Even though the ruling had no effect on the final outcome, reaction has been intense and sustained. Could there be a bigger issue afoot? That'd be the way to go if you were a betting man.

And hey, who isn't?

To recap: Pittsburgh led San Diego 11-10 as the Chargers engaged in a desperate lateral-fest as time ran out. Their final lateral ended up in the hands of the Steelers' Troy Polamalu, who returned it for a meaningless touchdown.

Upon further review, the score was upheld. Upon even further review, it was overturned. After the game, Green admitted the officials should have stuck with the ruling on the field.

That's the first thing that should trouble the NFL that even with the aid of that great righter of wrongs, King God Replay, officials still blew the call.

The second thing that should trouble the NFL is that on-field officials are having a lousy season. We won't go into great detail here, because it's a long list and we all have lives to lead. But as a for-instance, recall that the Chargers were burned in Week 2 when a Denver Broncos fumble was ruled an incomplete pass.

But here's what should really make the NFL feel uneasy this story continues to have legs not because of its impact on the game, but because of its impact on the world of wagering.

See, the Steelers were favored to win by 4? to 5 points. Polamalu's touchdown would have made winners of bettors who took Pittsburgh and gave the points. Instead, bettors who took the road dog cashed in.

Not only did the protracted scene at the end of the game cause apoplexy among gamblers who weren't sure if they had won or if they would have to eat cat food for the rest of the week, the final judgment was a windfall for bookmakers. Why? Estimates vary on the amount of money wagered on the game, from a few million to the gross national product of Peru. But there seems to be consensus that roughly two-thirds of that dough was bet on Pittsburgh to cover.

OK, two quick thoughts before we move on.

One, if you wager on sporting events, you should understand that you are, in many cases, wagering on the bounce of a ball, on walk-on garbage time at the end of a college basketball game, on an umpire's floating strike zone or on two-headed use of replay. You have a fabulous chance of losing your money, so when you do, you should shut up about it.

And two, if you're a bookmaker, this is the kind of thing that makes people swear off betting, at least until the next time they're in Las Vegas, five martinis into a boys'-night-out weekend. So what you need to do is count your money and wipe that smirk off your face.

The NFL, as we all know, takes great pains to disassociate itself from gambling. Well, except for the weekly injury reports, which they insist, unconvincingly, are prepared as a courtesy to the wives, children and parents of the players.

But here is proof of the powerful and unmistakable relationship between the game and the game-outside-the-game. The longer this story rages on, the more uncomfortable the NFL should be, because where there is interest in gambling, there is interest in manipulating games to achieve a desirable result. Conspiracy theories regarding Sunday's game are all over the Internet.

And where there is that kind of interest, you need to worry about rogue referees (hello, Tim Donaghy), thrill-seeking players and coaches (hello, Pete Rose), maybe even network TV technicians with authority to choose what replay to show and when to show it to encourage or forestall a challenge (don't say it can't happen).

If we know our NFL suits and ties, this story has their full and complete attention. Figure the over/under to be, "Smithers, let's retire Red Cashen's number this weekend and see if we can't generate a little happy news for once."

Contact Gary Peterson at gpeterson@bayareanewsgroup.com