Pass interference in 2nd quarter

**BlitzburghRockCity** · 12-05-2011, 09:09 AM

Penalties ravaged the Bengals all day. In all, they were called for 10 penalties for 109 yards. Conversely, the Steelers were called for four penalties and 29 yards.
But it was a pass interference call on Bengals safety Chris Crocker in the second quarter that might have been the killer for Cincinnati.

With the Steelers up, 7-0, and the ball at their 35, Roethlisberger went deep down the middle to Wallace. Crocker was called for interference on the play, and the ball was placed at the Cincinnati 20.

The Steelers scored three plays later.

"We got a big pass interference penalty down the middle of the field on a ball that wasn't catchable," Bengals coach Marvin Lewis said.

Crocker agreed: "I touched him, but I thought it was uncatchable. But what can you do? You have to keep playing."

From the PG

**BlitzburghRockCity** · 12-05-2011, 09:10 AM

I have to admit, I didn't think that was a legitimate pass interference penalty either. However since the Steelers get called for so many phantom penalties on any given week, I'll take one that goes in our favor for once.

**TampaSteelGirl** · 12-05-2011, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by BlitzburghRockCity

I have to admit, I didn't think that was a legitimate pass interference penalty either. However since the Steelers get called for so many phantom penalties on any given week, I'll take one that goes in our favor for once.

Totally agree here and it's not like that penality would have changed the outcome of the game as we owned them

**Goodfrom55** · 12-05-2011, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by BlitzburghRockCity

I have to admit, I didn't think that was a legitimate pass interference penalty either. However since the Steelers get called for so many phantom penalties on any given week, I'll take one that goes in our favor for once.

Makes up for the phantom PI penalty vs Heath negating COtchery's TD in Cincy 3 weeks ago.

**LatrobePA** · 12-05-2011, 09:18 AM

I thought it was border line, but felt he had a chance to catch it..

**StillinBaltimore** · 12-05-2011, 09:28 AM

Tunch and Bill watched the replay a couple of times and Tunch thought it was a bad call at first too. But after the replay he said that Crocker had Wallaces arm pinned down. And I agree with Blitz... if we get one of those our way... I'll take it! lol

**igor0190** · 12-05-2011, 10:00 AM

It may not had appeared to be a catchable ball... But it's Mike Wallace... The fastest receiver in the NFL. You can't touch a guy moving that fast without it being noticed...

**SteelDad** · 12-05-2011, 10:22 AM

So hard to say what is a 'catchable' ball anymore with players like Wallace in the League. Either way, these calls balance out over time and frankly, it could have easily been called defensive holding for pinning the arm down.

**BlitzburghRockCity** · 12-05-2011, 10:51 AM

Originally Posted by SteelDad

So hard to say what is a 'catchable' ball anymore with players like Wallace in the League. Either way, these calls balance out over time and frankly, it could have easily been called defensive holding for pinning the arm down.

That's a good point, and had it not been defensive holding atleast we'd have all been screaming for a non call. Either way most times the Steelers never get these types of calls so I'll take one now and then even if it's controversial.

**Stone** · 12-05-2011, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by BlitzburghRockCity

That's a good point, and had it not been defensive holding atleast we'd have all been screaming for a non call. Either way most times the Steelers never get these types of calls so I'll take one now and then even if it's controversial.

Ditto

I'd like to see it again, I think he impeded Wallace from getting to the ball which is why it looked uncatchable.