First off, King is exactly right on the goal line lunge. Absolute certainty on either side is a credibility-killer. If it was across, it was by maybe 3 inches. If it was shy, it was by fewer than 6. All of this nonsense of "I saw his head, and i know the ball was behind his head" is just that - nonsense. It's almost impossible to tell with 100% certainty whether or not it crossed. Who cares what Ben said on Letterman - do you think he has some magical sense of where the invisble plane is? It was a close call - a coin toss. If it was a "bad call" against Seattle, then you must think that, had it gone the other way, no one in Pittsburgh would complain. And you know that's not true. So just accept that it could have gone either way, and it HAD to go one way. So someone loses on that play. Deal.

Briefly, on other stuff: I cannot fathom how people can still claim "not to see" the endzone PI. Watch Hope's feet. Watch Hope's feet move backwards. Watch Jackson's arm push straight onto Hope's chest. What is it that you're not seeing? Explain to me how Hope could physically have made a play on the ball with Jackson pushing him away from it. And forget the Irvin nonsense. I don't think he was on the field yesterday. King wants evidence, not hearsay.

No offense, but I think SunKing should be less defensive, because I sure didn't read his first post as... whatever he thinks it said. It sure reads like, Steelers didn't deserve to play Sunday, and I hate parity. Maybe he just needs to work on his composition skills.

That said, his arguments that the Steelers aren't Super Bowl quality are unconvincing. They don't have an identity? They have arguably the best defense in football - certainly top-5. Bettis had a quiet year, but he sure ran off a 100 yard game in Chicago against the so-called best D in the league. Ben may very well be Canton-bound someday, and had a better passing rating for the season than 29 other starters. Hines Ward already has every receiving record for the Steelers, and he's got at least 2-3 productive years left. Fast Willie ran for 1200 yards even while sharing duties with Bettis (he got fewer than 75% of the carries this year). And, if Ben is healthy all year (remember - he played with a chipped thumb on his throwing hand all season), they probably finish 13-3 - maybe better.

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.

Maybe you can also explain why, on the LSD touchdown, the side judge ran in signaling for the short spot and then changed his mind halfway there, suddenly throwing up both hands for the TD. Watch that in the slow-mo for a while and see what you can come up with.

("Uh... see... he was off balance running in, so was trying to regain his equilibrium with with his left hand... which was also clearly - I've looked at this frame-by-frame - suffering a severe arthritic cramp...")

You've got a great future in PR. RJ Reynolds and Halliburton could use your... uh.... talent.

kneel and others make a brilliant point. A lot of people who've never read the rulebook - and a few who have - think something. Therefore, that something is true.

On a related note, history has now been revised. Saddam did plan 9-11. After all, 67% of Americans think so. And that's all the proof we need.

PS - "Handfighting" is incidental contact. You can no more "initiate" incidental contact than you can "incite" a peaceful demonstration. Hope touched Jackson, Jackson touched Hope. No harm, no foul - literally. Then Jackson, like a rookie in his first big game, straight-arms Hope right in front of a ref. Sorry your boy isn't as smart as Irvin was - he at least knew to play it clean in front of the ref.

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.