What if ...? NFL VP says Holmes' celebration was a foul
By Gary Mihoces, USA TODAY
Santonio Holmes should have gotten an excessive celebration penalty after his winning touchdown catch in Super Bowl XLIII.
The Pittsburgh Steelers would have gotten another play even had linebacker James Harrison come up short on his 100-yard interception return touchdown as the first half ended.
If the NFL had it do all over again, it would have done additional review of a fumble by Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner on the Cardinals' final play — though the call was correct.
Those were the assessments made Tuesday on the NFL Network by Mike Pereira, the league's vice president of officiating. The final score stands: Pittsburgh 27, Arizona 23. But assorted calls and non-calls leave room for what-ifs. Pereira's reviews:
The celebration
Holmes was deemed by the officials to have had both feet in bounds on his winning 6-yard touchdown reception from Ben Roethlisberger with 0:35 left. The call was upheld on replay review.
But after the play, Holmes did use the ball as a prop when he mimicked basketball star LeBron James' pre-game move of shaking powder onto his hands and tossing the powder in the air. In the NFL, using the ball as a prop calls for a 15-yard excessive celebration penalty.
On the ensuing kickoff, Pittsburgh would have kicked from its 15-yard line instead of the usual 30. Arizona started its final drive at its own 23. Who knows where it might have been had the call been made on Holmes?
"Well, it would have been (called) if we had seen it. It was one of these plays where it happened so far after the play was over," said Pereira.
On Monday morning, commissioner Roger Goodell declined to speculate on the legality of Holmes' celebration after handing out the Super Bowl MVP award to the Steelers receiver.
"I was on the field," Goodell said. "I couldn't even see it."
On the NFL Network, Pereira watched a replay of field judge Greg Gautreaux making the touchdown call and then standing near Holmes.
"Greg Gautreaux makes the call and then does everything I ask him to do: watch, watch, watch. Nothing seemed like it's gonna happen, and this is a great period of time. This is all acceptable celebration."
But after about 15 seconds, as the officials turned away, Holmes got to his celebration. Pereira said the officials were setting up for the extra point.
"You'll see the official turn away here because we're setting up for the try," said Pereira. "Had he ended up facing us, we certainly would have called this. … It is clearly using the ball as a prop and it would have been a foul if we had seen it."
The fumble
With 15 seconds left, the Cardinals had a first down at the Pittsburgh 44. Warner dropped to pass and he was hit by linebacker LaMarr Woodley. The ball came loose and was recovered by defensive end Brett Keisel. It was ruled Pittsburgh ball, and the Steelers ran out the final five seconds.
Both Cardinals coach Ken Whisenhunt and Warner questioned after the game why replay official Bob McGrath did not give the play a second look.
"Well, it was reviewed," said Pereira. "You just need to understand the mechanics. Inside of two minutes, the replay assistant has a job to do upstairs, and that's to either confirm that the play was called correctly on the field or, if he's not sure, to send it down and have the referee take a look and make the final decision.
"Bobby McGrath had quite a bit of time because we had a penalty associated with the play, so he got to look at all the reviews and he determined, which is correct, that it was a fumble. And it clearly was a fumble (and not an incomplete pass). … He got the confirmation, he phoned to me and to TV to say that he confirmed it. He did his job."
But upon further review.
"Looking back at it, that big of a play, at the end of the game, I'd have sent it down and given (referee) Terry McAulay a chance to look at it again and confirm what McGrath saw and what Terry knew, that it was a fumble," said Pereira. "So you learn, and you go back on this and say the next time it happens, at this point of the game, this big of a play, let's go ahead and get it sent down."
Of Warner's motion before the fumble, Pereira said, "The ball turns in his (Warner's hand) hand before the arm starts forward. It's is the hand that's the key indicator. … He has to have total control. It is a fumble.
The return
With 0:18 left in the first half, Arizona had first and goal at the Pittsburgh one. Warner's pass was intercepted at the goal line by Harrison, who ran 100 yards for a touchdown as time expired.
What if Harrison had been tackled by Cardinals wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald just short of the end zone with 0:00 on the clock?
"Lost in that (what if) was the fact that there was a penalty called on this play," said Pereira.
The foul was a grabbing the facemask penalty. Pereira said it was on Arizona guard Reggie Wells.
"There was a facemask call on No. 74 (Wells) of Arizona prior to the interception, and so it took this whole element out of whether they would have another play or not because the personal foul by the offensive team before an interception is actually tacked on to the end of the play and then the period is extended," said Pereira.
"So no matter what we would have ended up ruling, even if we would have reversed it (the touchdown) and put it down short, we would have had another play and extended the half."
Fitzgerald ran about 40 yards down the Arizona sideline — while out of bounds — in pursuit of Harrison. Fitzgerald, who brushed by a Cardinals coach along the way, finally turned back onto the field inside the 5-yard line to tackle Harrison as he powered into the end zone. Had Fitzgerald stopped Harrison short, would it have been a legal tackle?
Yes, says Pereira.
"It was a legal tackle," Pereira said Wednesday via email. "The only time you can't go out of bounds is during a kick. Any other time you can go out of bounds, stay out of bounds and even be blocked out of bounds. The only restriction is during a kick."
Very interesting stuff. This was actually Mike Pereira's last year in the NFL....he is now retired. It will be interesting to see who replaces him as "spin doctor" for the officiating crew.
Next up, I believe I owe Mr. Santonio Holmes an apology. I had originally planned to show you pictures that proved that Santonio actually only got one foot down on "the catch".....pictures like these:
But, a picture has finally surfaced that appears to have proved me wrong. And it is as clear as day (click on the picture to enlarge):
However....the picture is missing one key thing. Where is the football? I would assume it is very close to his hands right now, and it COULD be in his hands....but does he really have possession of the ball at this point? Does he ever have possession of the ball AND both feet down at the same time? I doubt there is a picture out there that would tell us for sure. However, if you look at the first picture above where Santonio clearly has possession of the ball, the defender has his arms outstretched, but has not yet touched Santonio. In the "two feet down" picture, the defender is touching Santonio.....so logically we could concur that Santonio did have possession, and then dragged his feet (so he really does have possession of the ball in the third picture).
So Santonio, you have my apologies - you are a true Super Bowl hero.
NFL referees.....not so much.
No comments:
Post a Comment