The NFL has, in the past, had unfortunate off-field incidents on the eve of big games. Certainly the arrest of Atlanta Falcons defensive back Eugene Robinson for soliciting a prostitute and the mental meltdown of Oakland Raiders center Barret Robbins, both right before Super Bowls, proved to be sad and unwelcome distractions. But there may never have been an incident with quite the portent of the knife wound to the knee suffered by Indianapolis defensive back Nick Harper in a domestic altercation the night before his team's big game against Pittsburgh.
Because the following afternoon, with his wife under arrest on battery charges, Harper scooped up a fumble in the final minute of the game and was racing down the field for what would have likely been the winning touchdown--and the most glorious moment in Indianapolis football history. All that stood in his way was a backpedaling quarterback, which is usually the equivalent of no obstacle at all.
But somehow Ben Roethlisberger's desperate lunge tripped up Harper. And soon after, the Colts kicker, the best percentage booter in NFL history, jagted one wide--make that very, very, very wide--right. Indy, the prohibitive Super Bowl favorite, was out, its most ignominious stumble in a string of postseason disappointments. And one was certainly left to wonder if Harper's knee--the wound was described as an inch deep and a half-inch wide--prevented him from cutting back toward what appeared to be a sure path to the end zone or destabilized him so that he was tripped up rather easily by the one-armed tackle.
Perhaps it's better to credit Roethlisberger for saving the Steelers and, in this case, the NFL from, at the very least, embarrassment and quite possibly a scandal. Because a few days later the NFL made a rare admission that its referee had made a mistake in overturning an interception by Pittsburgh safety Troy Polamalu that effectively would have clinched the game for the Steelers. What would have been perhaps the most grievous officiating fumble in NFL history--if only because the call appeared so clear-cut to everyone, including the announcers, watching the replay--became instead just an awkward footnote to a game for the ages.
And I'd say there it should lie but for the fact that it was part of an overall pattern of egregious officiating during that crucial NFL weekend. The reversal of the interception was no more explicable than two other critical calls--or more accurately noncalls--that went the Colts' way that afternoon. On one, nobody blew the whistle on a pass interference, more mugging than marginal, that might have helped get Pittsburgh off to an even bigger early lead. The other came on an apparent offsides, when Colts players were actually in the Steelers' backfield, that would have given Pittsburgh a key first down when they were trying to run out the clock.
The cumulative effect led Pittsburgh's mouthy linebacker Joey Porter to surmise that the Polamalu call was a deliberate attempt--he used the word "cheating" to The New York Times--to propel the popular and TV ratings-friendly Peyton Manning-led Colts toward the Super Bowl. I don't tend to subscribe to conspiracy theories (though the grievousness of the error was further revealed when the NFL did not fine Porter for his breach of protocol.) And certainly not when the officiating was almost as bad in Denver, including a horrendous--and curiously belated--pass interference call that turned the tide in favor of the Denver Broncos against the New England Patriots. I have no doubt that if there were a conspiracy afoot atop the NFL, it would include helping the defending and dynastic Super Bowl champs along to a showdown with Indy. But every critical call went Denver's way. And in Chicago, the officials also appeared to blunder when they reversed a fumble call against the Bears, costing the Panthers an early touchdown that might have turned the game into a rout.
What all these bad calls had in common is not that they were part of some pre-ordained NFL directive. The league is on such firm ground that it can, more easily than other leagues, withstand the disappointment of having a final four with only one team in the top half of NFL TV markets, Seattle at 13th in the nation. (The others are Denver at 18th, Pittsburgh at 22nd and Charlotte a lowly 27th.) It is rather that all the bad calls went in favor of the home team, an unintentional but perhaps inevitable consequence of the frenzy that is the modern sports fan.
I can't prove that contention. If the NFL keeps stats on which way the bad call bounces, they are not available on its wonderfully comprehensive Web site. All I do know is this has been the season of bad officiating. Throw in the baseball playoffs, in which the most conspicuous of a number of bad calls spurred the home team Chicago White Sox on to victory. And the Rose Bowl for the national championship, in which somehow the whole world--with the notable exception of the replay officials--saw that Texas quarterback Vince Young's knee was on the ground well before he scored one of his touchdowns.
The irony is, of course, that we knew his knee was down the very same way we knew Polamalu intercepted the ball: it was obvious once we saw the replay. The TV technology is now so superb that it is truly jarring when the officials don't see it the way we do or, in fact, don't see it at all. As a result, the NFL has arrived at a critical point. Having succumbed to the lure of technology and the promise of improved accuracy, the NFL has to consider how much of a place there remains for judgment calls or at least bad judgment calls.
This is where I am supposed to go into a disclaimer, noting how hard the officials' job is. I stipulate to that. And I also stipulate to the fact that we are all human and human error will inevitably be part of any contest played and officiated by humans. Still, does it remain acceptable that everybody watching can know the official erred except that official? In an age of technological wonders, is that desirable? Or more accurately, is that acceptable?
I don't believe there are any solutions that won't prolong games that, we all agree, are already excessively long. (The major bowl games, more than the NFL playoffs, were a torture, albeit a compelling one.) Still, I am willing to endure a little more waiting to ensure that the right call is made. Perhaps we need specialists, officials who are schooled in both the technology and the league rules, to make the calls from the booth. At the very least, we might need to take the referee out of his isolation booth on the field, allowing him to communicate his interpretation of the rules to an expert in the booth. At least then, the expert might say, "You've got to be kidding"--and alert the ref to the dimensions of his folly.
And, of course, something needs to be done about pass interference beyond a little lightening up on the current approach, which is nonstop throwing the flag against the defense. I understand that contemplating replay for pass interference opens up the proverbial can of worms. But few calls have such major impact as a 39-yard penalty that takes the ball from beyond field-goal range and puts it on the one-yard line. Which is what happened late in the second quarter of the Broncos-Patriots game and gave Denver a lead it never relinquished.
Replay has to be rethought and recast. The NFL approach has been settling for halfway measures instead of availing itself to the technological advances in recent years. Pro football, with its large officiating crew, may not be as vulnerable as, say, a low-scoring game like soccer with a single referee, where a single whistle for a penalty kick can prove decisive. Soccer has, in fact, endured recent scandals involving officiating in both Europe and Latin America. But in a world where corruption routinely invades our most hallowed institutions, it's silly to think the NFL is immune. The league has the tools and should take the steps to protect itself from further embarrassment and the possibility of something far worse.
Wild, Wild Weekend
I have been so wrong so consistently about NFL teams and games this season that, while I do not run a tout service and would never encourage you to wager based on my predictions, betting against me seems almost a foolproof scheme. I am predicting a historic first--two wild-card teams in Super Bowl XL.
Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Denver Broncos
Denver has been an extraordinarily opportunistic team, and it's safe to say that, if the Steelers turn the ball over five times like the Patriots did last week, the Broncos will be Super Bowl bound. But I love to ride the karmic trail and the Steelers seem to be on it. Moreover, I don't care how professional the officiating crew is, it will lean over backward to spare Pittsburgh another bad call. I think the Steelers can duplicate the Patriots' success against Denver's touted running attack, leaving the Broncos in the hands of quarterback Jake Plummer. And while "Jake the Snake" is clearly improved, he was shaky enough, at times, against the Pats for me to pick Big Ben and the Steelers. Pittsburgh 24, Denver 20.
Carolina Panthers vs. Seattle Seahawks
Carolina was a popular experts' preseason pick to reach the Super Bowl and Seattle is always a popular pick--"soft" is the most common explanation--as an upset victim. Carolina proved to be a true trick-or-treat team this season And I don't think Seattle is soft any longer, if indeed they ever were. But Steve Smith has been an unrivalled weapon through this postseason. Moreover, Jake ("Not the Snake") Delhomme is finally beginning to resemble the quarterback who, two years ago, was so appropriately super in the Super Bowl. I can't resist the wild-card symmetry in this uncommon season. Carolina 27, Seattle 21.