5 day forecast
Steelers Q&A with Ed Bouchette
Share with others:
Q: Once again an official blows a review call ... on Edwards "touchdown" catch, the ruling on the field was no catch, out of bounds. There is no way there was indisputable visual evidence to overturn that initial call. If the ruling on the field was a catch in bounds, it could not be overturned based on the visuals. Why do so many officials not understand the replay rule? The ruling on the field comes first, then there must be clear indisputable visual proof to change the call ... the play in question does not fit those criteria ... that same lack of understanding of the rules cost the Steelers in Denver and almost cost them yesterday.
Mike Geissler, Albuquerque, N.M.
BOUCHETTE: I'm not so sure there's a question in there but I liked it so much I will merely give you my answer -- I agree. It's another reason why I hate replay. Those who are for it constantly tell me it's great because it gets calls right. I've seen too many times when it got them wrong and that Braylon Edwards catch my be another. He might have gotten both feet in bounds, but it was not clearly shown on replay and as you said, Mike, then it can't be overturned. Problem is, too many times the referee -- in this case Ron Winter -- thinks he sees something and overturns it.
First Published November 14, 2007 12:00 am
