Steelers vs Cardinals Super Bowl

MrBishop

Well-Known Member
I'll stick to doing it in traffic, thanks.
Considering the number of idiots on the road, I'm surprised that you can still speak. I swear that my idiot-magnet is stuck at "On" recently...

Recently = starting the moment the first snow-flake hit the streets back in October.
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
Considering the number of idiots on the road, I'm surprised that you can still speak. I swear that my idiot-magnet is stuck at "On" recently...

Recently = starting the moment the first snow-flake hit the streets back in October '85


Fixed it for ya
 
You know the game was great and all, but I think there were shades of what happened in SB XL. Nothing as blatant, but did you notice that EVERY time the Cards o-line held, it got called, but I think the Stealers got called one time and with that much maligned o-line, I am sure they held more than that. Then at the end when they called Warner's "fumble" and subsequent Pittsburgh recovery, they did not even review it and let the Stealers line up and kneel.

I don't believe the game is fixed, but I do believe the refs are biased, and it would not at all surprise me if they were instructed to be so in both games. It really disgusts me, but they are playing to the market. Pittsburgh is the most popular NFL team, therefore it helps the NFL for them to prevail. Had the game been Arizona vs Baltimore, there would have been no bias as both teams are small market and largely unpopular, but I think then the Cowboys, Steelers, Packers, and maybe a few other teams are in the big one the refs are encouraged to give them preferential treatment and try to make it look legit.

Bottom line is that the Cardinals could still have won, and failed to do what it takes, but the Stealers have had help twice now in my opinion.
 

Inkara1

Well-Known Member
That "fumble" you speak of, at least to my eyes on the TV replays, actually was a fumble.
 
That "fumble" you speak of, at least to my eyes on the TV replays, actually was a fumble.


I agree, but it was close enough it should have been reviewed. Close enough that it might have had a 1% chance of being an incomplete pass, but yet, the NFL crew did not even pretend to care.
 

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
I agree, but it was close enough it should have been reviewed. Close enough that it might have had a 1% chance of being an incomplete pass, but yet, the NFL crew did not even pretend to care.

Because...being on the field and all...they knew.
 

Inkara1

Well-Known Member
Well, it also was within 2 minutes and the booth upstairs looked at it and didn't tell the refs to have a look-see.
 

Professur

Well-Known Member
I'll be honest, it didn't look like an incomplete pass to me. But then, the earlier fumble that was called imcomplete didn't look like one to me either.

I'm no fan of refs getting to see the reviews. Call it as you see it and get on with the game already. Lord knows they've got enough officials looking on.
 
Top