Why it was Tripping-Rules, and Why Steelers first Touchdown was A TOUCHDOWN.

by surag238 on Oct 26, 2009 11:18 AM EDT Comment 64 comments

I'm getting annoyed by all the unnecessary whining that the steelers got favorable officiating. check after the jump.

Oh, and I was at the game..AWESOME

First, heath Miller had INCIDENTAL CONTACT. and yes, the route of the DB was thrown off as he did fall down. However, this was PRIOR TO THE TOUCHDOWN PASS. And the official rulebook states:

Actions that do not constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to:

(a) Incidental contact by a receiver’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball (this did not happen as neither heath miller nor the db were near the ball) or neither player is looking for the ball.

(b) Inadvertent touching of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player is playing the ball(neither were playing the ball).

(c) Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the ball is clearly uncatchable by involved players. -even though the DB FALLS DOWN...HE WAS NOT CAPABLE OF GOING NEAR HOLMES AS AT THAT POINT HOLMES WAS OFF COVERAGE. the db was not involved in Holmes pursuit!

Note 1: If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no interference.

Ok, now to the second issue, TRIPPING.... The definition of tripping is if a offensive player attempts to trip a defensive player ON PURPOSE. I was at the game, but I kept hearing afterwards how Goose was against the call. let me first off say that dude was one of the cheapest players on the defensive side. no wonder he sided with the vikings. Anyway...lets see here, yes the tight end did actually INTEND TO GO DOWN. It looks like it was an accident, as if he fell. you watch carefully and you can see his intent was to trip him over. that is not allowed. just because you dont have your foot out(ahem dallas cowboys) doesnt mean its not tripping. That CERTAINLY IS CONSIDERED.

now, contact. there was NO contact. but that is STILL TRIPPING. the INTENT to trip someone constitutes as TRIPPING.

And finally, Kick return. watch carefully for the hold. there was considerable holding during the wedge formation(which is apparantly legal as long as its only 2 players) and there was an obvious block in the back. neither of which were called.

so in the end, this goes both ways.

0 recs | Comment 64 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

"Goes both ways"

Like WAVES that are successful?

"My doctor said I'd quit getting nosebleeds if I just kept my finger out of there!"
-Ralph Wiggum

by SteelFever on Oct 26, 2009 11:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I disagree on the OPI call

Miller, purposefully, or accidentally, set a pick. You aren’t allowed to do that.

From the 2006 NFL rulebook (the latest copy I have, boldface are my highlights)

Page 53 onward:

Article 5

It is pass interference by either team when any player movement beyond the
line of scrimmage significantly hinders the progress of an eligible player of such player’s
opportunity to catch the ball. Offensive pass interference rules apply from the time the
ball is snapped until the ball is touched. Defensive pass interference rules apply from
the time the ball is thrown until the ball is touched.

Offensive Pass Interference
Actions that constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Blocking downfield by an offensive player prior to the ball being touched.
(b) Initiating contact with a defender by shoving or pushing off thus creating a
separation in an attempt to catch a pass.
(c ) Driving through a defender who has established a position on the field.

Not Offensive Pass Interference
Actions that do not constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Incidental contact by a receiver’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing
for the ball or neither player is looking for the ball.
(b) Inadvertent touching of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player
is playing the ball.
(c ) Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the ball is clearly
uncatchable by involved players.

It is my opinion (shared by the officials, it would seem) that a downfield pick is nothing more than an illegal block. You can’t say for certain that the ball wouldn’t have been catchable by the DB that got picked, because he was in the vicinity of the throw. “In the vicinity” has an overlarge meaning, in that he could have broken off at any point to go for the ball, even though he wasn’t really in the play.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 12:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

What is the definition of "downfield" though?

I thought contact within 5 yards was legal and I thought Heath and the DB were within 5 yards. Maybe I am totally wrong though as I am no expert on all the rules.

" I’m glad we play Pitt twice, and not Tenn this year." - Salty Browns Fan.

by Johnny_S on Oct 26, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good question

I’m going to try and figure that out. My gut says a legal chuck has to be executed by the defender at the line (and released within 5 yards). I don’t know what would happen if the receiver, or in this case the TE, just tried to run over a DB at 6 yards past the LOS. Gut says thats OPI if it takes the DB completely out of the play. The overriding principle is that all players downfield have equal rights to the ball, and changing that fundamental begets a penalty.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

According to the rulebook, the 5-yard chuck rule applies only to the defender. The receiver can make contact, but not to redirect the defender, and the defender can make contact, but not to redirect or restrict the receiver.

In any case, the play was a 3rd and 4 from the Minnesota 7, and if I remember correctly, the penalty occurred at or very close to the goal line, outside the legal 5 yard chuck zone.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is weird

That it applies to the defender but not offensive guy. He should be allowed to hit the DB just the same as he can hit him. Anyway thanks for the schooling on the rule.

Where do you get your information on the rules? It’d be a nice resource for me to have for future reference

" I’m glad we play Pitt twice, and not Tenn this year." - Salty Browns Fan.

by Johnny_S on Oct 26, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have a copy of the 06 rulebook.

Google will show you the way. I believe you can find a copy of the 09, even. It’s probably time for me to update as well.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, and

Don’t fall for the NFL.com abridged version garbage. You want to see the rule the way it’s written, with the examples and legalese. The summary rules just don’t cut it for the close plays.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So you have a hard copy? Yeah I have seen that BS nfl.com one. That thing sucks.

" I’m glad we play Pitt twice, and not Tenn this year." - Salty Browns Fan.

by Johnny_S on Oct 26, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I actually have a PDF

but yes.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Check your email.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thank you sir

I’ll let you know if I find the ’09 book.

" I’m glad we play Pitt twice, and not Tenn this year." - Salty Browns Fan.

by Johnny_S on Oct 26, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have been looking for a while myself. The 06 book is the closest thing I can find.

by Bjorno on Oct 26, 2009 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They don't let Steeler fans see the 09 version

because they’ll be ticked off.

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty." - Winston Churchill

by PixburghArn on Oct 27, 2009 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

3rd and 5 from the 8

the contact occurred at the 5 yard line, 3 yards off the line of scrimmage

by 1STstate bucco on Oct 29, 2009 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Minor addenda

Had Miller, at the point of the pick, set his feet, and stopped moving, it would not have been OPI. The fact that he ran through/redirected the DB is the important bit.

Its not relevant to the case in this game, exactly, but its interesting that if you want to set a pick in the NFL its ok, so long as you stop and turn for the ball. The phrase driving through is the operative term in this case. Had he not been moving, no foul.

Of course, that’s not the route he was supposed to run, but I thought the similarity between the NFL and basketball vis-a-vis setting picks was interesting.

We now return you to your argument already in progress.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Heath obviously picked the DB and got caught. You can’t watch that play and seriously argue otherwise. Lots of missed calls like there are in every game. They suffered more than we did as far as being penalized anyway

by qwikdoc on Oct 26, 2009 12:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

My review of your review

Agree entirely with the Miller OPI call. I’d like to add though that the contact started as incidental, but Miller’s beefy-ness mowed the guy down with a bit of a shove so I could see where they felt it was aggressive. Still, WAY away from the play.

And as far as the Tripping. I think the guy went for a low block, and Harrison just is so godly he managed to sidestep and jump over him, and then you can see the legs flare out in a way to catch him.

I think it was a fair call, if the loser just blocks like a real player standing up and not diving at a guys legs (which I dont like anyway) no problem.

by Mechem on Oct 26, 2009 2:25 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

There is no incidental contact with respect to setting a pick on a DB. If you re-route them, it should be called as OPI. There is no 5-yard buffer as far as that is concerned, see my breakdown above.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 26, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed.

by Bjorno on Oct 26, 2009 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

From the NFL rulebook:

Rule 3 section 38

"Tripping is the use of the leg or foot in obstructing any opponent (including a runner) below the knee

You seem to have omitted the "use of the leg" in your description of what a trip was.

In your description of pass interference, you forgot the part that is DIRECTLY above the verbiage you quoted. "C. Driving through a defender who has established a position on the field." or what is considered a "Pick".

The line "C) contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the ball is clearly uncatchable by involved players." does not apply to plays that would be considered a "Pick". The defender that gets picked obviously is put in a position where the ball is uncatchable by the offensive player executing the pick and the defender who get’s picked.

You seem to only include information that supports your argument.

by Bjorno on Oct 26, 2009 4:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Also, Boston Wahoo included a part that I failed to mention.

Offensive Pass Interference
Actions that constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Blocking downfield by an offensive player prior to the ball being touched.

by Bjorno on Oct 26, 2009 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

last time i checked, a thigh is part of a leg

by t1mmy10 on Oct 26, 2009 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes...

And he made contact with Harrison with his hip, which is not part of his leg.

by Bjorno on Oct 26, 2009 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

first i disagree with that.

second, even if that is the case, your big argument is the call shouldn’t have been made is because the body part of your player that was involved with hitting our player was 6 inches away from hitting our player with an “illegal” part of his body…but there is no clear line of demarcation such as a helmet, face mask, etc. for the officials to discern by. kinda choosy to be complaining about something like that, yet arguing that heath miller was “blocking/picking” down field. i’d say he was protecting himself when your db ran into him when following our wr. miller didnt go out of his way to pursue the db or hit him. he was running his route and never deviated. but it was a judgment call and i can see (although disagree) with where they are coming from.

your player was obviously trying to hit ours with his lower portion of his body. no other reason would he be turned side ways at the line of scrimmage after whiffing on a block….unless he was going for a chop block (which he wasn’t) cuz he’s wasn’t blocking down on another player. it’s a judgment call that was not blatantly wrong and should’ve been called.

by t1mmy10 on Oct 26, 2009 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

your big argument is the call shouldn’t have been made is because the body part of your player that was involved with hitting our player was 6 inches away from hitting our player with an "illegal" part of his body

My argument was that borderline calls like that should not be made. The same as how holding is not called on every single play, the same as how pass interference is not called when two players are hand-fighting.

The pace at which an NFL game is played is too fast for a call like that to be made. The ref should only call a penalty if they are 100% sure it is a penalty, not if they THINK it might have been a penalty.

I am arguing the Heath Miller hold on EXACTLY the same premise that you are making towards the tripping call. From a certain angle, it could look like a penalty should have been called, but if it is not obvious it should be left well enough alone.

We get a bunch of Steelers fans saying the tripping was justified and the Heath Miller OPI was bogus. I am merely the antithesis of that view. In reality, both penalties should not have been called.

by Bjorno on Oct 26, 2009 11:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"In reality, both penalties should not have been called."

ok, but you are more than a lil misleading with your comments on the opi rule above and below then…and blitz’s post game breakdown. if that’s your stance then thats what you should say.

i completely see your issue with this post that it seemed to leave out a few key words to further their point. but i think the basic gist was

so in the end, this goes both ways.

it was just trying to make a point to the vikings fans that were complaining they were screwed on the calls and it cost them the game.

by t1mmy10 on Oct 27, 2009 1:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and i’m not sure if you were implying that i was being completely biased, but

but it was a judgment call and i can see (although disagree) with where they are coming from.

by t1mmy10 on Oct 27, 2009 1:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

An argument could be made the outcome would have been completely different if both penalties were ignored.

But bad calls are part of the game. The bottom line is, to beat good teams like the Steelers, we need to make enough plays so that it doesn’t come down to a bogus penalty or a fluke play.

I still argue the OPI call because they still argue the tripping call. Maybe I am being a bit petty, but to be completely honest the OPI was more justified than the tripping penalty.

by Bjorno on Oct 27, 2009 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and an argument could be made that you would have lost anyways if they didnt make any of the calls and instead called you guys for holding on the kickoff…since we’re reversing all “questionable” calls.

and you are being petty by continuing to try to convince steelers fans on their website that the opi call is more legit than your player PURPOSELY throwing his “hip” into our player’s legs while sticking his legs out

by t1mmy10 on Oct 28, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

look, i see where you are coming from with both calls. and i understand your point that the game (but dont agree with the philosophy) that the outcome could’ve been different if none of the calls were made. but you can’t go back, reverse 2 comparable calls and say “see, we shoulda/coulda won.” it doesnt work like that.

the game basically came down to: when our TD was reverse with the call, we got a field goal. when your TD was reversed, you turned over the ball for a defensive TD instead of tying it with a field goal. that penalty didnt cause your team to turn over the ball.

your team played a great game and it says a lot that you were that close to winning the game. but you didnt deserve to win the game

by t1mmy10 on Oct 28, 2009 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

and an argument could be made that you would have lost anyways if they didnt make any of the calls and instead called you guys for holding on the kickoff…since we’re reversing all "questionable" calls.

I didn’t make that argument, only that the outcome would be different. That doesn’t mean we win, it only means that it would have been different. More likely, it would have been a closer score at the end of the game.

by Bjorno on Oct 29, 2009 3:19 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

outcome would be different

the only way the outcome would be different is if the Vikings won. they didn’t so the outcome is exactly the same. W for Steelers L for the Vikings Live with it.

by 1STstate bucco on Oct 29, 2009 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A score of 27-24 Steelers is a different outcome.

by Bjorno on Oct 30, 2009 4:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

details...

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty." - Winston Churchill

by PixburghArn on Oct 30, 2009 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree..

The part everyone forgets is that OPI is so only if its intentional. if you watch miller, his head was turned the other way and as he runs into the guy his head turns. he had no idea he was there. there was no pick. and I cant imagine why he would purposely do so. I dont think the play was timed for holmes. it didnt seem taht way at least.

by surag238 on Oct 26, 2009 9:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I was gonna say

I think the intent of Miller matters a whole lot. I dont think he really meant to hit anybody. What purpose would it have served?

by Mechem on Oct 26, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The purpose it would have served was to knock a defender off one of the other receivers. That is the definition of a pick, and is illegal by rule.

by Bjorno on Oct 26, 2009 11:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

he was running his route!

So because Heath and the DB got too the same piece of field at the same time and the DB isn’t paying attention and gets knocked down( Miller never extendes his hands to block or reroute the DB) the penalty is on the guy that stays on his feet?
as per rules below “significantly hinders the progress of an eligble receivers opportunity to CATCH THE BALL”. The ball was thrown to the other side of the field.Unless he had a rocket tied to his ass he wasn’t catching that ball.
Article 2 Prohibited acts by BOTH teams while the ball is in the air. I thought, according to you in a previous thread(Bjorno), the ball hadn’t been THROWN yet. I didn’t think it had been thrown yet but if it had e) cutting off the path of an opponent by making contact with him( he was running his route so who was cutting off who’s path and making contact) without playing the ball( not thrown to his side of the field)
Above you added the part of the rule a) Blocking downfield by an offensive player(what is considered downfield?) prior to the ball being TOUCHED( the ball hadn’t been THROWN yet so this part of the rule doesn’t apply.}
EVERY rule can be interpreted to benefit your own view. somewhere above someone said if he would have stopped he wouldn’t have been penalized.IMO if he would have stopped then that would be more like a pick and that WOULD be OPI. He continued on his route and didn’t let DB move him off of it. It’s not his fault the DB didn’t have his head on a swivel.EVERY TEAM runs these type of plays at the goal line. has that DB ever watched film? Because the DB doesn’t have a clue, penalize Heath for running his route.Bad call

by 1STstate bucco on Oct 27, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow, hit return every so often and I’ll be able to respond more accurately.

In any case, OPI is in effect from the moment the ball is snapped until the ball is touched by a receiver. DPI is in effect from when the ball is thrown until it is touched by a receiver.

That’s the first inaccuracy in your argument.

The second is that, as I said before, the definition of OPI is not predicated on the ball being catchable by the defender. What heath did could be considered a downfield block of an eligible receiver. Downfield means past the line of scrimmage. Thats all it means.

Finally, if Heath had stopped and turned for a throw, no matter what happened with the DB, it would not have been OPI. That part of your argument is just plain wrong. As in basketball, if your feet are set and your hands are clear, they can’t call you for anything.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 27, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"significantly hinders the progress of an eligble receivers opportunity to CATCH THE BALL"

That rule only applies to defensive holding, note the “eligible receiver” portion of that statement.

It does not matter that he was running his route, because there are routes that can be designed SPECIFICALLY to pick an opposing defender. That argument is moot.

As far as I know, the OPI was called before the ball was thrown. I don’t have access to the replay of that play, but I though it was before the ball was in the air, and it was corroborated by others.

“Actions that constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Blocking downfield by an offensive player prior to the ball being touched.”

And no, not every rule can be interpreted to benefit your own point of view. They are very specific and detailed as to what can and cannot be done. What Miller did was a pick, and was called as such.

Was it borderline? Yes. But the call was valid.

by Bjorno on Oct 27, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not exactly.

The word is incidental, not intentional. Intent has nothing to do with it. The only question is whether or not Miller rerouted the DB. He did, clearly, and while the ball was in the air. That is OPI, whether the penalty is in the vicinity of the throw or not.

I found the 09 rulebook, and here is the current wording:

Fron page 56, Section 5 (Pass Interference), Article 2 (emphasis mine):

Article 1 Definition. It is pass interference by either team when any act by a player
more than one yard beyond the line of scrimmage significantly hinders the progress of
an eligible receiver’s opportunity to catch the ball. Pass interference can only occur
when a forward pass is thrown from behind the line of scrimmage, regardless of
whether the pass is legal or illegal, or whether it crosses the line.
Defensive pass interference rules apply from the time the ball is thrown until the ball is
touched. See Article 2 for prohibited acts while the ball is in the air.
Offensive pass interference rules apply from the time the ball is snapped until the ball is
touched. See Article 2 for prohibited acts while the ball is in the air and Article 4 for prohibited
acts prior to the pass.

Article 2 Prohibited Acts by both teams while the ball is in the air. Acts that are
pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Contact by a player who is not playing the ball that restricts the opponent’s opportunity
to make the catch.
(b) Playing through the back of an opponent in an attempt to make a play on the ball.
(c ) Grabbing an opponent’s arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to
catch a pass.
(d) Extending an arm across the body of an opponent, thus restricting his ability to
catch a pass, and regardless of whether the player committing such act is playing
the ball.
(e) Cutting off the path of an opponent by making contact with him, without playing the
ball.
(f) Hooking an opponent in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes
the opponent’s body to turn prior to the ball arriving.
(g) Initiating contact with an opponent by shoving or pushing off, thus creating a separation
in an attempt to catch a pass.
Note: If there is any question whether player contact is incidental, the ruling should be no
interference.

As you can see by the rule, Miller is guilty of violating clause (e), and the flag was thrown, CORRECTLY.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 27, 2009 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ooh Ooh! Where did you find the ’09 copy?

I loves me some ’09 rulebook.

by Bjorno on Oct 27, 2009 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I found it at forums.footballguys.com

I had to register, and didn’t get permission to download it until this morning. But it was painless anyway.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 27, 2009 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

both calls were appropriate

Heath picked and Dugan tripped. Fair calls on both sides. I don’t know how anyone could say we win because of preferencial treatment from the refs. Seems like we get a lot of penty anty penalties because the refs are trying to make a point, ask Hines.

by DarinS on Oct 27, 2009 1:59 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Thank Christ for sanity.

You, sir, are absolutely correct.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 27, 2009 10:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

actually no you are wrong.

the first call was unnecessary. several reasons.

1st. if you bother to watch the replay(which is available on postgameheroes.com) you will find that 1. mewelde moore bumps into the DB within 5 yards and the DB then runs in to heath miller. 2. heath miller is turned the toher way the entire time until he bumps into the DB and then turns his head(in surprise) and then pushes him away. there is nothing wrong wtih that once the DB INITIATES contact. obviously that was the case here. 3. the penalty was called AFTER the touchdown. in other words the penalty was called after they knew who got the ball. now had heath miller received the TD reception then I can see why it should be called(DB-who was NOT covering miller was knocked down and as a result could have been the reason to blown coverage-even though the safety was responsible for miller).

however, holmes was the target and received the football. the rules specifically state regarding makikng a PLAY ON THE BALL. neither miller nor the LB were capable of this. also, watching the replay over and over i see that the DB RAN INTO Miller. the penalty was uncalled for.

by surag238 on Oct 28, 2009 11:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Actions that constitute offensive pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Blocking downfield by an offensive player prior to the ball being touched.

Your comment:

and then pushes him away.

is considered blocking.

by Bjorno on Oct 28, 2009 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You mean the post on PGH where they back me up and say the call was maybe ticky-tack but correct to the letter?

Yeah, that one.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 28, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The first 2 sentences of the post:

Miller’s Offensive Pass Interference

By Dagger | October 27, 2009

This is clearly Offensive Pass Interference in my book. Heath Miller lowers his head/shoulder and knocks the LB to the ground.

http://www.postgameheroes.com/?p=8131

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 28, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No one that is not a total homer disputes this call.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 28, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Like many routes in almost every game, that route is designed to be a pick route so really I find it hard to believe that Heath was surprised to find DB exactly where that route was designed to lead him, I stand by my opinion, fair enough if yours is different.

by DarinS on Oct 29, 2009 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

surag238

spot on. The only thing I saw differently from your interpretation was that Heath didn’t PUSH HIM AWAY, the LB(52) went up to bump MeMo a yard in front of where Heath was running his route. At contact MeMo knocks him off balance while trying to run his route.The LB falls back into Heath’s path( and then flops like a Duke b’ball player taking a charge) but Heath never veers off of his route(why should he, he’s running his route) and only lowers his shoulder ( doesn’t extend his hands to block or stop his route to ’ pick ’) to continue his route.

Because the LB stumbles back into his path is he suppose to stop and wait for a clear path to continue his route?I don’t think so.Is he suppose to change his route to accomadate an off balance defender? It’s a timing route where Ben would expect Heath to be in a certain spot at a certain time.The LB put HIMSELF in that position so because Heath did his job better than him, Heath gets penalized? Don’t seem right to me .

BostonWahoo, being a steelers fan i’m not understanding how you could be agreeing with Bjorno from the vikings blog. He has done nothing but complain since he came over here about how they got screwed by the refs.Even if you think it was a good call, let him fight his own battles. Fellow steelers fans should not be siding with the enemy. By you agreeing with him he thinks he has finally convinced US that he’s right. Sorry, call me a homer but he is WRONG and doesn’t need to be validated by you. Bjorno, go back to your own blog and worry about the Packers. This game is over and you got an L. Deal with it.

by 1STstate bucco on Oct 29, 2009 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Apparently you think fan allegiance trumps common sense and fairness. I’ll fight the battles I want, and you fight those you want. If you’d like it to be different, tough shit.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Oct 30, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Till the cows come home

Is how long this can be argued by anyone and everyone. Both the trip and the pick have fairly specific wording in the rule book but both are also open to interpretation as most rulings/penalties are. Every team runs pick routes even though they are against the rules. The goal is to get as close to breaking the rule as you can without actually breaking it. Both plays could be run over and over exactly the same and sometimes they would get called and sometimes not. We got caught, they got caught. I don’t think being able to acknowledge that as a persons opinion invalidates their allegiance to their team. I can see the point of view for both plays not being called penalties as they were both borderline but I can’t sit and argue that they shouldn’t have been because I believe Heath was running a pick route and just got caught and Dugan made a poor attempt at a cut block, realized it wasn’t good and elevated his legs in an attempt to trip. I have watched both plays several times and nothing is going to change my mind on that. Others have their right to a different opinion and I just repectfully disagree.

by DarinS on Oct 30, 2009 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you are correct about the rules, it just depends what side your looking at it from.

But I didn’t say that Wahoo ’s opinion invalidates his allegiance to his team.

I was just wondering why he was fighting so hard to make Bjorno’s point. Bjorno was on about 4 posts I read before this one, complaining about the trip as costing his team the game. Someone asked about the PI on Heath and he proceeded to bring out only the rules that benefited his arguement.

He also posted a STILL of the 25 yard long hold on the KO return of K Fox as proof of No holding. So by the time I had gotten here I had had enough of his whining.

Sorry BostonWahoo, I did’nt mean to upset you, but you were making more intellegent arguements than he had since he came trolling over here.

I would NEVER question another man’s allegiance to his team, except MaLoR , who we all know is a closet Steelers fan. I’ve seen him lurking around again. lol

by 1STstate bucco on Oct 31, 2009 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That is fair

I didn’t know the history, and I can understand your distain, hate trolls. If there is anyone trying to say this is why the Vikes lost then they better go watch the game again. They lost because they played a better team who really wasn’t even in sync on offense. Be thankful it was only a 10pt. loss. If Ben had ben on his A game instead of about his C game, this would have been a blowout.

by DarinS on Oct 31, 2009 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Quickest way to rile me up is to tell me to shut up. No problems though.

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Nov 2, 2009 9:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ooooo but I was steamin mad on Friday. :)

Guns don't kill people. Lamar Woodley kills people. (mattyc_77 on twitter)

by BostonWahoo on Nov 2, 2009 9:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well how sick was it to listen to the Fox coverage

I had to mute the t.v. Hearing Goose in the endzone, My god how can grown men love Farve, and Peterson so much, it made my ears bleed. They all reminded me of the Howard Cosell days, where he would get on a guy or teams bandwagon, and he sounded like a fan at home watching the game.

by BadChad on Oct 30, 2009 9:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Oh i know...

I remember one play, was like Favre escaped a sack and hit some short out for like 1-2 yards…

And they are like “just look at the poise and leadership favre shows to make a play”

nevermind it was a one yard gain that was underthrown… God.

by Mechem on Nov 1, 2009 11:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I was suprise, that the commentaters were on our side on the big ben late hit.

by BadChad on Oct 30, 2009 9:30 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Bad calls that take points off the board

The Steelers seem to be getting more than their share of points taken off the board this year by questionable referee calls on TD plays. I guess this shows that everyone, and especially the refs, is putting the black and gold under the microscope this season.

by Billy52 on Oct 30, 2009 10:51 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs