What other sport has rules that force players to adjust their play on a particular day based on the referee's fiber intake that morning?

Off the top of my head, I'll say basketball (fouls, traveling), baseball (balls and strikes) and hockey (interference and similar penalties).

You need to watch that one again. Roethilisberger, in a moment of gamesmanship (artfully blurring the rules) turns his back to Fisher at the last moment. A no-call is absolutely proper in that situation.

OK. I'd watched it about a dozen times already, but after reading this I watched it again. And you're wrong. Sorry.

Roethlisberger is running down the field giving chase to Herndon. Fisher is also running down the field, behind Roethlisberger. He catches up to him and blocks him in the back. In order for Roethlisberger to "turn his back to Fisher," he would have had to have been backpedaling. He wasn't. Or Fisher would have had to have run past him and turned arouund to block. He didn't.

Can we talk about the World Cup now?

You mean the World Baseball Classic? Sure! If you mean the soccer tournament, not now, but after the Olympics and the Final Four and the start of the baseball season and, uh, Kentucky Derby? Indy?

Not only did the replay CLEARLY show Roethlisberger's head crossing the line, but it also CLEARLY showed him pulling the ball from his midsection after he was down, which CLEARLY was not even close to touching the line.

Roethlisberger moving the ball after he was down is, I think, a red herring. Roethlisberger dived for the end zone. You're right, his head clearly got in, which, you're right, doesn't matter. He's holding the ball in his midsection but as he flies through the air he begins to bring it "up," toward his head. His entire body, parallel to the ground, is rotated to the left, meaning his right side is closer to the ground. The ball is tucked right under his right cheek as he nears the goal line.

From the camera angle -- which appears to be right on the goal line -- it appears that the top of his helmet is over the blue part of the end zone, and his face, and the ball under it, are over the white goal line, which is part of the end zone. (To clarify, the entire white goal line is in the end zone.)

That's why I say it looks like a touchdown to me. Now, if the camera is actually deeper than the goal line, in the end zone, it could create an illusion that he's in when he's not. That's why I say I can't be sure. When D.D. Lewis hits Roethlisberger in the back of the right shoulder, it drives him back and he lands with the ball on the green field, out of the end zone. Everything that happens after that, as I said, is or should be irrelevant.

As for why the official appeared to change his mind, I have no idea. It certainly did look that way. It looked to me like he was going to call it fourth down when he started toward the pile, then somewhere along the way changed his mind. If he was actually swayed by Roethlisberger moving the ball (I just can't believe anyone, including a Pop Warner ref, would do that), then he has no business officiating in the NFL, or Pop Warner. Even though I think he ultimately got the call right, I can't think of a good reason why he would change his mind there.

But whatever he was thinking, this doesn't make sense: was he thinking, 'i'm not sure anymore, so i'd better call this a touchdown and let the booth sort it out'?

The play is reviewable whichever way he calls it.

Oh, and as for your brilliant analysis of the officials' behavior, can you tell us if you've ever seen a ref reach for his flag and then not throw it? He also might've thought he was seeing an infraction, then realized it wasn't (probably because it wasn't). Then been swayed by a moving plea.

He reached for it and whiffed, and immediately looked down and began trying again to pull it. If you have access to a replay -- I do and I just watched it again -- and can say that my reading isn't the only plausible one, I salute you. I don't think you can.

And King, my friend, if we're going to continue talking about football--or at least what the rest of the world considers football--that means the next grand topic is the World Cup (people only care about who gets voted to the Pro Bowl; no one actually watches).

I would dispute this. Nobody cares who gets voted to the Pro Bowl.

I do think a lot of the magic has disappeared from the announcing booth for any number of reasons. Maybe it's hype. Maybe it's money. I don't know.

I think it's because most announcers today are TV announcers only. They didn't come up through radio. Almost all of the great play-by-play announcers came up through radio.

Of Duke you said "They're good, and they can beat anybody..." Well not, apparently, Georgetown.

Surely -- and I don't mean to call you Shirley, Amy Leonard -- you're not suggesting that just because Georgetown beat Duke one night, Duke is not capable of beating Georgetown on some other night. I'd suggest they'd beat them most nights, though not every night.

I am never happy when someone is injured. But I made an exception in that case.

Ha! That made me laugh. Reminded me of Groucho's immortal "I never forget a face but in your case I'll make an exception."