53 yard Field Goal ...but we punt?

[Sword]

Did somebody forget to tell Tomlin Scooby was no longer on the team?

[flippy]

I didn't understand that one? Tomlin has tried 50+ yd FGs in the past with weak legged kickers. The logic here didn't seem to make sense. Maybe he trusted the D more in this scenario and hoped to pin them back deep whereas he didn't trust the D to stop anyone in the past?

[buccoray61]

I didn't understand that one? Tomlin has tried 50+ yd FGs in the past with weak legged kickers. The logic here didn't seem to make sense. Maybe he trusted the D more in this scenario and hoped to pin them back deep whereas he didn't trust the D to stop anyone in the past?

Actually,it's like he didn't trust the D in this situation. A missed FG would have given the Bengals a shorter field.

[Steelhere10]

He trusted his defense, they played lights out all game. If the defense comes up big there we get the short field again. What is messed up is he didn't challenge the 3rd down when the two player's was fighting for the ball.

[Slapstick]

He trusted his defense, they played lights out all game. If the defense comes up big there we get the short field again. What is messed up is he didn't challenge the 3rd down when the two player's was fighting for the ball.

I agree. Perhaps if the refs had not forced him to use his first challenge needlessly on Heath's obvious first down, he may have been more inclined to throw the challenge flag. The Cincinnati receiver had to "re-establish" possession and possibly ended up behind the sticks when doing so. However, the way the refs were calling things and reviewing things yesterday, having them get it right was far from a sure thing.

[papillon]

He trusted his defense, they played lights out all game. If the defense comes up big there we get the short field again. What is messed up is he didn't challenge the 3rd down when the two player's was fighting for the ball.

He would have lost the challenge and a TO. The replay was conclusive that the offensive player had the ball and the defensive player was attempting to wrest it from him. Even if you give simultaneous possession the offensive player gets the ball. I'm glad he didn't challenge that one.

Pappy

[RuthlessBurgher]

It was awfully windy yesterday and was toward the open end of the field. I'm sure he considered it, but punting was probably the better percentage play in this particular instance.

[papillon]

It was awfully windy yesterday and was toward the open end of the field. I'm sure he considered it, but punting was probably the better percentage play in this particular instance.

Thanks for the field condition update,watching on TV is drastically different than being in the stadium. It makes sense now.

Pappy

[Starlifter]

I know the new kid has been lights out - but a 53 yard FG at Heinz field is something that is ALWAYS open for debate.

I would have liked to seen the attempt - but I was fine with the punt.

[Ghost]

At the time the D was playing great and the O was struggling to move the ball consistently. I thought Tomlin wanted to try and pin them inside the 10, have the D make the stop and then get the ball back near mid-field or just over it.

Had they missed the field goal and Cincy got the ball back, even a three and out would have led to them punting and possibly sticking the Steelers with a 90 or 95 yard drive. Something the O looked incapable of completing with success. He was putting it on the D to maintain good field position.

[Steelhere10]

He would have lost the challenge and a TO. The replay was conclusive that the offensive player had the ball and the defensive player was attempting to wrest it from him. Even if you give simultaneous possession the offensive player gets the ball. I'm glad he didn't challenge that one.

Pappy

I disagree both players fought for the ball and the wr got possession but after they fell back, short of the first down and it would've been 4th down.

[papillon]

I disagree both players fought for the ball and the wr got possession but after they fell back, short of the first down and it would've been 4th down.

Well, lets put it this way then, I don't believe there was enough evidence to overturn the call on the field. It looked like two guys fighting for the ball, the offense wins in simultaneous possession and I'm not certain when the whistle was blown. It would have been a risky challenge, IMO hoping for either a re-spot of the ball or overturn to INT. I also think you have to tell the referee what you are disputing, I don't think you can say INT or the spot, you have to pick one or the other.

Pappy

[Slapstick]

I disagree both players fought for the ball and the wr got possession but after they fell back, short of the first down and it would've been 4th down.

I agree, but I have no faith that the refs yesterday would have made the correct call.

[Steelhere10]

I'm not arguing that the wr didn't come away with possession but when he finally established pos. It was a yard short. But slap I agree the refs were hard to trust yesterday.

[WindyCitySteel]

Another example of Tomlin living in his fears.