***AFCC - Buffalo 15-4 at Kansas City 16-2*** (-2, 47.5) 6:30 (2 Viewers)

[The Duff Man]

Bias is a long standing problem, seems like people might be more sensitive to it now? Maybe because of gambling? And yes social media, in the 80s you talk about it over the water cooler or in your local bar, the conversation moves on to the next thing.

 

[Snotbubbles]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?

Its not that the problem doesn't exist, its that the "problem" only exists on social media and internet message boards. Across the internet every single day fans of losing sports teams across all sports worldwide are bitterly complaining about referees, claiming bias and corruption and suggesting these sports are in some sort of crisis situation due to poor officiating. It makes for fun banter during a two week break with no football, but there's no need to take any of this seriously.

After Tim Donaghy in the NBA, I'm willing to believe that NFL referees might be making certain calls to influence outcomes.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?

Its not that the problem doesn't exist, its that the "problem" only exists on social media and internet message boards. Across the internet every single day fans of losing sports teams across all sports worldwide are bitterly complaining about referees, claiming bias and corruption and suggesting these sports are in some sort of crisis situation due to poor officiating. It makes for fun banter during a two week break with no football, but there's no need to take any of this seriously.

After Tim Donaghy in the NBA, I'm willing to believe that NFL referees in all sports might be making certain calls to influence outcomes.

fixed

cause that is all the whiners and criers and conspiracy theorists have to fall back on....

 

[JohnnyU]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?

Its not that the problem doesn't exist, its that the "problem" only exists on social media and internet message boards. Across the internet every single day fans of losing sports teams across all sports worldwide are bitterly complaining about referees, claiming bias and corruption and suggesting these sports are in some sort of crisis situation due to poor officiating. It makes for fun banter during a two week break with no football, but there's no need to take any of this seriously.

….until there is

 

[Snotbubbles]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?

Its not that the problem doesn't exist, its that the "problem" only exists on social media and internet message boards. Across the internet every single day fans of losing sports teams across all sports worldwide are bitterly complaining about referees, claiming bias and corruption and suggesting these sports are in some sort of crisis situation due to poor officiating. It makes for fun banter during a two week break with no football, but there's no need to take any of this seriously.

After Tim Donaghy in the NBA, I'm willing to believe that NFL referees in all sports might be making certain calls to influence outcomes.

fixed

cause that is all the whiners and criers and conspiracy theorists have to fall back on....

It's not a conspiracy theory when an actual professional sports referee got 15 months for fixing games.

 

[jabarony]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?

Its not that the problem doesn't exist, its that the "problem" only exists on social media and internet message boards. Across the internet every single day fans of losing sports teams across all sports worldwide are bitterly complaining about referees, claiming bias and corruption and suggesting these sports are in some sort of crisis situation due to poor officiating. It makes for fun banter during a two week break with no football, but there's no need to take any of this seriously.

After Tim Donaghy in the NBA, I'm willing to believe that NFL referees might be making certain calls to influence outcomes.

There’s always the possibility of refs fixing games. But I suspect it would be a few refs during Jags/Titans type meaningless games.

Not multiple crews all deciding to do it specifically during high profile Chiefs games. That seems a bit far-fetched.

 

[Snotbubbles]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?

Its not that the problem doesn't exist, its that the "problem" only exists on social media and internet message boards. Across the internet every single day fans of losing sports teams across all sports worldwide are bitterly complaining about referees, claiming bias and corruption and suggesting these sports are in some sort of crisis situation due to poor officiating. It makes for fun banter during a two week break with no football, but there's no need to take any of this seriously.

After Tim Donaghy in the NBA, I'm willing to believe that NFL referees might be making certain calls to influence outcomes.

There’s always the possibility of refs fixing games. But I suspect it would be a few refs during Jags/Titans type meaningless games.

Not multiple crews all deciding to do it specifically during high profile Chiefs games. That seems a bit far-fetched.

I won't say it's happening, but I'm not going to deny the possibility either.

 

[ChiefD]

What I don't get is why would the NFL be interested in fixing games? Who "owns" the NFL?

The owners.

If you've ever met anyone with money two things will always hold true:

1. They want more money
2. They have enormous ego's and are really competitive

There is no way these owners are getting together and telling Goodell - "hey, let someone else win all the Super Bowls"

No way, no how. Because no matter who is in the game the NFL is printing money and more of it.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?

Its not that the problem doesn't exist, its that the "problem" only exists on social media and internet message boards. Across the internet every single day fans of losing sports teams across all sports worldwide are bitterly complaining about referees, claiming bias and corruption and suggesting these sports are in some sort of crisis situation due to poor officiating. It makes for fun banter during a two week break with no football, but there's no need to take any of this seriously.

After Tim Donaghy in the NBA, I'm willing to believe that NFL referees in all sports might be making certain calls to influence outcomes.

fixed

cause that is all the whiners and criers and conspiracy theorists have to fall back on....

It's not a conspiracy theory when an actual professional sports referee got 15 months for fixing games.

nobody has any substantial proof of anything in the NFL.....not a sniff......yet it keeps being brought up by those with the loser mentality and when their team loses or a team like KC appears to get a call go their way....it happens on a weekly basis in here and on social media...and Tim D is the same ol tired thing every single one of them falls back on when called out....

 

[cheese]

I can't speak to the radio frequency stuff

Just to be more clear, I wasn’t suggesting doing it with RFID. By “it’” I meant tracking technology.

I can find my dogs within a few feet of their location any hour of the day.

NFL got the money for military level ****. They could do this if they wanted to, and I’ll die on that hill despite being neither an engineer nor someone who will take the time to do 1 second of research on it. It’s the American way.

The most similar thing to accurate spots is soccer (for example EPL) offsides. Take a look at how they determine whether the last relevant body part is beyond a certain point at a certain point in time. That is done pretty quickly and nobody really argues the technology. The best part is the technology leaves no gray area, it ultimately says past the line or not past the line.

 

[Anarchy99]

I can't speak to the radio frequency stuff

Just to be more clear, I wasn’t suggesting doing it with RFID. By “it’” I meant tracking technology.

I can find my dogs within a few feet of their location any hour of the day.

NFL got the money for military level ****. They could do this if they wanted to, and I’ll die on that hill despite being neither an engineer nor someone who will take the time to do 1 second of research on it. It’s the American way.

The most similar thing to accurate spots is soccer (for example EPL) offsides. Take a look at how they determine whether the last relevant body part is beyond a certain point at a certain point in time. That is done pretty quickly and nobody really argues the technology. The best part is the technology leaves no gray area, it ultimately says past the line or not past the line.

The VAR system used in soccer (or the Hawkeye system in tennis) both are very easy to get an accurate result. They are line of sight. They can tell just by looking where the ball / player was (in soccer) and where the ball landed (in tennis). Determining a first down in football would be way more complicated for the reasons I already brought up (ball constantly moving, was forward progress stopped, was the whistle blown, was the player's knee / arm / butt / elbow down, usually no line of sight / obstructed view to even tell where the ball was, etc.). All of those would be very difficult to get a 100% accurate result . . . and they could still be guessing and off by multiple inches. Football was not invented and intended to have 60 camera angles, a full team to review every camera angle, super-duper slo motion, and multiple sensors. When we get to that lever of granularity, there usually is not a "clear and concise" determination to be made . . . and sometimes reviews take so long it completely disrupts the momentum and flow of the game.

 

[Ray_T]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?....the NFL has been around for a long time and while spotting of the ball has maybe had a few blips on the radar in the past.....it feels like all this talk of chips and stuff would not be an issue if it didn't involve the Chiefs.....these things happen in every game every season.....but since "it went the Chiefs way" the NFL just HAS to do something....lol

Let's just say they have a chip in the ball. This opens up a world of other questions . . . is the chip in the center off the ball (meaning the spot the ball is placed could still be off a few inches)? But beyond that, how could they know if the runner was already down and then moved the ball forward? If his forward progress was stopped? Where the ball was at the point the whistle blew? How about if the ball was constantly moving at the time the runner was getting tackled? There could easily be no good way to determine all that, especially if there is a giant scrum in the middle of the field. So, I agree with you . . . having a chip in the ball really wouldn't make spotting the ball much more accurate, and how many times a game would that even come into play (likely not very often)?

well, the chip in the ball would ensure that no completely egregious calls get made.

once the chip crosses that line, a little light should go on at the sideline. Naturally, it is the job of the ref to make sure the player was not down (or out of bounds) when the light goes on, but on those closer calls, you likely cannot rely on the chip unless you have one at either end of the football . knowing how wide the football is you can probably get that replay accuracy pretty high most times. Even then, not a lock to get it right 100% of the time.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

What I don't get is why would the NFL be interested in fixing games? Who "owns" the NFL?

The owners.

If you've ever met anyone with money two things will always hold true:

1. They want more money
2. They have enormous ego's and are really competitive

There is no way these owners are getting together and telling Goodell - "hey, let someone else win all the Super Bowls"

No way, no how. Because no matter who is in the game the NFL is printing money and more of it.

Only fools think the NFL is rigging games
That said, they have made a mockery out of tight football games in the 4th Q mostly due to crippling penalties left to the judgement of referees, broader NFL topic beyond the Chiefs

-Jimmy Johnson told his Miami Hurricanes in 1988 before a trip to South Bend "Don't leave the game in the Refs' hands" and low and behold they lost 31-30 and came up on the short side of things when you look back at the game, same could be said for the 2002 Canes when they lost to OSU in the Fiesta Bowl

My point is if teams want to beat the Chiefs, don't leave it in the Refs' hands and that goes for any team
How come nobody is able to give them a 31-9 whooping in the Playoffs other than the Tampa Bay Buccaneers?
That's how you beat the Kansas City Chiefs, don't cry about losing a close game in the 4th

-Is Kelce scheduled to propose to Swift right before or after they all announce they're going to Disney World?

 

[Steelers4Life]

The problem isn't that any one of the calls that goes the Chiefs way is so egregious that it's the reason they've won games.

The problem is that every big call in big moments... every consequential judgement call... every time a call might or might not be made, it just happens to go in the Chiefs favor.

Whether it was the catch on the ball that hit the ground, the spotting of the ball on 3rd AND 4th down, the multiple blocks in the back and holds that could've been called on the long punt return, the multiple times that it appeared Chris Jones lined up offsides on the tush pushes, or the roughing the passer penalties that Mahomes gets that no other QB seems to get, the close ones always go the way of the Chiefs. And over the course of a game, they add up.

I'm not saying that the refs are consciously favoring one team. No one disputes that the NFL benefits financially from Taylor Swift being at games, but I think it's far fetched that there's a really effort to swing the games. Not impossible, but far fetched.

There's going to be plenty of scrutiny on it next Sunday.

 

[Anarchy99]

The problem is that every big call in big moments... every consequential judgement call... every time a call might or might not be made, it just happens to go in the Chiefs favor.

I remember the last PHI / KC Super Bowl with the defensive holding call near the end of the game. Still can't see how they called that one a penalty with the entire season on the line. Without the penalty, KC would have had to kick a FG and left 1:45 on the clock for the Eagles to counter.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

The problem isn't that any one of the calls that goes the Chiefs way is so egregious that it's the reason they've won games.

The problem is that every big call in big moments... every consequential judgement call... every time a call might or might not be made, it just happens to go in the Chiefs favor.

Whether it was the catch on the ball that hit the ground, the spotting of the ball on 3rd AND 4th down, the multiple blocks in the back and holds that could've been called on the long punt return, the multiple times that it appeared Chris Jones lined up offsides on the tush pushes, or the roughing the passer penalties that Mahomes gets that no other QB seems to get, the close ones always go the way of the Chiefs. And over the course of a game, they add up.

I'm not saying that the refs are consciously favoring one team. No one disputes that the NFL benefits financially from Taylor Swift being at games, but I think it's far fetched that there's a really effort to swing the games. Not impossible, but far fetched.

There's going to be plenty of scrutiny on it next Sunday.

at this point in the end it really doesn't matter.....hell the last time these two teams played in the super bowl.....people's heads exploded on THE CALL in that game ....even though the player who committed the penalty said he did in fact commit the penalty.....people STILL went ape ****....

 

[Stinkin Ref]

The problem is that every big call in big moments... every consequential judgement call... every time a call might or might not be made, it just happens to go in the Chiefs favor.

I remember the last PHI / KC Super Bowl with the defensive holding call near the end of the game. Still can't see how they called that one a penalty with the entire season on the line. Without the penalty, KC would have had to kick a FG and left 1:45 on the clock for the Eagles to counter.

lol...we were thinking along the same line at the time.....you do realize even the guy that had the penalty called on him admitted he committed the penalty right....?

 

[Stinkin Ref]

The problem isn't that any one of the calls that goes the Chiefs way is so egregious that it's the reason they've won games.

The problem is that every big call in big moments... every consequential judgement call... every time a call might or might not be made, it just happens to go in the Chiefs favor.

Whether it was the catch on the ball that hit the ground, the spotting of the ball on 3rd AND 4th down, the multiple blocks in the back and holds that could've been called on the long punt return, the multiple times that it appeared Chris Jones lined up offsides on the tush pushes, or the roughing the passer penalties that Mahomes gets that no other QB seems to get, the close ones always go the way of the Chiefs. And over the course of a game, they add up.

I'm not saying that the refs are consciously favoring one team. No one disputes that the NFL benefits financially from Taylor Swift being at games, but I think it's far fetched that there's a really effort to swing the games. Not impossible, but far fetched.

There's going to be plenty of scrutiny on it next Sunday.

also wanted to add...your use of the EVERY really casts some shade on your post....Chiefs havr been on the wrong side of many calls....#Toney

 

[Anarchy99]

the last time these two teams played in the super bowl.....people's heads exploded on THE CALL in that game ....even though the player who committed the penalty said he did in fact commit the penalty.....people STILL went ape ****....

The problem I had was there were multiple other plays throughout the second half with more contact that were ignored and got no calls. IMO, just because a player admitted to grabbing someone doesn't necessarily mean they should have thrown a flag. That's my biggest pet peeve with officiating in any sport. I don't care what is or isn't called a foul as long as the game is called consistently throughout. In this case, sure, the DB got his hands on JJSS. To the letter of the law, it was a foul. If I were a ref, I wouldn't have called anything . . . based on the way the game had been called up until that point. After 73 minutes of a very evenly matched game, that ended up being a huge call that could easily have impacted the outcome of the game.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

the last time these two teams played in the super bowl.....people's heads exploded on THE CALL in that game ....even though the player who committed the penalty said he did in fact commit the penalty.....people STILL went ape ****....

The problem I had was there were multiple other plays throughout the second half with more contact that were ignored and got no calls. IMO, just because a player admitted to grabbing someone doesn't necessarily mean they should have thrown a flag. That's my biggest pet peeve with officiating in any sport. I don't care what is or isn't called a foul as long as the game is called consistently throughout. In this case, sure, the DB got his hands on JJSS. To the letter of the law, it was a foul. If I were a ref, I wouldn't have called anything . . . based on the way the game had been called up until that point. After 73 minutes of a very evenly matched game, that ended up being a huge call that could easily have impacted the outcome of the game.

your initial response to steelers4life (and what you quoted) was in reference to the part of his post about all the calls going in KC's favor....so it's pretty safe to assume that it what you were referring to....and supporting....that KC gets the calls.....

now you are spinning it that you just want consistency across the board.....and that's fair.....but also a different discussion...but your post was slanted towards agreeing with what he said about KC getting favoritism of some sort....

are there examples of these "multiple other plays throughout the second half that were ignored and got no calls"...

 

[eighsse2]

the last time these two teams played in the super bowl.....people's heads exploded on THE CALL in that game ....even though the player who committed the penalty said he did in fact commit the penalty.....people STILL went ape ****....

The problem I had was there were multiple other plays throughout the second half with more contact that were ignored and got no calls. IMO, just because a player admitted to grabbing someone doesn't necessarily mean they should have thrown a flag. That's my biggest pet peeve with officiating in any sport. I don't care what is or isn't called a foul as long as the game is called consistently throughout. In this case, sure, the DB got his hands on JJSS. To the letter of the law, it was a foul. If I were a ref, I wouldn't have called anything . . . based on the way the game had been called up until that point. After 73 minutes of a very evenly matched game, that ended up being a huge call that could easily have impacted the outcome of the game.

your initial response to steelers4life (and what you quoted) was in reference to the part of his post about all the calls going in KC's favor....so it's pretty safe to assume that it what you were referring to....and supporting....that KC gets the calls.....

now you are spinning it that you just want consistency across the board.....and that's fair.....but also a different discussion...but your post was slanted towards agreeing with what he said about KC getting favoritism of some sort....

are there examples of these "multiple other plays throughout the second half that were ignored and got no calls"...

Name does NOT check out.

 

[Anarchy99]

the last time these two teams played in the super bowl.....people's heads exploded on THE CALL in that game ....even though the player who committed the penalty said he did in fact commit the penalty.....people STILL went ape ****....

The problem I had was there were multiple other plays throughout the second half with more contact that were ignored and got no calls. IMO, just because a player admitted to grabbing someone doesn't necessarily mean they should have thrown a flag. That's my biggest pet peeve with officiating in any sport. I don't care what is or isn't called a foul as long as the game is called consistently throughout. In this case, sure, the DB got his hands on JJSS. To the letter of the law, it was a foul. If I were a ref, I wouldn't have called anything . . . based on the way the game had been called up until that point. After 73 minutes of a very evenly matched game, that ended up being a huge call that could easily have impacted the outcome of the game.

your initial response to steelers4life (and what you quoted) was in reference to the part of his post about all the calls going in KC's favor....so it's pretty safe to assume that it what you were referring to....and supporting....that KC gets the calls.....

now you are spinning it that you just want consistency across the board.....and that's fair.....but also a different discussion...but your post was slanted towards agreeing with what he said about KC getting favoritism of some sort....

are there examples of these "multiple other plays throughout the second half that were ignored and got no calls"...

I didn't intend to support a conspiracy theory that the league and the refs are colluding to get KC an inordinate amount of favorable calls. But the one play that jumped to my mind was the play we have been discussing. I certainly don't think the ref was trying to help out the Chiefs and that there was any malfeasance on his part. That play was intended to show that some calls at key moments have gone the Chiefs way (which is what steelers4life had mentioned).

As for the other issue (consistency from the refs), I was more perturbed by the fact they called a penalty there (with no bias toward which team it favored . . . I just thought it was a bad decision). I remember watching the game and there being no calls for defensive holding or DPI on physical plays in the second half. In real time, I remember thinking they were going with the old axiom of "letting them play" and "not wanting to make penalties" be a part of determining the outcome. The refs had not called an in-play penalty for 62 minutes in a row prior to the defensive holding call.

They had only called pre-snap / false start or offsides penalties. That's the equivalent of an entire game's worth of time with no holding, illegal contact, hands to the face, pass interference, personal foul, block to the back, roughing the passer, late hit, unsportsmanlike conduct, or other similar penalties. How often does that happen? Close to never. Then they threw the flag on impeding progress of JJSS . . . which occurred within 5 yards of the LOS (which would have been another reason I wouldn't have thrown a flag). That's why I said it seemed like that flag didn't fit the way the game was being called.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

the last time these two teams played in the super bowl.....people's heads exploded on THE CALL in that game ....even though the player who committed the penalty said he did in fact commit the penalty.....people STILL went ape ****....

The problem I had was there were multiple other plays throughout the second half with more contact that were ignored and got no calls. IMO, just because a player admitted to grabbing someone doesn't necessarily mean they should have thrown a flag. That's my biggest pet peeve with officiating in any sport. I don't care what is or isn't called a foul as long as the game is called consistently throughout. In this case, sure, the DB got his hands on JJSS. To the letter of the law, it was a foul. If I were a ref, I wouldn't have called anything . . . based on the way the game had been called up until that point. After 73 minutes of a very evenly matched game, that ended up being a huge call that could easily have impacted the outcome of the game.

your initial response to steelers4life (and what you quoted) was in reference to the part of his post about all the calls going in KC's favor....so it's pretty safe to assume that it what you were referring to....and supporting....that KC gets the calls.....

now you are spinning it that you just want consistency across the board.....and that's fair.....but also a different discussion...but your post was slanted towards agreeing with what he said about KC getting favoritism of some sort....

are there examples of these "multiple other plays throughout the second half that were ignored and got no calls"...

I didn't intend to support a conspiracy theory that the league and the refs are colluding to get KC an inordinate amount of favorable calls. But the one play that jumped to my mind was the play we have been discussing. I certainly don't think the ref was trying to help out the Chiefs and that there was any malfeasance on his part. That play was intended to show that some calls at key moments have gone the Chiefs way (which is what steelers4life had mentioned).

As for the other issue (consistency from the refs), I was more perturbed by the fact they called a penalty there (with no bias toward which team it favored . . . I just thought it was a bad decision). I remember watching the game and there being no calls for defensive holding or DPI on physical plays in the second half. In real time, I remember thinking they were going with the old axiom of "letting them play" and "not wanting to make penalties" be a part of determining the outcome. The refs had not called an in-play penalty for 62 minutes in a row prior to the defensive holding call.

They had only called pre-snap / false start or offsides penalties. That's the equivalent of an entire game's worth of time with no holding, illegal contact, hands to the face, pass interference, personal foul, block to the back, roughing the passer, late hit, unsportsmanlike conduct, or other similar penalties. How often does that happen? Close to never. Then they threw the flag on impeding progress of JJSS . . . which occurred within 5 yards of the LOS (which would have been another reason I wouldn't have thrown a flag). That's why I said it seemed like that flag didn't fit the way the game was being called.

I guess I have a hard time labeling that play as "a call that went the Chiefs way" when even the player who the penalty was called on said he deserved the flag....to me that is just a "call in a game"....like any other....describing it as "one that went the Chiefs way" in the way it is being described hints at favoritism....the outcome (which team) shouldn't matter.....it was a play that was called correctly....

I think you and most fans are looking for a "level of consistency" that is impossible to achieve....it's a noble request, and something all officials actually strive for....(believe it or not, we want to be "perfect") and go unnoticed....I mean say out loud to yourself what you actually wanted on that play....

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag.....you want to talk about something hard to officiate....lol

 

[Stinkin Ref]

IMO....I want officials to see a play and then judge accordingly whether it was worthy of a flag or not....and unfortunately "judgement" doesn't get delivered to these guy's houses by Amazon in a nice box that is the same for all 120+ officials.....and unfortunately just because something wasn't called earlier in the game doesn't mean it shouldn't be called later....judgment plays/calls like DPI or defensive holding may be "similar" but they are never exactly the same....

 

[Anarchy99]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

so were you in some pregame meeting with the officials where they discussed this....or just your opinion based on how the game shook out....?...I can promise you refs don't pregame a game by saying "let's not throw any flags today boys"....people think stupid **** like this actually happens, but it doesn't....

saw a thing a few days ago on TV (not sure what show) talking about this topic a little and what are the differences are between the good and the bad teams....and advancing in the post season....they brought up several factors.....front office/drafts/coaching/vets/etc.....and one of the other things they mentioned was discipline....and the fact that many of the teams that advance deep into the playoffs don't make many mistakes.....especially ones that can cost you games....you pointing out that both PHI and KC had zero penalties other then pre snap in the super bowl supports that....both teams were really good and played really disciplined....so it's not really a surprise when the last two teams standing don't commit a bunch of penalties....especially game changing penalties.....but it does happen....

 

[Anarchy99]

so were you in some pregame meeting with the officials where they discussed this....or just your opinion based on how the game shook out....?...I can promise you refs don't pregame a game by saying "let's not throw any flags today boys"....people think stupid **** like this actually happens, but it doesn't....

saw a thing a few days ago on TV (not sure what show) talking about this topic a little and what are the differences are between the good and the bad teams....and advancing in the post season....they brought up several factors.....front office/drafts/coaching/vets/etc.....and one of the other things they mentioned was discipline....and the fact that many of the teams that advance deep into the playoffs don't make many mistakes.....especially ones that can cost you games....you pointing out that both PHI and KC had zero penalties other then pre snap in the super bowl supports that....both teams were really good and played really disciplined....so it's not really a surprise when the last two teams standing don't commit a bunch of penalties....especially game changing penalties.....but it does happen....

I don't think the refs huddle up before games and decide how they are going to call a game (unless the league gives them points of emphasis or things to look out for). But I do think that there are some unwritten rules that refs usually follow (ie, limiting flags for the most blatant penalties and infractions at the end of games). Not always, but I tend to think that they call fewer penalties in crunch time. And I also think that the home team gets the benefit of the doubt on calls in those situations. (Obviously not applicable at a neutral site.)

I decided to look up how the league championship games were officiated before the PHI / KC Superbowl. In the Eagles / Niners matchup, there were 12 in-play penalties like the ones that I listed off earlier. In the Chiefs / Bengals game there were 11 such penalties. Who knows, maybe the Chiefs and Eagles all played like perfect gentlemen in the Super Bowl that night. Maybe they learned a lot with an extra week off. But I find it . . . unlikely . . . that each team played any differently in the SB than they did in the game prior. To go from 11 or 12 major penalty calls to 2 for the same infractions in a game with 5 quarters seemed unusual. I am not remotely suggesting that the refs were biased toward one of the teams, that they colluded in anyway, or that they made a conscious decision or discussed how they were going to call or ignore penalties. I just think it's odd that there were hardly any penalties.

 

[Steelers4Life]

The problem isn't that any one of the calls that goes the Chiefs way is so egregious that it's the reason they've won games.

The problem is that every big call in big moments... every consequential judgement call... every time a call might or might not be made, it just happens to go in the Chiefs favor.

Whether it was the catch on the ball that hit the ground, the spotting of the ball on 3rd AND 4th down, the multiple blocks in the back and holds that could've been called on the long punt return, the multiple times that it appeared Chris Jones lined up offsides on the tush pushes, or the roughing the passer penalties that Mahomes gets that no other QB seems to get, the close ones always go the way of the Chiefs. And over the course of a game, they add up.

I'm not saying that the refs are consciously favoring one team. No one disputes that the NFL benefits financially from Taylor Swift being at games, but I think it's far fetched that there's a really effort to swing the games. Not impossible, but far fetched.

There's going to be plenty of scrutiny on it next Sunday.

also wanted to add...your use of the EVERY really casts some shade on your post....Chiefs havr been on the wrong side of many calls....#Toney

I get that it's a sensitive topic to Chiefs fans. But whether I used the word every or almost every, the point remains the same.

There are bad calls, and there are consequential bad calls. On the consequential ones, the Chiefs tend to ALMOST always come out on top. Its why even in last week's game, it's not like people pointed to other questionable, impactful calls that went the Bills' way. Why? Because they ALL went for the Chiefs. People can come to their own conclusions on why.

 

[Steelers4Life]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

so were you in some pregame meeting with the officials where they discussed this....or just your opinion based on how the game shook out....?...I can promise you refs don't pregame a game by saying "let's not throw any flags today boys"....people think stupid **** like this actually happens, but it doesn't....

saw a thing a few days ago on TV (not sure what show) talking about this topic a little and what are the differences are between the good and the bad teams....and advancing in the post season....they brought up several factors.....front office/drafts/coaching/vets/etc.....and one of the other things they mentioned was discipline....and the fact that many of the teams that advance deep into the playoffs don't make many mistakes.....especially ones that can cost you games....you pointing out that both PHI and KC had zero penalties other then pre snap in the super bowl supports that....both teams were really good and played really disciplined....so it's not really a surprise when the last two teams standing don't commit a bunch of penalties....especially game changing penalties.....but it does happen....

I don't think the refs huddle up before games and decide how they are going to call a game (unless the league gives them points of emphasis or things to look out for). But I do think that there are some unwritten rules that refs usually follow (ie, limiting flags for the most blatant penalties and infractions at the end of games). Not always, but I tend to think that they call fewer penalties in crunch time. And I also think that the home team gets the benefit of the doubt on calls in those situations. (Obviously not applicable at a neutral site.)

I decided to look up how the league championship games were officiated before the PHI / KC Superbowl. In the Eagles / Niners matchup, there were 12 in-play penalties like the ones that I listed off earlier. In the Chiefs / Bengals game there were 11 such penalties. Who knows, maybe the Chiefs and Eagles all played like perfect gentlemen in the Super Bowl that night. Maybe they learned a lot with an extra week off. But I find it . . . unlikely . . . that each team played any differently in the SB than they did in the game prior. To go from 11 or 12 major penalty calls to 2 for the same infractions in a game with 5 quarters seemed unusual. I am not remotely suggesting that the refs were biased toward one of the teams, that they colluded in anyway, or that they made a conscious decision or discussed how they were going to call or ignore penalties. I just think it's odd that there were hardly any penalties.

bolded....since you were looking....how many were on KC or PHI..... vs the team that lost....of the 23 ....how many were on the winning team...?

 

[Stinkin Ref]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

bolded...again I will ask...what were these plays that you are referring too....?

 

[Steelers4Life]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

bolded...again I will ask...what were these plays that you are referring too....?

If you're asking me for a specific play, nope, don't have it.

If you want to believe that almost no penalties were committed during play for almost 4 quarters when neither team had a track record like that, and then finally one was committed coincidentally on a moment that big, you can. It just goes against any semblance of logic to believe that.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

bolded...again I will ask...what were these plays that you are referring too....?

If you're asking me for a specific play, nope, don't have it.

If you want to believe that almost no penalties were committed during play for almost 4 quarters when neither team had a track record like that, and then finally one was committed coincidentally on a moment that big, you can. It just goes against any semblance of logic to believe that.

logic....so we/everybody/you and anarchy when discussing something are allowed to just throw out statements/opinions as fact just because that's the "way we feel it happened"........not even one play to back it up....we are just supposed to take you and anarchy for your word.....got it....my bad....

 

[Steelers4Life]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

bolded...again I will ask...what were these plays that you are referring too....?

If you're asking me for a specific play, nope, don't have it.

If you want to believe that almost no penalties were committed during play for almost 4 quarters when neither team had a track record like that, and then finally one was committed coincidentally on a moment that big, you can. It just goes against any semblance of logic to believe that.

logic....so we/everybody/you and anarchy when discussing something are allowed to just throw out statements/opinions as fact just because that's the "way we feel it happened"........not even one play to back it up....we are just supposed to take you and anarchy for your word.....got it....my bad....

As has been stated, you're free to believe that for 4 quarters, defensive backs almost never clutched or grabbed recievers, linebacker never held a TE for a second coming out of their break, and offensive linemen played every snap clean against two pretty good pass rushes. And then, at a key moment late in the game, THEN a penalty was committed. If that makes sense to you, enjoy it.

That makes much more sense than the idea that the refs let them play without getting involved for 95% of the game and then changed their approach at a key moment late in the game that just happened to benefit the Chiefs in a fairly substantial way.

No one has to take anyone's word for anything.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

bolded...again I will ask...what were these plays that you are referring too....?

There is offensive holding on pretty much every play

 

[Stinkin Ref]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

bolded...again I will ask...what were these plays that you are referring too....?

If you're asking me for a specific play, nope, don't have it.

If you want to believe that almost no penalties were committed during play for almost 4 quarters when neither team had a track record like that, and then finally one was committed coincidentally on a moment that big, you can. It just goes against any semblance of logic to believe that.

logic....so we/everybody/you and anarchy when discussing something are allowed to just throw out statements/opinions as fact just because that's the "way we feel it happened"........not even one play to back it up....we are just supposed to take you and anarchy for your word.....got it....my bad....

As has been stated, you're free to believe that for 4 quarters, defensive backs almost never clutched or grabbed recievers, linebacker never held a TE for a second coming out of their break, and offensive linemen played every snap clean against two pretty good pass rushes. And then, at a key moment late in the game, THEN a penalty was committed. If that makes sense to you, enjoy it.

That makes much more sense than the idea that the refs let them play without getting involved for 95% of the game and then changed their approach at a key moment late in the game that just happened to benefit the Chiefs in a fairly substantial way.

No one has to take anyone's word for anything.

so you are saying the ref that threw the flag cheated for the chiefs...?

 

[Ghost Rider]

I hope everyone who thinks the officials are going out of their way to help the Chiefs are rich, because if you aren't betting the Chiefs in every game (which someone with a brain would be doing if they thought the fix was in), then you are really stupid.

 

[The Duff Man]

I hope everyone who thinks the officials are going out of their way to help the Chiefs are rich, because if you aren't betting the Chiefs in every game (which someone with a brain would be doing if they thought the fix was in), then you are really stupid.

I did and will be doing it again in the Super Bowl

 

[The Duff Man]

The commentary here is

Hilarious

 

[The Duff Man]

This video shows five times during the game the Bills had a first down taken away with a bad spot.

Gross Incompetence or Ref with Bias?

It doesn’t even address the missed face mask, or when Allen is literally pointing to his target being held mid play

 

[renesauz]

the last time these two teams played in the super bowl.....people's heads exploded on THE CALL in that game ....even though the player who committed the penalty said he did in fact commit the penalty.....people STILL went ape ****....

The problem I had was there were multiple other plays throughout the second half with more contact that were ignored and got no calls. IMO, just because a player admitted to grabbing someone doesn't necessarily mean they should have thrown a flag. That's my biggest pet peeve with officiating in any sport. I don't care what is or isn't called a foul as long as the game is called consistently throughout. In this case, sure, the DB got his hands on JJSS. To the letter of the law, it was a foul. If I were a ref, I wouldn't have called anything . . . based on the way the game had been called up until that point. After 73 minutes of a very evenly matched game, that ended up being a huge call that could easily have impacted the outcome of the game.

your initial response to steelers4life (and what you quoted) was in reference to the part of his post about all the calls going in KC's favor....so it's pretty safe to assume that it what you were referring to....and supporting....that KC gets the calls.....

now you are spinning it that you just want consistency across the board.....and that's fair.....but also a different discussion...but your post was slanted towards agreeing with what he said about KC getting favoritism of some sort....

are there examples of these "multiple other plays throughout the second half that were ignored and got no calls"...

I didn't intend to support a conspiracy theory that the league and the refs are colluding to get KC an inordinate amount of favorable calls. But the one play that jumped to my mind was the play we have been discussing. I certainly don't think the ref was trying to help out the Chiefs and that there was any malfeasance on his part. That play was intended to show that some calls at key moments have gone the Chiefs way (which is what steelers4life had mentioned).

As for the other issue (consistency from the refs), I was more perturbed by the fact they called a penalty there (with no bias toward which team it favored . . . I just thought it was a bad decision). I remember watching the game and there being no calls for defensive holding or DPI on physical plays in the second half. In real time, I remember thinking they were going with the old axiom of "letting them play" and "not wanting to make penalties" be a part of determining the outcome. The refs had not called an in-play penalty for 62 minutes in a row prior to the defensive holding call.

They had only called pre-snap / false start or offsides penalties. That's the equivalent of an entire game's worth of time with no holding, illegal contact, hands to the face, pass interference, personal foul, block to the back, roughing the passer, late hit, unsportsmanlike conduct, or other similar penalties. How often does that happen? Close to never. Then they threw the flag on impeding progress of JJSS . . . which occurred within 5 yards of the LOS (which would have been another reason I wouldn't have thrown a flag). That's why I said it seemed like that flag didn't fit the way the game was being called.

I guess I have a hard time labeling that play as "a call that went the Chiefs way" when even the player who the penalty was called on said he deserved the flag....to me that is just a "call in a game"....like any other....describing it as "one that went the Chiefs way" in the way it is being described hints at favoritism....the outcome (which team) shouldn't matter.....it was a play that was called correctly....

I think you and most fans are looking for a "level of consistency" that is impossible to achieve....it's a noble request, and something all officials actually strive for....(believe it or not, we want to be "perfect") and go unnoticed....I mean say out loud to yourself what you actually wanted on that play....

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag.....you want to talk about something hard to officiate....lol

I vividly remember the call in question. It was indeed a penalty. BUT...similar fouls went uncalled the whole game. It wasn't an egregious hold, and it was VERY consequential. Had they been calling similar holds the whole game there would have been no controversy at all.

 

[Ghost Rider]

This video shows five times during the game the Bills had a first down taken away with a bad spot.

Gross Incompetence or Ref with Bias?

It doesn’t even address the missed face mask, or when Allen is literally pointing to his target being held mid play

I was rooting for the Bills, but this "had this been a 1st down, the Bills would have won" talk is just madness and needs to stop. That did not decide the game.

 

[Steelers4Life]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

bolded...again I will ask...what were these plays that you are referring too....?

If you're asking me for a specific play, nope, don't have it.

If you want to believe that almost no penalties were committed during play for almost 4 quarters when neither team had a track record like that, and then finally one was committed coincidentally on a moment that big, you can. It just goes against any semblance of logic to believe that.

logic....so we/everybody/you and anarchy when discussing something are allowed to just throw out statements/opinions as fact just because that's the "way we feel it happened"........not even one play to back it up....we are just supposed to take you and anarchy for your word.....got it....my bad....

As has been stated, you're free to believe that for 4 quarters, defensive backs almost never clutched or grabbed recievers, linebacker never held a TE for a second coming out of their break, and offensive linemen played every snap clean against two pretty good pass rushes. And then, at a key moment late in the game, THEN a penalty was committed. If that makes sense to you, enjoy it.

That makes much more sense than the idea that the refs let them play without getting involved for 95% of the game and then changed their approach at a key moment late in the game that just happened to benefit the Chiefs in a fairly substantial way.

No one has to take anyone's word for anything.

so you are saying the ref that threw the flag cheated for the chiefs...?

No. I'm not. At least I'd hope he wasn't doing it with those kind of motives. I think it's just another questionable call at a pivotal point in a game that happened to go in the Chiefs favor. They just about always do, just like all of the calls and non-calls last week. Lots of examples, but none of them went in the Bills' favor.

If you watch the holding play from the end of their last Super Bowl matchup, you'll see a ticky tack half-grab that is a penalty by the letter of the law. It happens on damn near every play, and like offensive holding, it's often not blatant but a discretionary call. The problem isn't that that call itself was wrong. Its that up until that moment, they hadn't called the game that way at all and the players had expectations of what was and wasn't being allowed that night. In that moment, the ref changed how they had called the entire game before it... at a time that had a huge impact on a failed 3rd down attempt.

 

[Steelers4Life]

This video shows five times during the game the Bills had a first down taken away with a bad spot.

Gross Incompetence or Ref with Bias?

It doesn’t even address the missed face mask, or when Allen is literally pointing to his target being held mid play

I was rooting for the Bills, but this "had this been a 1st down, the Bills would have won" talk is just madness and needs to stop. That did not decide the game.

No, but think about how many questionable decisions went in favor of the Chiefs. No single call won or lost the game and the Bills couldve gotten the first down and still lost a y number of ways.

But, between the catch that hit the ground before anyone had control, multiple questionable spots on 3rd and 4th downs, Chris Jones not being called for lining up offsides, and none of the borderline blocks in the back and holding being called on the long punt return, youd think that SOME of those calls would've broken the other way. In the last 5 days, I haven't heard anyone reference a single questionable call from that game that did get called in the Bills' favor. I know I didn't notice any.

It just happens that way I guess.

 

[The Duff Man]

According to pro football reference that one (or two really) first down call shifted KCs win probability from 40% to 60% at the time the call was made.

It definitely didn’t decide the game.

We often try to distill games down to one moment or one reason why a team won, then someone else can jump in with an argument - well Kincaid should have caught that pass as an example.

The reality is, no one play decides any game. But as the game progresses win probability starts to come into focus and an incorrect (or bias) call moved win probability 20% in favour of one team. To me that is something worth correcting.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

This video shows five times during the game the Bills had a first down taken away with a bad spot.

Gross Incompetence or Ref with Bias?

It doesn’t even address the missed face mask, or when Allen is literally pointing to his target being held mid play

I was rooting for the Bills, but this "had this been a 1st down, the Bills would have won" talk is just madness and needs to stop. That did not decide the game.

Have people been saying this?

 

[Alex P Keaton]

According to pro football reference that one (or two really) first down call shifted KCs win probability from 40% to 60% at the time the call was made.

It definitely didn’t decide the game.

We often try to distill games down to one moment or one reason why a team won, then someone else can jump in with an argument - well Kincaid should have caught that pass as an example.

The reality is, no one play decides any game. But as the game progresses win probability starts to come into focus and an incorrect (or bias) call moved win probability 20% in favour of one team. To me that is something worth correcting.

Yeah, a 20 pt shift for a single call is huge…..clearly worth getting it right (which they obviously didn’t)

 

[Anarchy99]

Getting back to the PHI / KC SB year, in 19 games prior to the SB, the Chiefs averaged 4.63 post-snap penalties. Their opponents averaged 4.89 post-snap penalties. In 19 previous games, the Eagles averaged 3.68 post-snap penalties. Their opponents averaged 4.11 penalties.

That means in KC's games, there were an average of 9.52 post-snap penalties per game. For PHI, that averaged out to 7.79 post-snap penalties per game. Since the SB went to a full OT, that means the expected number of penalties (using the averages) would have been a combined 11.9 post-snap penalties in KC games and a combined 9.7 post-snap penalties in PHI games (the average per game total multiplied by 1.25). Similarly, the expected number of post-snap penalties would have been 5.79 post-snap penalties for KC and 4.60 post-snap penalties for PHI.

In the SB, KC was called for 0 post-snap penalties, while PHI was called for 3 post-snap penalties. Given the expected total per game averages adjusted for OT, 3 total post-snap penalties represented 25% of the norm for KC games and 30% of the norm for PHI games.

There were 162 total plays / snaps between the two teams including all offensive plays, special teams plays, and plays that were negated by penalties. Again, I am not suggesting the fix was in or there was a conspiracy to help the Chiefs, but I find it odd that a team could go 162 snaps in a row and not commit a live action penalty. I don't need to go hunt for individual plays to think that outcome seems very atypical. Not suggesting that the moon landings were faked, Elvis is still alive, or that Paul McCartney died in 1966 and was replaced with a look alike. Just presenting my opinion that the officiating went against the usual outcomes compared to the other games those two teams played that season.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

are we searching for a solution to a problem that really doesn't exist...?

Its not that the problem doesn't exist, its that the "problem" only exists on social media and internet message boards. Across the internet every single day fans of losing sports teams across all sports worldwide are bitterly complaining about referees, claiming bias and corruption and suggesting these sports are in some sort of crisis situation due to poor officiating. It makes for fun banter during a two week break with no football, but there's no need to take any of this seriously.

After Tim Donaghy in the NBA, I'm willing to believe that NFL referees in all sports might be making certain calls to influence outcomes.

fixed

cause that is all the whiners and criers and conspiracy theorists have to fall back on....

It's not a conspiracy theory when an actual professional sports referee got 15 months for fixing games.

nobody has any substantial proof of anything in the NFL.....not a sniff......yet it keeps being brought up by those with the loser mentality and when their team loses or a team like KC appears to get a call go their way....it happens on a weekly basis in here and on social media...and Tim D is the same ol tired thing every single one of them falls back on when called out....

If you represent how referees discuss calls from the game, then I certainly see why the NFL would never want to let their referees talk to the press. Goodness.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

you wanted the official NOT to throw the flag even though the player who drew the flag said he deserved the flag

IMO, you are making way more out of this "admission" than it deserves. I just outlined that the refs hadn't thrown a flag for an in-play infraction since the first quarter. If we surveyed the other players on the field that played significant snaps and asked them if they had committed a penalty at some point in the game, they would have said yes and could have pointed out which plays without even thinking much about it. But yet none of those plays were penalized . . . as evidenced by the clear lack of penalties called.

I don't have the time or the access to tape of the game to go and comb through the video to find what should have been penalties on other plays but weren't. My point still stands that even without that visual evidence, the sheer fact that NO PENALTIES were called would reflect that the refs were focused on NOT throwing flags that day. I'm sorry . . . there is no way in a normal game that they could go 60+ minutes of game action without calling a single penalty other than illegal procedure or offsides. That just doesn't happen. Then to call what amounted to a ticky-tack foul in the final 2 minutes of overtime seemed out of place. IMO, at that point in the game, a defender would have had to have mauled a receiver or dragged him to get a call in that situation where it was obvious that the defender was beaten and trying not to give up a TD. But that's just my value judgement of how late game situations should be called.

But we live in an imperfect world. Receivers get grabbed coming off the LOS on practically every play. If the ref on that particular play felt that that DB's actions were more egregious than the actions and contact of all the other DBs on 65 other passing plays, so be it. I still look at it that play and think that James Bradbury got ticketed for doing 56 mph in a 55-mph zone when there were other cars on that day that went zipping by at 85 or 90.

It's laughable to think almost no penalties were committed in that game. They were, they just weren't called... until one of the most impactful moments of the game.

If calls are made consistently, no one complains no matter which side they're on. It's when they aren't consistent that there's a problem, and in Chiefs games in particular, there seems to be a consistent lack of consistency in the Chiefs favor on judgement calls.

bolded...again I will ask...what were these plays that you are referring too....?

If you're asking me for a specific play, nope, don't have it.

If you want to believe that almost no penalties were committed during play for almost 4 quarters when neither team had a track record like that, and then finally one was committed coincidentally on a moment that big, you can. It just goes against any semblance of logic to believe that.

logic....so we/everybody/you and anarchy when discussing something are allowed to just throw out statements/opinions as fact just because that's the "way we feel it happened"........not even one play to back it up....we are just supposed to take you and anarchy for your word.....got it....my bad....

As has been stated, you're free to believe that for 4 quarters, defensive backs almost never clutched or grabbed recievers, linebacker never held a TE for a second coming out of their break, and offensive linemen played every snap clean against two pretty good pass rushes. And then, at a key moment late in the game, THEN a penalty was committed. If that makes sense to you, enjoy it.

That makes much more sense than the idea that the refs let them play without getting involved for 95% of the game and then changed their approach at a key moment late in the game that just happened to benefit the Chiefs in a fairly substantial way.

No one has to take anyone's word for anything.

so you are saying the ref that threw the flag cheated for the chiefs...?

No. I'm not. At least I'd hope he wasn't doing it with those kind of motives. I think it's just another questionable call at a pivotal point in a game that happened to go in the Chiefs favor. They just about always do, just like all of the calls and non-calls last week. Lots of examples, but none of them went in the Bills' favor.

If you watch the holding play from the end of their last Super Bowl matchup, you'll see a ticky tack half-grab that is a penalty by the letter of the law. It happens on damn near every play, and like offensive holding, it's often not blatant but a discretionary call. The problem isn't that that call itself was wrong. Its that up until that moment, they hadn't called the game that way at all and the players had expectations of what was and wasn't being allowed that night. In that moment, the ref changed how they had called the entire game before it... at a time that had a huge impact on a failed 3rd down attempt.

I'll ask this of the third person to say this.....do have examples of similar plays that went "uncalled" or are you just assuming there "had to be" in order to support your position....