The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

I understand everyone is up in arms about "the call" at the end of the game.  I am too.  Let's be clear, here, though.  That call did not cost Miami the game.

Miami recovers two turnovers and comes away with 6 points, two field goals.  I am more pissed about that.  Convert one of those two into a touchdown.  Just one.  Come away with 7 and not 6 and the game is tied and going to OT.  Come away with 10 and Miami wins.

Give Allen some help with Wallace.  Where is the safety help on that play?  The dude is the fastest WR in the league.  Limit Pittsburgh to a field goal on that drive versus a TD.  Miami wins.

Conservative play calling.  How many carries do you need into the teeth of Pittsburgh's defense before you know it ain't working?  Keeping the defense honest?  Really?  No one runs on the Steelers and everyone knows it.  Open up the play book a little more.

We can bellyache all we want about "the call."  It didn't cost Miami the game.

How bad of a call does it need to be to say a call caused ANY team to lose? Granted, everyone in sports says the refs never cost them the game, it's always their failed execution that loses the game. However, when there is about 2 minutes left in a game, and you let the other team take the lead, that's pretty close to causing you to lose the game.

Yea, I'm upset that we couldn't have gotten some touch downs when we have such short field position, but, you can't always convert on those. Every team has a crappy offensive series, even in short yardage.

At some point, you have to say, the refs sucked, the call turned the game into someone else's favor, and leave it at that.

Actually the correct statement would be "the call" didn't NECESSARILY cost Miami the game.

Yes, it's possible they would still have lost even if the call was correct, but wouldn't you have like to have had a chance to SEEN if that's what happened?  It's also possible that Miami does win the game if they get the call correct.  Quite possible actually.

Sure you can play the "What if" on every single play of the game, but the fact of the matter is that those other "What ifs" were determined by the players, not the refs.  That's a HUGE difference.

this is definitely correct.  the call AFFECTED the outcome of the game.  whether or not MIA got the ball on their own 20 or not.  the call changed the outcome.  maybe MIA goes 3 and out and punts to PIT and the DEF holds and doesn't allow a game-winning FG at the end.

the call was total BS. Rapistbergher and the Pittsburgh Referees won the game, fair and square.

So since the dolphins didn't take advantage of every opportunity it had on sunday its ok for the refs to blow calls at the end of the game? I've never understood that point of view.

Sure we could have made more plays, but Pittsburgh is also paid to play and they're defense is pretty good (arguably the best in the league). When you play a team as good as Pittsburgh they're going to force you to make mistakes sometimes. That's football. Bottom line is that over the course of 60 minutes we played well enough to beat Pittsburgh on that day. That's all you can ask of the team.

Personally, for me, I would rather cause my own luck rather than be subjected to the chance of luck altering my outcome.  When I'm fighting, example, I would rather knock and / or tap someone out when I have the chance versus hoping the people judging the fight see it in my direction.  If I do something that screws my chance to end a fight early only to lose on points, who do I have to blame?  Me.  That's it.

When you place yourself in a position that relies on someone else in order to accomplish a goal (in this case the refs), you're asking for trouble.

I don't understand the focusing on one play of a game with just over 2:00 left...versus not taking advantage of the other 58:00 that each team has.  That call was important, sure.  However, had Miami done it's job, it would not have been AS important.

Forcing a fumble and recovering it in the endzone is taking advantage. That sounds like a knockout punch to me.

So your fine that if the match is dead even at the end of the match the ref saying the other guy won because he's from Pittsburgh.  Is that what you're saying?

Many things cost Miami the game. "The call" wasn't the sole factor but it was one of them so technically it did cost us the game.

I can respect the call that was made, and it was not the reason the Fins lost.  First off, once again poor kick return coverage set the ball up in Miami territory to start the drive, then Pitt marched right down to the one yard line.  My thought from the begining was that it was going to be Pitt's ball on the one yard line because the side judge signaled touchdown immediately and started blowing the whistle, so...I would have thought it wouldn't matter who recovered the ball at that point since the play was over.  My only question is that in the Ref's explanation he made an issue that the replay would have to clearly show who recovered the ball, normally an initial call must be made, THEN video evidence must be available to overturn the initial ruling.  Why didn't one of the referee's make an initial call on which team recovered the ball in the endzone??  There was one Ref who stayed with the play to see who came out with the ball.

Did I say that?  Weird.  I don't see anywhere where that I said that.

23-22 is not "dead even."  Sorry.  23 is higher than 22.

Had Miami scored a touchdown, just one, on one of the other forced fumbles in Q1 we would not be having this discussion.  Did the "guy from Pittsburgh" also alter Miami's ability to put points on the board when they (Miami) recovered two fumbles around Pittsburgh's 20 yard line within the first five minutes of the game (and couldn't must a 1st down on either drive, much less more than a field goal)?

Additionally, Pittsburgh kicked a field goal to go ahead.  Miami had over 2:00 to get themselves into field goal range.  The play calling on that sequence was awful.  A screen pass on 3rd and 8 to your fullback?  Really?

I'm not one for excuses.  Blaming this loss on the merit of one call = excuses.

Maine,

Miami isn't as good as Pittsburgh.  We did what we needed to win the game.

We played a superior team, kept the game close, and then forced a fumble to prevent their winning score.  There will always be things that any team could've done earlier in the game.  But we won that game on the field, and a bad call screwed us out of it.

I believe Miami showed that they aren't as far away from being on par with able to keep up with Pittsburgh. 

It seems as though some people have blinders on regarding how talented the Dolphins are.  This isn't a middle of the road team.  This team has a chance to do some real damage.  Miami wasn't lucky to be where they were yesterday, they were in that position because that is how good they are.

whether folks like it or not, there is a certain part of luck involved in football that is just part of the game.

it was an evenly played game all the way down to the wire. true, miami had ample opportunity to score td's instead of fg's, but you can't just look at the final score and assume things would've played out differently based on that.

the steelers have the better team mostly because they have a better qb. however, the offense is still getting it's legs back underneath it from ben's absence. that steelers team from yesterday is pretty even with miami's team. they can play 10 times and you will have close outcomes coming down to a few plays.

right now, miami's team maybe isn't as experienced to make the key plays needed to beat the elite teams, much less beating that steelers team helped to 3 points through some very good luck.

Oh you want to talk facts do you?  Sorry I thought we were playing "Hypothetically speaking".  The score was 22-20 Miami at the time the Ref decided he liked Pittsburgh better.

Essentially, this can be summarized as "If you don't win decisively, you deserve to lose."

Losing to one unlucky play is bad, and being more than one play ahead is safer, I agree.  But a close game does not excuse poor officiating.  Do you remember the first Holyfield-Lewis fight, where Lewis clearly dominated the fight only to have it declared a draw?  Was that perfectly reasonable?

The major problem I have with your position is that nobody cares about bad officiating in a blowout.  That last INT by Harrison bounced off of the ground (another blown call by the refs), but nobody cared because the game was over.  Likewise, nobody would care about the blown call on the TD by Big Ben if MIA was winning by 3 touchdowns.  So basically, if we take your position that you can't blame the refs for a game-altering mistake, the refs have no accountability at all.

The only time that the officials have the spotlight on them is during important calls in close games.  They should be held responsible for their actions, particularly in those scenarios.

^ Nobody cared on that last play if it was an INT or not because it was 4th, so Steelers ball either way.

Clean and simple, if you play in such a way that you leave your result down to someone else, you haven't played well enough, you need to control your own destiny so that when those bad calls don't go your way it doesn't matter.

There was little wrong with the call, the ruling on the field was touchdown so the fact the ball came loose was irrelevant, until under review the touchdown was reversed. It's unfortunate but had it happened in the first quarter you wouldn't be as annoyed. Maine is right, although the call appeared to cost us the game, you can't leave it to chance, otherwise sometimes things don't go your way.

Right, but it was still a blown call.

The point is that bad officiating is ignored when it's irrelevant.

Maine, I am totally 100% with you on this one. That call absolutely DID NOT COST the Dolphins the game. The Dolphins cost the Dolphins the game.

Let's just assume for the moment that the call was 100% in the Dolphins' favor - that they not only over-turned the TD, but the Dolphins were also awarded possession of the ball. This means that it would have been Miami ball at their own 20 yard line.

The remaining situation doesn't even come close to guaranteeing a Miami victory - and I mean not even close. There were over 2 minutes left in the contest (2:40-ish?). Pittsburgh had all three timeouts - Miami only had 1 timeout (because they blew their final time out to regroup after their misfortune). You had only a 2-point lead, against a stout defensive unit who had been holding you in check in the running game all game long with 2:30+ on the clock and all three time outs. Could Miami have gotten a first down?

Then if they didn't get the first down and had to punt it away, you had Randle El who could have provided the Steelers a decent return. Even if he didn't and would have been tackled at the point of the catch (or fair caught it), the Dolphins still would have faced a two-time winning super bowl QB with at least one timeout remaining and anywhere from 2:00 to 1:30 remaining on the clock with possibly needing only 30-40 yards to be in Reed's FG range to still win the game by 1 point.

So - even IF the Dolphins would have gotten the ball at their own 20, there were so many factors and variables left to determine that you cannot conclude that the Dolphins would have won the game if the call had turned out in Miami's favor.

And - it should also be mentioned that the Dolphins did get the ball back with over 2:00 left in the game!!! They could have mounted a small drive to get into carpenter's FG range, and booted home the game-winner (he's been insanely on fire as of late, and could have drilled home a 50+ yarder if necessary). Instead, a clock-eating draw up the middle is inexplicably called, and Fasano drops a ball that hits him right in the gut.

Also - the Dolphins connected on five field goals - FIVE. That's 15 points and a busy day for a kicker. Had any one of those trips to the red zone (there were 3 trips to the red zone that led to FGs - maybe even 4) been converted into a TD and not an FG, then the Steelers would have had to go for it on 4th and goal from the half-yard line - and there's no guarantee that they would have been able to get a half yard.

So, as the title of this thread boldly states, "The Call" did NOT cost Miami the game.

Well now we can all sleep more sound tonight knowing that you have made your ruling.  The only person on this board more biased then the Dolphins fans. LOL

I just don't understand why every thread I comment on about this is barely read and then I'm attacked by the Pappy13's of the TDMMC-world.

Why can't you guys try to see this rationally? Pappy13 there is no way in hell you read this post in under 2 minutes. Try reading the full post and then formulate your response.

it wasn't just that it was a blown call... it was a blown call that gave the steelers 3 points.

evenly played game, you hand another team 3 points and that's the difference.

Actually - it didn't hand the Steelers 3 points. It in fact took away the original 6 + xtra point away from the Steelers.

Lost in all of this is the fact that Sparano did challenge the play - it wasn't a review from upstairs that "screwed" the Dolphins. And, when you challenge the play, everything about the play is reviewed (the spot, the possession, the breaking or not breaking of the plane of the goal line, and etc..). He should have challenged it, definitely, as it was an obvious non-TD. But he did challenge it, leading to the sequence of events that unfolded afterwards. And, he did win the challenge - so instead of being down 27-22 and needing a TD to win, the Dolphins were down 23-22 needed an FG to win. So, the challenge actually helped the Dolphins.

The Dolphins, however, did not help the Dolphins by calling a draw up the middle with no timeouts left to start the comeback drive.

A Steelers fan told me this morning that we got hosed.  'Nuff said.

Actually nobody cared because it was not ruled an INT.

what are the guidelines to "visual evidence in recovery"? seems pretty wide open to referee interpretation. clearly the dolphin player emerges with the football. obviously that isn't visual evidence, so either they need to be more specific in that or they need to add this as an extension to out of bounds unrecovered fumbles through the endzone rule already in the books.

I'm reading a whole lot of ifs in this thread. IF the Queen had ball she'd be the King.

My understanding is, that the Dolphins player running around with the ball is not visual evidence of a fumble recovery, a ref dragging players off a pile to find who has possesion is the evidence, but in a situation with lots of bodies on top there is no way from the review that you can see who recovered the ball.

Had the touchdown not been ruled, the possesion of the fumble would have been determined in the pile, leading either to a Steelers TD or a Dolphins touchback. The touchdown ruling meant the whistles blew and the recovery of possesion was not important......except of course until the review overturned the call and it occured to them that no one checked for possesion which is why they needed to review film for it, before determining that it was not determinable :-)

Again, one thing that I am not hearing anyone speak to:

Pittsburgh kicks the field goal and goes up by 1.  There is over 2:26 left in the game.

2:26.  In football terms, that is a loooooooooooooooooooong time.

What does Miami do with that 2:26?  

1st and 10 from the 29:  Ronnie Brown up the middle in to the teeth of the Steelers defense for a two yard gain.

Miami is now rushing around like someone just announced the field is on fire in order to get another play off before the 2:00 minute warning.  Because that's smart.

2nd and 8 from the 31:  Henne incomplete to Fasano.

Two minute warning (1:58).

3rd and 8 from the 31:  Henne to POLITE.  On THIRD AND EIGHT.  2 yard gain.  Oh, boy.  The Steelers defense is on their heals now.  We just threw a completion to LOUSAKA POLITE.  

4th and 6th from the 33:  Incomplete to Ronnie Brown (which, if caught, would have still left Miami 3 yards short of the 1st down).

Talk all you want about getting hosed.  This call didn't cost Miami the game.

Quarter 1:  Recovered fumble at the Pittsburgh 22.  Three plays later, they've gained ONE YARD and kick a field goal.

Quarter 1:  Recovered another fumble at the Pittsburgh 21.  Play 1, Williams for no gain.  Play 2, Williams for 8 yards.  Play three Williams for no gain.  Field goal.

There are three offensive series (two in Q1, one in Q4) where Miami managed 14 yards in 11 plays.  That is a stellar 1.2 yards per play average.  

Or do we want to talk about the very shoddy kick / punt returns that seemed to give Pitt the ball close to mid field almost every kick?

Or Hartline's "here, take it" fumble right into Farrior's chest?  That directly resulted in a touch down.

Or the kick from Carpenter that landed on the ten and Pittsburgh returned to the 47?  You know...the play right before Roethlisberger completed a 53 yard bomb to Mike Wallace for a touchdown?  The same play where the safety misread the coverage and didn't cheat over to help?

Yep.  Let's blame it on one call.  Good idea!

It's not just that you commented, it's the way in which you commented in ALL CAPS as if to say I HAVE SPOKEN!  Besides it's not just this post, but your posts in general have tended to be very biased and I don't lend a whole lot of credence to them anymore.

After reading your whole post, I'll just repeat what I already said in that it didn't necessarily cost us the game, but it sure did change the way the final 2:30 played out and could have changed the outcome, so to declare it DID NOT COST the game is clearly incorrect. You don't know that anymore than we know it DID COST us the game.  What makes your view anymore valid than ours?

That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

I usually don't like to do all of this rebuttling after a post - but since you shared your thoughts:

1. I did not comment in "ALL CAPS" - I think i used caps for a total of 5 words in that 300-400 word essay.
2. Of course my posts tend to be "very biased". So are yours, Maine's, Dave's - everyone posts with bias.
3. I'm not posting so that you can lend credence to my posts - or that anyone will lend credence to my posts. I post here for my own benefit, and my own benefit alone.
4. Stating that [The Call] "DID NOT COST" the Dolphins the game is not "clearly incorrect". It did NOT cost the Dolphins the game. What about my entire scenario analysis of what could have happened if the Dolphins did actually get the ball back at their 20 yard line? That is one possible scenario from an infinite number of possible scenarios that may have happened. My view is valid (and possibly more valid than anyone else's as you've suggested) because there are just too many variables that you cannot account for that could have led to a Dolphins victory - you can't simply throw all of those unknown variables away because one of the infinite number of outcomes turned out to be what happened on Sunday afternoon.

If "the call" did indeed cost the Dolphins the game - why did they even line up to play after "the call", if it was such a foregone conclusion? Because there was still 2:30 left on the play clock - plenty of time for anything to happen. The Dolphins could not make it happen in that time frame. Their fault, not Gene Skerator's fault.

I think after a few days when this has died down some that you'll realize what the real culprit(s) of the loss yesterday were. You can't just pin losses on a late-game call - the Dolphins have a lot of issues to address before playing @ Cincinnati next week.

I did not see the game or play in question but.....

In every game both team makes a huge number of mistakes that affect the outcome of each game. 

In every game the refs make a small number of mistakes that affect the outcome of the game.  Fans typically dwell on the few that hurt their own team and are almost completely blind to the ones that aid their team.  In an effort to minimize the number by the refs, in 1986 the league implemented instant replay. 

To focus on one play in which some view as the wrong call in the game as the reason for a lose is to lose sight of the 50-100 mistakes made by players and coaches during the game that could have also won the game. 

The refs like the coaches and players are humans who make mistakes.  Of the three, the refs by far and away do a better job at their job, than either the coaches or players do at theirs. 

While there is a point to be made that MIA did nothing with the ball when they did get it, surely you acknowledge that there's a huge difference between needing-to-go-50-yards-in-2-minutes and needing-to-get-one-first-down?  The second down playcall (and I hesitate to even call it that) should be a clear example of that.

The play-by-play from nfl.com confirms your account, but I think the NFL went back and scrubbed the game record after-the-fact.

If you watch the game highlights replay (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010102401/2010/REG7/steelers@dolphins/analyze/box-score#tab:watch), the official clearly says, "Interception by Pittsburgh... first down."

Not to worry, you won't see any more rebuttals from me.

The NFL doesn't "scrub" an interception off the books. If that was the case they could go back and "scrub" any wrong call such as the one we are discussion. It was changed by the guys on the field, we just didn't get to hear the benefit of that from the TV announcers.

Except for 1 big difference.  The game is being PLAYED by the players.  Their mistakes or non-mistakes is what I expect to determine the outcome of a game.  Any game.  That's a given and as it should be.

Mistakes by the refs are not a given, nor are they as it should be.  Mistakes by the referees should not determine the outcome of games even though they are unavoidable.  When they do or at least are reasonably perceived that they do, people bitch about it.  That doesn't mean I think we should be given a win, but it does mean I have a legitimate reason to be upset about it.  Don't try to play it off that both things are equal, they are not.

Perhaps if you used logic throughout the whole post.
For instance you talk about Miami getting the fumble,l and the time left with the number of Steelers timeouts, yet you refer to the usage of Miami's timeout to regroup leaving them with one( which would not have happened if they got the fumble, so they would have had two to Pittsburgh's 3).
This is your problem. Even when you posture like you are trying to make and informed and logical arguement, you take swipes at Miami, even when it goes against your arguement.
No one respects your opinions because you are a incessant troll who brings nothing to any discussion on this board but vitriol about the Doplhins.

You make valid points. But you are not taking into account how emotionally deflating to a team to stop another team late in the game and only to have your efforts crapped on by a highly questionable call.
Now the Steelers are pumped up as they can taste victory and Miami is trying to regroup from the fact that they went from almost locking this game up, to having to mount a last inute drive against one of the top defenses in the league.
If you do not think the huge emotional swing on both teams made a difference, then you are mistaken.
Officials should help maintain the the flow and pace of the game, not drastically alter the flow of a game with bad calls.

Nope, we would have had one timeout. The one we used was our last one.

I don't see how you can say that the call didn't cost us the game.  Had the call been ruled correctly, the Dolphins have the lead and the ball with 2 minutes left.  To still give Pit the lead not only cost the Fins directly, but then asked the Fins to do the very thing they're worst at, drive the length of the field with no timeouts against arguably the best defense in football.

Did you follow the link I posted?

The OFFICIAL announced that it was an interception by Pittsburgh.  There was no review of the play prior to the Steelers' next snap.  Yet the INT magically disappeared from the box score.

They scrubbed it, plain and simple.

One thing that did piss me off about the touchdown call is that one of the refs that called it a touchdown actually could only see the quaterbacks back on the play, he couldn't even tell if the ball broke the plane while in his possession, he shouldn't have made the call.

I think the call cost Miami the game and here's why:
All of the things that Mainedolfan describes,  shows all of the miscues and mistakes that the dolphins did that day.  He also describes how pittsburgh could do anything they wanted on offense,  score at will.  but what he forgets is what did the dolphins accomplish that day.    They held mendenhall to under 40yards rushing
miami scored more points then all other teams that played against them (19) being the highest at that point.  (against the toughest defense in the nfl). 
and the most important,  Miami stopped pitt more times on offense than pitt did to miami.  miami was leading 22-20!!!!!after all those reasons they still were ahead. 
they then stop ben in the endzone and recover the ball.   how do you not know that they could've run out the clock???   (they had the momemtum!!).  here is a team at that point who could've beat pitt,  beat minnesota, beat green bay, beat buffalo a close loss to the jets that they could've won. the only convincing loss this year is to the patriots.  this is not a 3-3 team.  they should be 5-1!!.    yes they had alot of mistakes that day,  but pitt had more.... or they would of been leading at the time of "the CALL"

There are a number of things that infuriated me even before we got screwed by Mr. Pittsburgh.  The playcalling was so gutless and stupid that I was looking for Dave Wannstedt.  How many times did the Dolphins throw a 2 yard pass on 3rd and long?  Why didn't they try a two point conversion after the touchdown?  Why did they not go for it on 4th and a  foot?  Their two minute "offense", and I use that term generously, reminded me of Marty Schottenheimer.   If this is all that Henne and the offense can do, then let's start the hell over!

I agree the call didn't cost us the game, but I'm pissed that I can't remember a single time that a blown call gave the Dolphins a win, but I can think of three or four very questionable calls that Pittsburgh got that gave them wins.  Ask Cardinal fans about two in one Superbowl or Seahawk fans about another one, or Raider fans about a famous one.  Then to see the damn Steelers fans gloating about this in the Miami newspapers' forums just rubs salt in the wound--which is exactly what they want.  The bottom line is that the Almighty Steelers barely beat a pathetic, useless,  Dolphins team with the help from their homey ref, and now they act like this is some major accomplishment.   

You're not supposed to go for 2 until the 4th quarter.  It's conventional coaching wisdom.  There are too many variables in play to try to predict more than a quarter ahead, so it's better to just take the points.

I've seen the play, but think about your theory for a minute. Have you ever heard of the NFL taking a play away after the fact? As a matter of fact I believe they are on record saying there is nothing that can be done after the fact. It is far more likely that my theory is the right one, that we just didn't get the benefit of seeing one of the other officials wave the call off (I didn't need to see your video link because I watched the game and know the play).

If you saw the play, then why are you talking about the TV announcers?  They have nothing to do with it.

If an official announces one result of a play on the PA system, then later changes that result without making another announcement on the PA system or initiating a review, how is that in any way different from surreptitiously scrubbing the result?

I'm talking about announcers because who else would say after the commercial break that the call had been overturned?

It is different because it is still part of the game. The NFL does not change calls after a game is over as you are theorizing.

Oh really?

I know you "don't need to see the link because you watched the game and know the play" but I strongly suggest you check the video (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010102401/2010/REG7/steelers@dolphins/analyze/box-score#tab:watch).  (Play-by-play recap from NFL.com.)

MIA has the ball on their own 33, 4th and 6.
4-6-MIA 33 (1:33) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 7-C.Henne pass incomplete short right to 23-R.Brown (97-J.Worilds).

Harrison "intercepts" the ball and is downed at the 32.
1-10-MIA 32 (1:26) 7-B.Roethlisberger kneels to MIA 33 for -1 yards.

If the pass was actually incomplete, why was the ball at the MIA 32 instead of the 33?

Fine. I'm tired of this. The NFL has a practice of changing game stats after the fact now. Fantasy gamers beware.

Not that I care, but that's not really evidence.  Often the ball will change yard markers on a change of possession because of the way the box score is recorded.  It happened in the Minnesota game as well.  The Vikings went for it on 4th and 6 from the 27 and threw an incomplete pass.  Miami was then 1st and 10 from the 28.  The box score even mentions there was a change in yard line due to a change in possession.

4-6-MIA 27 (:38) (Shotgun) 4-B.Favre pass incomplete short middle to 81-V.Shiancoe. WATCH HIGHLIGHT

1-10-MIA 28 (:33) Change in yard line due to change of possession. 7-C.Henne kneels to MIA 27 for -1 yards.

It happened again in the Packers game:

4-1-GB 27 (1:34) 23-R.Brown up the middle to GB 27 for no gain (26-C.Peprah). Yard marker changed due to change of possession. Miami challenged the first down ruling, and the play was Upheld. (Timeout #1 at 01:26.) WATCH HIGHLIGHT

1-10-GB 26 (1:26) 32-B.Jackson left end to GB 25 for -1 yards (70-K.Langford).

It's possible that it's pure coincidence that Harrison was downed at the 32 after an announced interception, but I'm skeptical.

"The call" did cost us the game.  Not scoring a TD with those early turnovers cost us the game.  Having a 2 minute offense that couldn't do Jack at the end of the game cost us the game.  All of that stuff cost us the game.

So apparently this revisionism is nothing unusual.

http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/20717/fitzpatricks-legend-growing-in-buffalo

"Fitzpatrick, a career backup who has surfaced as a starter here or there in his six NFL seasons, posted a career afternoon in an overtime loss to the Baltimore Ravens. His numbers actually got a tad better Wednesday.

An NFL statistical correction gave Fitzpatrick 8 more passing yards, nudging him that much closer to Peyton Manning for the league's best passer rating.

The play in question originally had been ruled a 17-yard loss on a completion to Roscoe Parrish. It was changed to a 9-yard loss because a review showed the ball had been batted."

I'm not sure what a batted ball does to add yardage. That has me for a loop. What also has me for a loop is I went to look at the play by play to see how they account for this, but I don't see any plays ruled as either a 17 yard loss or a 9 yard loss.

Oh man it just keeps on getting better and better.  Has everyone seen this?

http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_football_dolphins/2010/10/ask-mike-can-you-guess-who-was-the-line-judge-on-sundays-crew.html

I'll just quote the part that is the most interesting to me.

"Now, here’s another officiating tidbit that should send you off the deep edge. Sunday’s line judge was Ron Marinucci, who is from New Jersey and, according to Steelers coach Mike Tomlin, “immediately ran up to talk” to Steratore as he was in the replay booth. It was Tomlin who alerted Marinucci the lack of a clear fumble recovery “would potentially be an issue.” He mentioned this to Marinucci, who reminded Steratore of the rule that wound up costing the Dolphins dearly.

If Marinucci’s name sounds familiar, it should. He was in the same line judge capacity on Oct. 25, 2009 (nearly a year to the day earlier) working on referee John Parry’s crew, when Darren Sharper’s goal-line fumble on an interception return was ruled a Saints touchdown instead of a Dolphins touchback. The famous Sports Illustrated photo below clearly showed the ball dropping from Sharper’s grasp at least a full yard short of the goal line – Ted Ginn Jr. and Anthony Fasano combined to knock it out – but Marinucci (No. 107) was standing 3 yards beyond the goal line and well out of bounds as he made the improper call that went against the Dolphins.

That time, you’ll remember, video review didn’t even wipe out the Saints touchdown. The officials, lacking a conclusive angle that SI’s photographer somehow was able to get, let the TD stand, and the Saints went on to a 46-34 win en route to their first Super Bowl title."

Man, who pissed in Ron Marinucci's wheaties anyway?  Whomever it was needs to go apologize. LOL

WAIT it gets better!!!!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/504370-miami-dolphins-chad-hennes-final-pass-vs-steelers-ruled-interception?source=rss_teams_Miami_Dolphins

Even though video replay has showed that Harrison did not intercept Henne on that 4th down play, since on the field they ruled it an interception and it was never reviewed (even though it happened within 2 minutes of the end of the game, it doesn't have to be challenged to be reviewed), it goes as an INT.  So Harrison gets credit for an INT that never happened and Henne gets charged with an INT that never happened.

The NFL is now in the business of making shit up as they go.

Looks like that crew was having a banner day.