Let's be clear: "the call" didn't cost Miami the game

[MaineDolFan]

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.

[Cathal]

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.

[Pappy13]

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.

[hordman]

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.

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.

[Brian]

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.

[MaineDolFan]

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.

[Brian]

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.

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.

[Pappy13]

Personally, for me, I would rather cause my own luck rather than be subjected to the chance of luck altering my outcome.

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?

[Phishfan]

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.

[masterfins]

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.

[MaineDolFan]

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?

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.

[Dave Gray]

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.

[MaineDolFan]

Miami isn't as good as Pittsburgh. 

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.

[dolfan13]

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.

[Pappy13]

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

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.