying to twist someone's head off and accidentally hitting the facemask for a split second.
I probably should have examined the play because people are complaining that Holmes was facemasking Rodgers-Cromartie at the same time. It's tough, but generally when an offensive player is going for the stiff-arm, he's not going to be called unless he starts twisting the mask of the defender. I don't believe that happened in this instance.
Not that it's fair, but that's just how the game is called.
2-02-2009 @ 7:28PM
Be cool! said...
matso.. it was a face mask penalty, the only one they can call is 15 yds this year. What's your beef?
2-02-2009 @ 8:10PM
mattso27 said...
Be Cool:
I am saying it was a minor facemask. This year penalties that were of the 5 yard variety are no longer penalties. A defender either drags down by the facemask and commits a 15 yard penalty or commits no infraction at all. Since it was a light facemask I would have let it gone and called nothing.
2-03-2009 @ 4:45PM
psu74dl said...
what are you talking about all facemask penalties are now a 15 yard penalty. Touching or grasping. That is the rule in High School, NCAA, Arena, Pro, Europe etc. etc. It is a good thing half of these people don't have to pass a rules test to watch a football game. The harrison penalty was a good call however DID NOT deserve an ejection because he did not hit him with a closed fist it was the Palm of his hand. Also the whole story there is that the blocker went down to take out Harrison's knees a move that could have cost him his career, Harrison lost his cool and was penalized 15 yards for it. The other hit on the holder was a far worse hit and was an attempt to knock the Steelers punter out of the game.
2-02-2009 @ 3:42PM
Spleeve said...
Matt, You never mentioned a blatant non-call - on the interception runback by Harrison, Hightower was about to tackle Harrison and was shoved from behind - that's called clipping. Why wasn't that called? Is the answer always, always, always, "Well the refs didn't see it." What a cop-out. I give the Refs and F+. Another questionable win for the Steelers (refer back to the Seattle SuperBowl) Is this a trend. I think so.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 3:45PM
Matt Snyder said...
"That's called clipping."
It's really not. What you are talking about would be a "block in the back." Not "clipping."
Honestly, I didn't see that. I'll have to go back and watch the play again.
If what you described is true, it should have definitely been called. Not seeing a guy who is immediately behind the ballcarrier is not an excuse, because there are always multiple sets of eyes on the ball.
2-04-2009 @ 9:15PM
James Cushion said...
Fitzgerald came from out of bonds to tackle Harrison that also is a penalty
2-02-2009 @ 4:29PM
edgeofmyth said...
As a lifelong Seahawks fan, nobody understands the pain of one sided officiating like we do. That there was no investigation into the Steelers-Seahawk superbowl, or even questions from the nation still burns us. Though I was supporting the cards, Pittsburg actually won this one. Just what an arrogant, bandwagon (seriously, is everyone formerly from Pittsburg? Please..) riding fan base needed, another trophy.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 4:39PM
Bob said...
I'm noticing a trend--the Steelers seem to be the beneficiaries of a number of well-timed "questionable" calls in big games--certainly in their recent Super Bowl wins. Now unleash the "just another loser whiner" floodgates from the Steeler fans. Frankly, I think they're an excellent team, but those "iffy" calls are all on tape for review, so there's no denying they happened.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 4:40PM
Matt Snyder said...
The holding in the end-zone call for a safety does not happen if there is anything nefarious going on ... so everyone claiming there was a fix or anything needs to explain why that call was made.
2-02-2009 @ 5:22PM
mydj24 said...
I'm still looking for a photo of the right foot touching on the game winner. All the phots I've seen show the right foot locked behind the left one not touching the ground. With a right hand man jumping his lead will lift the right side making it impossible for the right foot to touch first. Try it at home and see what foot drags first. I wasn't a fan of either team but did enjoy the game.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 5:44PM
Snee said...
If this was such a hose job like all of the cards fans are claiming, then how does the safety happen, and how does "BEN"'s touchdown in the first quarter get reversed. Both could have gone either way, were huge plays involving a total of 6 points, and went against the Steelers.
On that last post, if you didn't see the foot touching the ground, then you are either blind or need to buy a nicer TV.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 6:24PM
delawarejack said...
The plain fact is, is that these guys will FOREVER be known as the " STEALERS " as in the refs & play review guys being in bed with these STEALERS by rushing through what should have been a much longer time to determine whether Warner's arm was indeed going forward .. it was evident to everyone ( even with like a million calls against them ), that the Cards clearly OUTPLAYED these CHUMPS !
Reply
2-11-2009 @ 7:32PM
gregg said...
the nfl deliberately selected the referee who allowed the fewest points
they did this in a game where one team has a great offense and a mediocre defense while the other team has a great defense but very little offense
this controversial result was eminently foreseeable
the fact that both harrison and ward were allowed to throw punches without ejections was what disturbed me the most
the steelers holding warner on the return when contrasted with numerous ticky tack calls on the cards was also unfortunate for the league's reputation
this is neither the first nor the last superbowl where the nfl has set itself up for cries of a fix
but if u r waiting for officials to make rulings against the steelers you will wait a long long time
i am still waiting for officials to rule that it is illegal for steelers to shoot at cicilians on the ohio turnpike and that was twenty years ago
Reply