There is so much to say. First, thank you for your comments. Secondly, the refs on the field should not have called a touchdown. It was clearly a somewhat controversial play. You, of course, are right that the evidence should be indisputable to overturn a call on the field. The views that we saw that were provided by NBC were not anywhere close to being indisputable. Thirdly, I am not an Arizona Cardinals fan. I just want to see a good football game. One that is not filled with controversy. Mark Warner’s fumble that gave the ball to the Pittsburgh Steelers was yet another controversial play. Before that, there was an intentional grounding call that was missed against Ben Roethlisberger (not the one that he was clearly outside the pocket again a couple plays earlier). The controversy was not isolated to just Pittsburgh. The holding in the end zone was also questioned. I’m not sure that was a classic takedown. I think the offensive player just got run over.

The bottom line for me is that this was supposed to be a Super Bowl and neither team play particularly well. Yuck!

Picture 36/44

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/gallery/football/2008/flash.htm?gid=691&aid=4136

The burden of proof in these cases is not to prove the call on the field is correct but instead to prove that the call on the field is wrong…

Either way here you go you whiners….. the pic with two feet down

http://www.steelersdepot.com/blog/2009/02/picture-of-santonio-holmes-with-2-two-feet-down-for-touchdown/

I didn’t think that Santonio Holmes had both feet down. I think that it was a great effort but I didn’t see convincing evidence last night. The bottom-line is that I didn’t think that either team was Super. Both teams played a mediocre game. I wish the Steelers had lost because I just don’t like them.

Thanks for your comments.