Refs blow the game

I think the ref overreacted; he simply saw the hand on the torso and without regard to seeing any effect on the receiver's body or jersey pulling he made a call, which most likely affected the outcome of the game. In critical moments like that it is best not to make a call.

Helmet-to-helmet blatant hit one of the first plays of the game.

Guy catches the ball, takes a few steps, hits the ground, ball doesn't move, has the ball. Is it a catch?

Guy catches a pass. Gets hit after one foot hits the ground, fumbles, it's a catch!

Holding on every play and they call it when convenient for the Chiefs.

This is why it's called a 'game.'

You may want to explain that to James Bradbury who is the Eagles player who was called for the hold. He has said it was a hold.

The 'make a football move' is the dumbest part of the catch rule.

Alan

While technically that play may be holding I think people are upset and suspicious because,

the same thing happened last year and that call was even worse and won the game for the rams

compare with the blatant holds that affected the last play before the field goal in the afc championship that weren't called

and of course compare the the saints rams missed pi which should pretty much make anyone think these last minute referee calls are being influenced by something (nfl, gamblers, ?)

also it really didn't affect the outcome of the play and I would bet if you watched through the game tape you would see stuff like that all game on both sides that isn't being called

it just doesn't feel good for players to get away with that stuff all game then they call it when it really affects the outcome. I had given up on watching nfl because off all this then started again week 17 this year and it was fun for a bit but ended up being disappointing.

the adage goes "theres a hold on every play" and its very convenience way for the nfl to control games when you only call the holds 5% of the time.

So to the rules of the game it's holding. But, and there is always a but - here is the issue from my perspective.

First and most importantly - that flag is thrown on plays like this (which let's be honest happen on almost every damn pass play of every game played in the NFL) maybe 50% of the time at best. It's the definition of the often used "ticky-tack" penalty.

Yesterday the officiating crew did a pretty good job I felt of keeping these calls to a bare minimum and this is the key point. The players 100% adjust throughout the game based on how the officials call the game. We all do at all levels of sports that are officiated. If you have played a full game where after a quarter you know they are being super strict on stuff like that then you know it's something you just can't do - that wasn't the case yesterday.

I just don't understand how, after officiating the game for 58 1/2 minutes one way, you decide to get ever so slightly stricter on that one play. That's simply poor officiating and the worst part is that prior to the play even happening, those officials know the implication of throwing a flag and what it means - basically game over and a season decided because of it.

You look at the AFC title game where that dude from Cinci makes that bone-headed play on Mahomes at the end. That's an example of something you can't let go. That hold? Come on now.

So to wrap it up, you have a ticky tack penalty that is really a coin flip call at best. A call you haven't been making all game that you know in that situation has HUGE implications. I'm sorry but the default there has to be no flag unless it's something so obviously egregious which that wasn't. You clearly can't mug the receiver on that play but that was the contact that was crucial factor in deciding an entire season of the National Football League? Nope.

I don't think anyone is disputing it's a hold (and yeah Bradbury doesn't either because it would be stupid for him to as it's pretty clear and he's doing a nice job taking "accountability").

The issue is in a game where these holds (which happen every play) were not enforced strictly at all (I just wrote I thought up until then the crew had actually done a great job letting the players play and keeping out of things), the official decides to reverse script and call one of the most innocuous ones of the game, on a ball that was never going to be caught, which has huge consequences.

It was such a great game with a total dud of an ending when it didn't need to be that way.

NFL rules are very convoluted. Just about every pro football game is filled with bad calls because the rules have so much subjectivity written in them that any two refs can see the same thing and reach different conclusions. And pro football players know how to exploit the rules. So, on just about every play you could find someone on the field who is arguably holding or committing pass interference. Refs miss calls and then try to make it up on closer calls. But in the end, if you come to the end of the game and claim that your team lost because of a blown call, you need to go back and watch the game again. The Eagles offense got shut down in the third quarter as the Chiefs were able to move the ball at will with a quarterback with a sprained ankle. When you score 24 points in the first half but barely muster 11 in the second, you did not lose because of one bad call. You lost because you got outplayed in the second half.

So, because the Eagles were getting away with calls all game you think they should just stay consistent and let them get away with that one too? Pass interference missed in the first half that benefitted Philadelphia. Goedert's crucial catch that absolutely was not a catch, went the Eagles way too. The catch and fumble that was returned for a TD that was overturned because they said it wasn't a catch is another big play that went the Eagles way. He absolutely caught it and made a football move up the field.

So, the Chiefs are getting screwed all game, so to be consistent they also need to get screwed at the end too? Got it.

Your wrong there. Fox focused on the end part of the video but earlier(and it was partly blocked by the defenders body but wonderful photos of it and a different camera angel) he was actually holding the jersey and it was being stretched out behind the receiver who may well have caught that pass if he wasn't held.) And again, even the defender admitted it was holding. You would think he'd know.

so you think the refs knew who was supposed to win the game and called it that way? Same as Maher missing 4 pats in the dallas/tampa playoff game? What was the over under for the dallas game? 45.5, total points scored after missing 4 pats? 45, vegas had the under

The Philly DB who got caught admitted that he was holding and only hoped that he wouldn't get caught for his holding. It is a miracle that the Chiefs overcame going against the Eagles and 7 crooked refs. The Eagles were bogusly given the "catch" that obviously wasn't a catch, and the fumble for a touchdown that obviously was a fumble was called back. The Eagles had a false start on nearly every play, and holding on nearly every play - yet were given passes by the bought off refs.

Yep, one big conspiracy to keep it close for more commercials. You nailed it guy. Please ignore the fact that it would have been closer if they had no called it, and there would have been more commercials as well. Your football (or marketing?) IQ is very low.

And right call 100%. At the time I thought it was ticky-tack but after seeing different angles, if not for the grab that's a wide open pass for an easy 1st down where the final few plays would have been identical to what we saw. IF there was a conspiracy for a closer game and more commercials it would have been if they swallowed the whistles on the play.

Agree 100%. Now....if Bradbury didn't hold it wouldn't have been that way.

No you wouldn’t have dummy

Babylon Bee

Don’t like the call but Chiefs probably still make the field goal. If it robbed us of anything it was a more dramatic finish with the Eagles having a two minute drill for the potential win.

It’s like DQing a sprinter for a false start when the paying public wants to see Lyles race Coleman

But surely you understand why your argument here is futile one right? Just like you did if I wanted to go back and analyse every play I could reel off a list of missed "holds" on the Eagles (and I'm not even an Eagles fan) and if we wanted to go super granular we could blow every single snap dead for a penalty based on the letter of the law. Then I could simply make the case for "who got screwed" too.

All of these arbitrary in field calls (I say that because stepping on a line etc isn't arbitrary) are contextual and happen in the context of how the game is called. I have zero issues with that being called if it has been enforced like this all game. Zero. But I suspect that if they had been called like this all game that James Bradbury probably doesn't even risk it in that situation and this is the key point.

Dude I don't even mind one bit the Chiefs won - in fact I picked them to win so it suits me. What I don't like is that such a great game fizzled out at the end because of an unnecessary decision and probably didn't aid the Chiefs in getting the 3 points they needed but stopped the Eagles having a chance to respond. As someone who has played sport before - as I am sure you have, the only thing sometimes you ask for is a chance and therefore I definitely am empathetic of the Eagles situation there.