[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by Colts And Orioles

o


It mattered a lot, because it kept the Colts' chances to win that game alive.

It was a horrible call, it was in as crucial a situation as could be (late in the 4th quarter of a playoff game), and it went in the Colts' favor ........ to assert that referees should not be judged unless their awful calls cost a team a game (and/or that awful calls are not worth bringing up in regard to a discussion about catch rules if the team that was screwed wound up winning the game) is illogical.


o

Originally Posted by DrSpaceman

I still think it does matter whether it made a difference in the outcome, but I would grant that was a bad call as well and if Pitt had lost due to that call I can see why they would be mad.

The problem with the catch rules are they tried to come up with a rule that makes it "easy" for refs to interpret and in the process they get ridiculous results like what we saw yesterday or with Dez Bryant where obvious catches are ruled incomplete.

The play yesterday goes against everything else we see in the NFL with plays at the goal line where the play is over when the ball touches the goal line.

Now if you catch it IN the end zone, that's different.

o


Why would it matter less if the Steelers had won the game? It's not a horrible rule because the Steelers lost the game, it's a horrible rule because it's a horrible rule. Yesterday's call/application of the rule would have been just as horrible if the Steelers had kicked a field goal and won the game in overtime instead of throwing the INT that they did.

The most effective time to complain about the referees and/or of a questionable rule is after a win. Complaining about the officiating/rules after a loss if often shrugged off as sour grapes. Complaining about the officiating/rules after a win cannot be written off as such.


o