The Spectacle Blog

Re: Hines v. Heinz

By on 2.6.06 | 12:01AM

Wlady: I'd best get to sleep, but I am very happy for Pittsburgh and Cowher, for the reasons you cite and more besides. The Steelers were the great dynasty of my formative years, and I'm glad to see the title restored after so long. It was an odd game, unsatisfying in many ways, but I'm glad they prevailed. As for the postgame, there was at least one note of grace: the presence of Bart Starr to present the trophy. He's as fine a man and ambassador for any sport as we're likely to see, and having him there lent some class to the proceedings, which usually are in need of some.

Send to Kindle

Hines vs. Heinz

By on 2.5.06 | 10:31PM

Paul, Jed: I enjoyed your pre-game and first half bantering. Lots of keys to this game, and not just to the Escalade that went to MVP Hines Ward. But in retrospect the bogus offensive interference call that cost Seattle and early touchdown was the biggest key -- the receiver did nothing out of the ordinary, against a defender who was completely lost on the play. No way should the referee have given him the benefit of the doubt. On the other hand, I do think Roethlisberger did score on that first Pittsburgh touchdown. Just for a split second the ball seemed to "touch" the plane of the goal line before not so gentle Ben tucked it back. That amounts to full penetration into the end zone, so far I know.

I paid next to no attention to ads and commentary, so I didn't notice the distinct lack of tribute to our soldiers in harm's way. But it also struck me that no one much mentioned Detroit either; not until the post-game trophy presentation (the worst choreographed annual event in sports -- why don't they just go back to the locker room for those made for TV moments?).

Send to Kindle


By on 2.5.06 | 8:51PM

I'm not sure I've seen a Super Bowl where one team has been such a one-sided beneficiary of the officals' calls as Pittsburgh has in this one. If Seattle doesn't get this fumble call review, in which Hasselbeck was clearly touched before he hit the ground, I'm going to start to wonder.

Send to Kindle


By on 2.5.06 | 8:47PM

Ok, ok., it's only a MasterCard commercial. But any reappearance of McGyver is worth a lot. Well done, MC.

Send to Kindle

Re: Commericals

By on 2.5.06 | 8:06PM

Jed: Yes, the airplane one was funnier, though this is supposedly a family audience, right? I guess I'm several years late with that concern, if not several decades.

Send to Kindle


By on 2.5.06 | 7:54PM

Paul: I think it's AmeriQuest that's doing the odd commercials your'e referring to. Tasteless? Maybe. Funny? Yeah, pretty much. Still better than that Burger King awfulness.

Send to Kindle

Re: Half Time Show(?)

By on 2.5.06 | 7:43PM

Jed: Failing, that, he might at least spare us a look at his midriff. This is somebody's grandfather, I'm told.

Send to Kindle

Half Time Show(?)

By on 2.5.06 | 7:29PM

At long last: I've found a sound that annoys me more than Hillary or Howlin' Howie. Can't we ever get Mick Jagger to just shut up? This is noise, not music.

Send to Kindle

But Speaking of Calls

By on 2.5.06 | 7:25PM

The revoked touchdown against Seattle was atrocious. I believe I lip-read Holmgren saying to the official at the half, "We haven't gotten a call yet," and he's right.

Send to Kindle

The Call

By on 2.5.06 | 7:08PM

Didn't look like a touchdown to me, but the official went with a strict constructionist reading of his duties, and refused to overturn in the absence of overwhelming evidence against the original call. Good for him.

Send to Kindle