The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I have been listening to people whine all morning about how the Cardinals were robbed by the refs.  To me, this is no more than sour grapes.  I thought the refs did a good job.  The Cardinals committed a lot of penalties and the refs can't be held to blame for calling them.

I would like to know what people who had no particular stake in the outcome thought of the officiating.

I thought for the most part they let them play.   Nothing jumped out at me, but as with most games I do not put much weight into blaming the refs.  Even if the refs made a bad call or two against the Cards.  They were in the lead with 2+ minutes to go & Pitts had to drive the field to win.

It was horrible.

I thought it was atrocious, as well.

Could you be more specific?

The officiating was FINE.  Their may have been a bad call or 2 but you have this in every game.  Stop WHINING (Cardinals fans) and play defense! ;)

The only one that was defeinitely bad in my opinion was the roughing the passer. Other than that ... they were at least a judgment call.

There were a few bad calls, but nothing that altered the outcome of the game.

Warner's INT in the endzone was a 10 point game-changer.  When you make mistakes like that, you lose football games.

I thought the officiating was pretty bad - i.e. perfectly in line with most of the games I've seen this year.

I didn't really have a stake in the game. I don't like either team, but neither do I dislike them. I don't mind the Steelers playing "dirty". Sure, there's a limit, but overall most of it comes from just playing the game with a lot of energy and edge - and that makes for an exciting spectacle and, usually, good results. I wish the Dolphins would play a little closer to the edge on D. Anyway, point is, I think I was about as neutral as you can get.

My main gripe is consistency. If bumping the quarterback 1-2 steps after he releases (with the defender's head down) is a roughing penalty, slamming the other quarterback 2-3 steps after he releases (with the defending looking right at the f'n pass) should have been one as well.

Continuing with the consistency gripe, the refs allowed VERY rough play for most of the game - both during the play and after - without throwing a flag. Then all of a sudden they start throwing flags for minor shit. Really, I don't care what "line" the refs take, but they need to stick to it. (OK, so I do care - I'd rather they allow more physical stuff, especially all the stuff that isn't likely to cause an injury).

I thought a lot of the flags thrown were for ticky-tack crap, but mostly my gripe is just the consistency of the officiating.

Bad game, bad year. (With regards to refereeing - great game, great year otherwise!)

How can you say that when you also raised the question about the last cardinals play? Time was still on the clock. One more play may have been the game winner.

I only raised the question of why it wasn't challenged by the booth.  I don't think the challenge would have been overturned, and it was ultimately the right call.  But it seems everything even remotely questionable goes to the booth for a 2 minute review.

The one call that was a no-call and could've made a difference was the excessive celebrating by Santonio Holmes.  He clearly used the ball as a prop after his TD and it was on TV and everything.  That would've been 15 yards on the kickoff.  ...that could've been a game-changer, because you're not in a position to have to go hail-mary as quickly.

^ Was he still on the field then or had he returned to the sidelines? (I don't know the exact rule but maybe it made a difference.)

Hmmm....not sure.  I think he was on the field.....at least in the corner of the endzone.  He used the ball like a shaker, sprinkled talcum on his hands, and then threw his hands up, like Lebron James does.

I think it's an undisputed 15 yards.

You and I disagree on that. The Steeler had his hand on the ball but it did not come lose from Warner until after a forward motion from what I saw. That is why it looked like a shotput. Both hands are on the ball as Warner was trying to throw it.

OK...fine -- either way.

Even if it is overturned, they didn't have the time to get downfield, short of a miracle hail-mary.  I don't think it would've changed the outcome was my whole point.

Officiating was flat out terrible.

Late hit on big ben was a joke. Harrison not being ejected was a joke. The steelers not being called for holding until the 4th quarter was a joke, they were holding all night long. For the refs not to even review the warner fumble was terrible and to top it off Santonio Holmes doing his Lebron James imitation, using to ball as a prop should've been excessive celebration.

Last year the refs were a non-story. The past 2 super bowls the steelers have partcipated in the refs have almost been a bigger story than the actual game.  I probably know why the warner fumbled wasn'r reviewed, Terry McCaully and his crew had a reservation at Mons VENUS and didn't want to be late.

Your probably right, but I think the Cards have a better chance than most teams on a hail-mary play with Fitzgerald going up for a jump ball.  I think they should have been given that chance...looked like a forward pass to me.


QFT

You dont think Harrison being ejected could have had an affect?

Yeah, I suppose it could've -- I don't know.  Anything can technically affect the outcome.

But, there wasn't that one, blatant bad call that cost Arizona the game.  The biggest play in the history of the Super Bowl cost them the game.

The refs blew.If they are gonna call stupid they need to call it both ways.There were only about 3-4 blocks in the back,holding,and outright tackling during the interception return before halftime.The roughing the passer was a joke,and Harrison shoulda been tossed.It was if the refs got together at the start of the 4th quarter and said,"shit!" "we need to even this up guys"because the Steelers didn't seem to get flagged until then.