# Superbowl 44 Congradulations REFS



## dogs31 (Feb 27, 2006)

Apparently the NFL Refs were paid by the Saints to fix the Super Bowl for them. I am hoping that Indy demands a rematch.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Uhhh, I saw no bad calls...and I'm a Colts fan.


----------



## Smthkd (Sep 1, 2004)

I wanted the Colts to win too but I thought it was just a darn good game! The Saints really shined tonight! Congrats to the NO Saints Superbowl 44 champs!

BTW: Its Congra*T*ulations with a "T" not "D"...


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

:scratchin


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

dogs31 said:


> Apparently the NFL Refs were paid by the Saints to fix the Super Bowl for them. I am hoping that Indy demands a rematch.


Sore loser (not looser)...also, it's congratulations (_not_ congradulations).


----------



## dogs31 (Feb 27, 2006)

Just kidding Congrads Saints


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

dogs31 said:


> Apparently the NFL Refs were paid by the Saints to fix the Super Bowl for them. I am hoping that Indy demands a rematch.


Can you list some examples?

I thought by far this was one of the better officiated Super Bowls in a long time. In fact, in my opinion, the only call that was even remote close to bad was the Personal Foul against the Saints there the end of the game.

The refs in this game, really let the players decide whom was the champ.


----------



## dogs31 (Feb 27, 2006)

I am over it. Here's to NASCAR season!!!!!!


----------



## Smthkd (Sep 1, 2004)

dogs31 said:


> I am over it. Here's to NASCAR season!!!!!!


 NOW where talking! The ShootOut in Daytona got me hyped!:lol:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Can you list some examples?
> 
> I thought by far this was one of the better officiated Super Bowls in a long time. In fact, in my opinion, the only call that was even remote close to bad was the Personal Foul against the Saints there the end of the game.
> 
> The refs in this game, really let the players decide whom was the champ.


Agree - one of the least controversial games in the playoffs.

By the way - Indianapolis never thought of contesting anything, nor had reason to.


dogs31 said:


> Apparently the NFL Refs were paid by the Saints to fix the Super Bowl for them. I am hoping that Indy demands a rematch.


That is just Sooooooooooooo Funny.

Guess that interception Manning threw was a mirage....perhaps if they look at it under Instant Replay....:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

I thought they called the game a little loose... but I didn't think that it contributed to the Saints victory by any means. The 5 yards of contact at the line was often stretched out to 7 or 8, and I thought there were a few times that Saints defenders were getting there just a TOUCH early (Not sure if the Colts were doing the same - they never seemed to be anywhere near the Saints receivers when they were catching the ball!).

Other than those couple of things that bugged me.... I didn't think it was poorly officiated. I'm one of those that thinks if it's a penalty in the regular season it should be a penalty in the postseason.. I don't like when refs put their whistles away and decide only to call the most blatant fouls. It's a pet peeve of mine... BUT, the game was called the same both ways, so I don't put any blame on the officiating - I just don't like it. 

As to the game... Sean Payton has some stones.... and his gambles really worked out. Going for it on 4th down at the goal line and not making it could have been a game changer. Instead, the Colts go conservative, try to run down the clock, punt it away, and the Saints still come away with a field goal. If the Saints put points on the board the first time and kick it off to the Colts, I think that the Colts probably try to generate at least a field goal in the last couple of minutes of the half. Instead, the Saints go in down by 4.

And the onside kick... If you give the Colts the ball on the Saints 45, and they take the short field and score a TD to go back up 10, momentum is all on the side of the Colts, and who knows what happens the rest of the way. Instead, (obviously), the Saints recover, drive down to tie it and the rest is history.

All in all, good game. Congrats to the Saints.

I haven't seen interviews with any players yet, but I saw the postgame interview with Jim Caldwell, and I thought he was very gracious in defeat. At one point, he said "We have to give the Saints all the credit - they did alot of things that we couldn't account for and they outplayed us". Pretty accurate summary of the game, I thought.

One last thing.... I really feel bad for Archie Manning in all this. He still lives in New Orleans, loves the Saints, and their winning the Superbowl should be a really happy day for him. Instead, he'll always remember that first Saints super bowl was at the expense of his son.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

compared to the last two SB the Stealers "won" This was a low penalty game. There was like 2 called?
SB XL had so many drive killing bad calls it was ridiculous, and as a Cardinals fan I'll never forget this non call:


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

machavez00 said:


> compared to the last two SB the Stealers "won" This was a low penalty game. There was like 2 called?


There were 8...

2 personal fouls, one on each team and different times.

1 holding on the return against the Saints.

1 False Start on the Saints.

1 Illegal formation on the Colts.

2 False Starts on the Colts

1 Offensive Pass Interference on the Colts (Garcon right at the end of the game).

I can't believe in a game where holding can be called on darn near every play there wasn't a single holding penalty (except the one during the kick return on the Saints).

But, the calls are pretty even, the offensive pass interference was blatant (and probably saved a second interception, though it didn't matter in the end). False starts and formation.. pretty obvious, gotta call those....

So, fair, but loose, IMO.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

hmm mea culpa on the number of calls. (still wasn't as bad as the Seahawks-Stealers SB)


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

I thought the refs did a good job. If you don't notice them, that means they did OK. The only time I noticed the refs was the 2 point conversion play on the goal line when they reviewed it.


----------



## jimmerz (Jan 26, 2010)

Stealers...lol. I love Steeler haters!


Congrats! Saints...good game, it'll be better next year with the Steelers back in it.


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

machavez00 said:


> hmm mea culpa on the number of calls. (still wasn't as bad as the Seahawks-Stealers SB)


I actually was posting the penalties in agreement with you (though it might not have seemed that way) that this was a low penalty game.

2 late hits and 1 holding on a return.

So there were 5 penalties "during play". 3 false starts, 1 illegal formation, and the pass interference.

Not a single holding penalty during the course of the game. No illegal contact or pass interference. Basically, they shoved their flags in their pockets for anything except procedure penalties.

But, it was the same both ways... nothing blatant that cost (or benefited) either team...


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

One of the best officiated games I've seen in any sport in a long time!

In fact... I only saw one "bad" call the whole game... and that was the 2-pt conversion that was reversed & corrected with instant replay by challenge from the Saints... and I 100% understand how the official missed that call in real-time. It was only through the reverse angle and in slo-motion that you could really see that the Saints receiver had possession, was down by contact, and breaking the plane of the end zone before the Colt kicked it out of his hands.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

n3ntj said:


> I thought the refs did a good job. If you don't notice them, that means they did OK.


An old myth. I have had any games where I unfortunately was quite noticed not because I wanted to be but because I had to be due to a very weird play or strange ruling. Like it or not, there are many times where we officials are too noticed but still do outstanding jobs.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

There should have been an after the play penalty on the on-side kick. The Saints bench was on the field interfering, including multiple coaches while the refs were looking for the ball.

While I don't think this non-call made any difference overall as it would have only given the Saints a different starting point, it should have been called in my opinion.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## jimmerz (Jan 26, 2010)

machavez00 said:


> compared to the last two SB the Stealers "won" This was a low penalty game. There was like 2 called?
> SB XL had so many drive killing bad calls it was ridiculous, and as a Cardinals fan I'll never forget this non call:


Not sure why that "non" call will stick with you? It was a clean hit as you can see over and over again he was hit on the side in the shoulder so good job refs! :nono2:


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

Tom Robertson said:


> There should have been an after the play penalty on the on-side kick. The Saints bench was on the field interfering, including multiple coaches while the refs were looking for the ball.
> 
> While I don't think this non-call made any difference overall as it would have only given the Saints a different starting point, it should have been called in my opinion.
> 
> ...


I thought the same thing, as player after player came out onto the field to get involved...

But, I also agree with your second point... the way the Saints marched down the field, did it *really* make a difference that there wasn't a penalty? They're on such a high at that point, I don't think a few extra yards would have made a difference.

If I'm the person responsible for grading the officials, there are definitely flaws that I could find... but I really thought that they called it the same for both sides, so despite the fact that I don't personally care for the way they called the game, the playing field was, IMO, level (well, actually, it's slightly crowned, but... you know what I mean. ), and as a spectator, having the game called "fair" is more important that whether it's called "tight" or "loose".


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

jimmerz said:


> Not sure why that "non" call will stick with you? It was a clean hit as you can see over and over again he was hit on the side in the shoulder so good job refs! :nono2:


sure looks like two hands on his back to me.. and I'm NOT an Arizona fan.


----------



## cheryl10 (Dec 15, 2009)

I thought the officials did an excellent job in the Super Bowl. Congratulations to the Saints and their fans.


----------



## DawgLink (Nov 5, 2006)

I am not sure I have seen a single person (except this thread) complain about the refs for the Super Bowl

Overall was a great game

Better team won


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

DawgLink said:


> I am not sure I have seen a single person (except this thread) complain about the refs for the Super Bowl
> 
> Overall was a great game


Agree. The Refs generally do a pretty good job.

Can't say the same about the previous Superbowl - stolen by the refs with that video clip and the non-catch by Santonio Holmes in the end zone. (BTW - I could care less about the Arizona team). :eek2:


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Oh, puhleeze! That whole tired argument and pic has already been debunked by the NFL. Steelers won fair and square. Get over it already.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> Oh, puhleeze! That whole tired argument and pic has already been debunked by the NFL. Steelers won fair and square. Get over it already.


:lol::lol::lol:

Denied yes, debunked no. :nono2:

The photo tells it all.

Like they're gonna come back after the game and after numerous replays and say "yeah....we totally blew the call, but what the heck..." :lol:


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Then you haven't been paying attention much these many years, have you? The NFL is not one to be afraid to publicly state when its officials err. They backed up the officials' call in that game and debunked the one photo that you love to show with evidence that Holmes did, in fact, touch the ground with both feet. Of course, I'm sure you won't post one of those pics. (And no, I'm not going to.)


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> The NFL is not one to be afraid to publicly state when its officials err. *They backed up the officials' call in that game and debunked the one photo that you love to show with evidence that Holmes did, in fact, touch the ground with both feet.* Of course, I'm sure you won't post one of those pics. (And no, I'm not going to.)


Love to see that Photoshopped photo.  :lol:


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Almost as photoshopped as the one you posted, eh?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> Almost as photoshopped as the one you posted, eh?


From the cover of the Arizona newpaper?

Guess so.

Maybe they are on the Dark Side.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

No, just looking for excuses as to why they legitimately lost the game.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> No, just looking for excuses as to why they legitimately lost the game.


OK sir.

No skin off my nose. 

By the way...as someone who has numerous friends and work collegues in the Pittsburgh area....they all (about 25 of them) have repeatedly stated at various times to me that they "know they got away with that one". It would appear that the stigma of that lingers on, even to the "victors".

But its history now, so we'll let it rest in peace.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Obviously ignorant Pittsburgh people they are.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> Obviously ignorant Pittsburgh people they are.


...or so Yoda might say.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

C'mon, let us stick to this year. We had last year's thread... well last year.  

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Tom Robertson said:


> C'mon, let us stick to this year. We had last year's thread... well last year.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tom


We're all good with that....as the Saints come marchin in...


----------

