Refs

[Sparko]

The famous "forward progress" calls by a retiring ref set a high standard. I had never seen it on a sack, and the calls were worth -10 points. The beauty of those calls were that the strip sack fumbles were then non-reviewable. Like yesterday's. The call yesterday was a pocket veto of anything the Chiefs did. It was a pre snap penalty, that showed their hand by allowing it to continue. Nothing good could have happened post flag. Must have felt pretty tingly throwing that

[jfish26]

I think this is a pretty relevant perspective. It does NOT mean the Chiefs lost Sunday because of the refs. But it does, in my opinion, mean that "durrrr he should have lined up onsides!!!" should not be the end of the story here.

We’re debating the wrong question on the flag against Chiefs’ Kadarius Toney

https://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-c ... rylink=cpy

Which brings us to the clarity: As the football world debates one question — did Toney line up offside or not? — the ire from Reid derives from another question entirely:

Did the referees follow the usual protocol for it?

His answer: an emphatic no.

Look, I realize some of the replies to this column will remind me Toney lined up offside. I’ve seen the freeze frame. And I agree. He’s offside. Slightly. What I’m telling you here: You’re arguing a different point.

The narrative about this unusual situation has somehow frequently failed to acknowledge why it’s so dang unusual.

Why is it? The offensive-offside infractions typically feature a warning, and I’m using the word “typically” rather than “always” because down judge Mike Carr failed to offer one Sunday at GEHA Field Arrowhead Stadium. I have spoken a lot of people involved in the NFL, past or present, over the past 24 hours, and I’ve not found even one who can recall such a penalty that was not preceded by a warning. Sure, some have thoughts on Toney’s discipline or the team’s eventual response to it. Heck, I did.

But on one aspect of it, they all agree: “You see it all the time. Almost every game. Warning,” one former coach in Kansas City told me.

Much of the conversation both locally and nationally is focused on the gray area, and whether Toney stepped into it or beyond it, but Reid sees the big-picture situation as black and white. The process unfolds in a very specific manner, and this instance just plain skipped a step.

“You give the head coach a heads up, and then in our case, we can tell them,” Reid said during the Zoom call Monday. “And then if they get called, listen, you were warned. And so that’s how it’s worked over the years. That’s what I was really, really trying to get across. And I take a lot of pride in taking what the officials give me and going to our players and telling them — like immediately telling them — and giving them that (information) and telling them, ‘Hey, listen, they’re giving you a warning. If you don’t do it, that’s on your plate.’”

Most penalties are subjective.

The processes should not be.

[...]

Immediately after the game, Reid commented that, “I haven’t had (an offensive offside penalty) like that.”

Not any at all, actually.

Per ESPN Stats, Reid has coached more than 25,000 offensive snaps, and not a one of them included an offside penalty on the offense. You can’t convince me Kadarius Toney is the first player coached by Reid to line up past the line of scrimmage. You can’t even convince me he’s the first to line up clearly offside. As one Chiefs player told me after the game, it’s quite common for players to hear something from officials about their alignment.

Toney should have made sure he lined up correctly. He should have made sure he received confirmation from the official that he was indeed lined up correctly. That’s all on him. They weren’t his only mistakes in the game, but they are mistakes so simple that any of us could avoid them in a game that features the best athletes in the world. Can’t happen. But even if he doesn’t line up properly, the typical response is to first warn him for it.

[...]

[The] footage, to be frank, is beside the point. After all, it wouldn’t change a thing about what Reid or Mahomes or anyone in that building said. What they would want to ask is this: Was the player previously warned?

We so often seek consistency from the enforcement of penalties.

But the first step? At the very least, we ought to see it in the process.

[DrPepper]

So I heard from the national talking heads this week that is common for the officials to warn the non-eligible receivers on the line, but not the others on the line. The receivers check themselves or get confirmation from the ref.

Another thing I heard was that KC's offensive line needs to look like a line rather than their logo (lol).

[Sparko]

I think we were all pretty happy it was your team at least. I think with three timeouts, the Bills would have found a way to win anyway. Green Bay too. The real frustration is with the inconsistent refs. Just cheating fans at this point. The Chiefs were gassed in the 4th quarter. It would have gone down to the last play.

The NFL stacking better rested teams against KC pretty much the second half of the season isn't cool. No excuse for the schedule to work out like that. Josh Allen has really done some Mahomes study. He made plays that only Mahomes could make.

[pdub]

I think this is a pretty relevant perspective. It does NOT mean the Chiefs lost Sunday because of the refs. But it does, in my opinion, mean that "durrrr he should have lined up onsides!!!" should not be the end of the story here.

This 'durrrr' continues.
I'm trying to put myself in another fan bases shoes and I am very much thinking i'd have the same response even if against the Chiefs.

I'd say something like, 'yea, that's some ticky tack shit for sure, we got pretty fortunate there with that, but you all got down 14-0 and we finished it.'

And that is true. The Chiefs were not good. Their WR's are trash. But ALSO this call that largely gets overlooked throughout the game and typically comes with a warning completely altered the ending.

It's the 'durrrr' foot down responses that don't even recognize that this call RARELY gets called yet it happens so many times a game and yet they called it to negate a likely game winning touchdown with a minute on the clock that just make me ashamed of the general fan base.

[jfish26]

I think this is a pretty relevant perspective. It does NOT mean the Chiefs lost Sunday because of the refs. But it does, in my opinion, mean that "durrrr he should have lined up onsides!!!" should not be the end of the story here.

This 'durrrr' continues.
I'm trying to put myself in another fan bases shoes and I am very much thinking i'd have the same response even if against the Chiefs.

I'd say something like, 'yea, that's some ticky tack shit for sure, we got pretty fortunate there with that, but you all got down 14-0 and we finished it.'

And that is true. The Chiefs were not good. Their WR's are trash. But ALSO this call that largely gets overlooked throughout the game and typically comes with a warning completely altered the ending.

It's the 'durrrr' foot down responses that don't even recognize that this call RARELY gets called yet it happens so many times a game and yet they called it to negate a likely game winning touchdown with a minute on the clock that just make me ashamed of the general fan base.

I'm sure every fanbase feels uniquely aggrieved.

But the context of this call matters, a lot.

It matters, a lot, that MVS got outright tackled with the potential game-tying throw in the air, the week before. It matters, a lot, that KC picked up a defensive holding penalty that was both (1) a legit call but (2) WAY less egregious than the MVS play, the drive before. It matters, a lot, that Buffalo didn't get called for its own obvious offsides, on the very next play.

It is not wrong to say "durr, these things wouldn't have mattered if the Chiefs hadn't been idiots!"

But nor is it really RIGHT; the NFL's whole thing is parity. The whole idea is that the margins are supposed to be razor thin. So yes, with all the resources available to call games fairly, and all the pressure that is on each and every play, Chiefs fans have - in my opinion - a legitimate gripe about just how much room for subjectivity and discretion there is in applying written rules.

[twocoach]

I think this is a pretty relevant perspective. It does NOT mean the Chiefs lost Sunday because of the refs. But it does, in my opinion, mean that "durrrr he should have lined up onsides!!!" should not be the end of the story here.

This 'durrrr' continues.
I'm trying to put myself in another fan bases shoes and I am very much thinking i'd have the same response even if against the Chiefs.

I'd say something like, 'yea, that's some ticky tack shit for sure, we got pretty fortunate there with that, but you all got down 14-0 and we finished it.'

And that is true. The Chiefs were not good. Their WR's are trash. But ALSO this call that largely gets overlooked throughout the game and typically comes with a warning completely altered the ending.

It's the 'durrrr' foot down responses that don't even recognize that this call RARELY gets called yet it happens so many times a game and yet they called it to negate a likely game winning touchdown with a minute on the clock that just make me ashamed of the general fan base.

I'm sure every fanbase feels uniquely aggrieved.

But the context of this call matters, a lot.

It matters, a lot, that MVS got outright tackled with the potential game-tying throw in the air, the week before. It matters, a lot, that KC picked up a defensive holding penalty that was both (1) a legit call but (2) WAY less egregious than the MVS play, the drive before. It matters, a lot, that Buffalo didn't get called for its own obvious offsides, on the very next play.

It is not wrong to say "durr, these things wouldn't have mattered if the Chiefs hadn't been idiots!"

But nor is it really RIGHT; the NFL's whole thing is parity. The whole idea is that the margins are supposed to be razor thin. So yes, with all the resources available to call games fairly, and all the pressure that is on each and every play, Chiefs fans have - in my opinion - a legitimate gripe about just how much room for subjectivity and discretion there is in applying written rules.

Every fan base in every sport has a list of games that they feel they lost due to the shitty, erratic and/ inconsistent performance by the referees. It's part of every sport that has refs. The NFL isn't going to do anything unique about this. As Roger Goodell succinctly put it:

“I think almost everybody, [to] my knowledge, is acknowledging the officials were absolutely correct,” Goodell said Wednesday in his news conference at the league’s winter meetings. “That's their job: to call when there's a foul. There was no question about that foul. It was absolutely the right call. If you don't call that, [then] our officials would have been subject to criticism also.”

And he's right. Yes, it fails to take into account all the nuance around it with regards to what is standard and the zillions of times they do not call it. But it 100% proves that the NFL has no interest in addressing their ref issues because you cannot address it. How do you make a rule that says "be more consistent" without dragging the game into a situation where you create an environment where refs are forced to call EVERY penalty that they see no matter what. NONE of us want that.

Some fans are mad that they didn't call an obvious foul one week and then mad that they did call an obvious foul the next week. If you want consistency, you're still going to be mad about one week or the other.

[MICHHAWK]

they should just take the humans out of the equation altogether. and use computers and robots instead of humans.



but then we wouldn't get our every monday morning circling of the red and yellow wahmbulance that we have grown to expect. it has become tradition.

[pdub]

"How do you make a rule that says "be more consistent" without dragging the game into a situation where you create an environment where refs are forced to call EVERY penalty that they see no matter what. NONE of us want that."

But this is an exponentially different circumstance.
This has been called ONCE against Andy Reid in his entire career.
It was called 11 times total this year.
In 416 games.
In which i'm sure in every single one of those 416 games WR's on each team were lined up offsides throughout the course of the game.
And as voiced across the league, this penalty usually comes with a warning before being called.

It's not like a holding which is called multiple times a game.
If we were called for a hold, which was a clear hold, yea that blows, but it's way different than this.

[jfish26]

"How do you make a rule that says "be more consistent" without dragging the game into a situation where you create an environment where refs are forced to call EVERY penalty that they see no matter what. NONE of us want that."

But this is an exponentially different circumstance.
This has been called ONCE against Andy Reid in his entire career.
It was called 11 times total this year.
In 416 games.
In which i'm sure in every single one of those 416 games WR's on each team were lined up offsides throughout the course of the game.
And as voiced across the league, this penalty usually comes with a warning before being called.

It's not like a holding which is called multiple times a game.
If we were called for a hold, which was a clear hold, yea that blows, but it's way different than this.

Limiting the discussion to offsides, my opinion is that the NFL needs to pick a lane.

Either:

1 - no warnings are issued ever, and the officials are required to call infractions whenever they occur; or

2 - infractions are only called without prior warning if the offending player gains a material advantage, in which case play stops (i.e., an offensive equivalent to "unabated to the quarterback").

What doesn't work, in my opinion, is a system where the interpretation and application of the written rule is left mostly to officials' whim and discretion.

[pdub]

It's like if a restaurant, which had been struggling lately, came out with a new menu, the buzz had attracted customers and the place was packed.

And then a inspector, one of many hundreds of inspectors, comes in the week of this rush and gives marks against things that are never ever marked against that absolutely have nothing to do actually with safety. The tickiest tackiest violations. Like the wash hands sign in the bathroom wasn't 100% visible. Or there was a dim lightbulb that needed replacing in a back closet. 99% of the time, the inspector will not mark it, and go up to the staff and say, "probably move your wash hands sign up just a touch, you're good."

They get a B on their door and loose a bunch of customers.
The restaurant didn't follow regulations to a tee - yes, we fucking get it, " jUsT fOllOW tHe RuLEz".
That doesn't excuse the fact that the inspection was unjust compared to all the other restaurants in the area because that inspector has a stick up his ass and just decided that very night to be an absolute stickler.

And to rub salt in the wound, just the week prior, their main competitor in the area, had an open deer carcass in their freezer and still wound up with an A because the inspector pretended not to see it.

[AlOerter]

"How do you make a rule that says "be more consistent" without dragging the game into a situation where you create an environment where refs are forced to call EVERY penalty that they see no matter what. NONE of us want that."

But this is an exponentially different circumstance.
This has been called ONCE against Andy Reid in his entire career.
It was called 11 times total this year.
In 416 games.
In which i'm sure in every single one of those 416 games WR's on each team were lined up offsides throughout the course of the game.
And as voiced across the league, this penalty usually comes with a warning before being called.

It's not like a holding which is called multiple times a game.
If we were called for a hold, which was a clear hold, yea that blows, but it's way different than this.

Limiting the discussion to offsides, my opinion is that the NFL needs to pick a lane.

Either:

1 - no warnings are issued ever, and the officials are required to call infractions whenever they occur; or

2 - infractions are only called without prior warning if the offending player gains a material advantage, in which case play stops (i.e., an offensive equivalent to "unabated to the quarterback").

What doesn't work, in my opinion, is a system where the interpretation and application of the written rule is left mostly to officials' whim and discretion.

Well said Jfish. Another irritant, Goodell said " It was absolutely the right call." He makes no mention of the missed call on the following play. If they would've thrown the flag on defensive off-sides it would have been "absolutely the right call" as well. So does not throwing the flag when you obviously see an infraction make it "absolutely the wrong call"? You are spot on to call it "officials' whim".

[jfish26]

It's like if a restaurant, which had been struggling lately, came out with a new menu, the buzz had attracted customers and the place was packed.

And then a inspector, one of many hundreds of inspectors, comes in the week of this rush and gives marks against things that are never ever marked against that absolutely have nothing to do actually with safety. The tickiest tackiest violations. Like the wash hands sign in the bathroom wasn't 100% visible. Or there was a dim lightbulb that needed replacing in a back closet. 99% of the time, the inspector will not mark it, and go up to the staff and say, "probably move your wash hands sign up just a touch, you're good."

They get a B on their door and loose a bunch of customers.
The restaurant didn't follow regulations to a tee - yes, we fucking get it, " jUsT fOllOW tHe RuLEz".
That doesn't excuse the fact that the inspection was unjust compared to all the other restaurants in the area because that inspector has a stick up his ass and just decided that very night to be an absolute stickler.

And to rub salt in the wound, just the week prior, their main competitor in the area, had an open deer carcass in their freezer and still wound up with an A because the inspector pretended not to see it.

And, the inspectors are largely unaccountable.

I'm not saying anything was or is rigged. I don't believe that's what happened. But, with as much is at stake in these games, you'd think the NFL would have an interest in preventing even the appearance of things being easily riggable.

[pdub]

The inspectors, in this case the officials, should have reviews over their performance every week for every snap. There's plenty of money to do this.

And those reviews should be scored and should be public - like receiving yards or tackles.

Fans should be able to see outright which officiating crews have done a good job and which have not.

[twocoach]

they should just take the humans out of the equation altogether. and use computers and robots instead of humans.



but then we wouldn't get our every monday morning circling of the red and yellow wahmbulance that we have grown to expect. it has become tradition.

Computers and robots are just boxes of wires programmed by humans to do things a certain way. That just hides the human influence one layer deeper.

[twocoach]

The inspectors, in this case the officials, should have reviews over their performance every week for every snap. There's plenty of money to do this.

And those reviews should be scored and should be public - like receiving yards or tackles.

Fans should be able to see outright which officiating crews have done a good job and which have not.

They do have such a review process. It is what is used to select which refs get postseason games. That is common knowledge. I don't see that making such reviews available to the public accomplishes anything but generating more fan complaint noise as there will always be some section of fans that do not like the conclusions drawn. As this site displays, there are always fans who think that proper calls against their team were the wrong decisions and who justify wrong calls that went their way as acceptable. We're all somewhere on the irrational spectrum when it comes to the sports team we cheer for.

[pdub]

What it would do is to publicly hold officiating accountable instead of through a closed door system that we have no clue how it's judged or if it's judged fairly.

The sport is for the fans in the end.

[twocoach]

"How do you make a rule that says "be more consistent" without dragging the game into a situation where you create an environment where refs are forced to call EVERY penalty that they see no matter what. NONE of us want that."

But this is an exponentially different circumstance.
This has been called ONCE against Andy Reid in his entire career.
It was called 11 times total this year.
In 416 games.
In which i'm sure in every single one of those 416 games WR's on each team were lined up offsides throughout the course of the game.
And as voiced across the league, this penalty usually comes with a warning before being called.

It's not like a holding which is called multiple times a game.
If we were called for a hold, which was a clear hold, yea that blows, but it's way different than this.

If the Bills threw a game winning touchdown on a play where a receiver lined up clearly offsides, you and Sparko would be here dragging the uncalled penalty through the muck for days. It's just the way some people are. There is no consistent behavior that won't result in someone being pissed about it or the game being drug into a 6 hour long penalty-fest.

It fucking sucks they made that call; I wish they wouldn't have. There's no fix that fixes it.

[pdub]

As I said before, maybe Sparko, but not me:

"This 'durrrr' continues.
I'm trying to put myself in another fan bases shoes and I am very much thinking i'd have the same response even if against the Chiefs.

I'd say something like, 'yea, that's some ticky tack shit for sure, we got pretty fortunate there with that, but you all got down 14-0 and we finished it.'"

Again, you aren't grasping the difference between this particular call and others.
There's no fix that fixes it, sure, but then in that case, you shouldn't complain about anything ever on here that we know can't or won't be fixed.

[twocoach]

What it would do is to publicly hold officiating accountable instead of through a closed door system that we have no clue how it's judged or if it's judged fairly.

The sport is for the fans in the end.

Ha, that's funny. "Publicly accountable". All it does is give people even more things to bitch about on social media. The NFL is not accountable to the public, nor do I ever see themselves changing their own rules and procedures to change that. There is ZERO need (in their eyes) or benefit to doing so.