Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Saw a lot of interesting things....none of which made much sense.

1) Of everything that happened, this first one might be at the top. KC ball 3rd and 9 with 10:29 left...KC had thrown an incomplete pass the previous down. Teams line up, play clock winds down, Mahomes starts to call the signals....TWEET TWEET TWEET. Is there a penalty? Is there a time out? Nope. A ref runs up to the ball and re-spots it literally a half-yard forward and then runs back to his position. I have been watching football for 40+ years, and I have never seen this happen. I don't know how the spot was lost when it was the previous LOS. I don't know how the ref 25 yards away had the 'eagle eyes' to rush in and respot the ball. I don't understand the point of respotting the ball such a superfluous distance. I don't understand how the teams were allowed to line up and almost snap the ball. None of it makes any sense. Which leads us to...

2) Ref Torbert announcing that the ball is respotted, put 10 seconds on the game clock, and, loud and clear for all to hear..."start the play clock AND THE GAME CLOCK on my whistle". Since the previous play was an incompletion, the game clock should not be started until the snap. None of the other refs caught this....that is, until the teams once again lined up, Mahomes called the signals, and evidently right when the ball is snapped the same "respot ball" ref blows his whistle to stop the play because the game clock should not be running. Why the delay in recognizing this? About 45 seconds elapsed between Torbert's announcement and the snapping of the ball. The teams were lined up for 10 seconds, too. This didn't make any sense to me, either. Tony Romo and Jim Nantz were too busy having a friendly conversation to explain what was actually happening. Romo even tried to pin the blame on Torbert's mike going out, which was a total lie since everyone in the stadium heard Torbert's declaration of starting the game clock on his whistle.

3) I thought one of the big plays was the play right before Burrow's long INT. He had Chase open behind the defender about 30 yards downfield and lofted the ball to Chase. The KC DB grabbed Chase's shoulders before the ball got there, and Chase stumbled to get the ball. No call. Romo/Steratore offer nothing. I thought that should have been a penalty considering how PIs had been called at that point in the contest. Which leads us to...

4) Bengals last drive was set back by an intentional grounding penalty with 1:22 remaining. As someone else mentioned, we've seen this play many times already. The QB is under pressure and whips the ball toward the feet of the safety valve RB. When I saw the late flag, I thought it was on KC for taking Burrow to the ground after the throw. I didn't even think of a ref calling intentional grounding in that situation with the game on the line. Gene Steratore's explanation was comical....'it obviously is'....'both receivers released vertically'....'no one was in the backfield'....'definitely intentional grounding'. Steratore somehow missed Perine LINING UP IN THE BACKFIELD, and, more importantly, BEING 5 YARDS FROM WHERE THE BALL LANDED. Steratore is such a mope.

5) The hit on Mahomes out of bounds was legit. I was hoping the refs would swallow their whistle because the penalty pretty much gave the game to KC, but the Bengals LB didn't need to hit Mahomes. I think it was probably out of frustration. And if the refs were going to call intentional grounding the previous possession, they weren't going to let this one slide.

Bengals were jobbed ... and Shanahan never has a clue ... blocking Reddick with tight ends?

I am still trying to figure out what went through the coaches heads?
Neither ran the ball and with Mahomes hobbling and Burrow getting pressure, a running game would have helped both sides. Pacheko and Mixon were ready to play. At least Pacheco and McKinnon get another chance ...

#1 -- I started thinking -- "This is the Colorado Buffaloes 5th Down play in the NFL!" That whole sequence was the strangest bit of officiating we may ever see. How many times did the teams line up for that third down? I think at least three. And I can't ever remember respotting the ball like that. Like you, 40+ years of watching and I can't ever remember that happening.

#4 -- Totally agree - I stood up and said - "There's a guy right there over the middle!" That was absolute nonsense. I'm glad you brought that up because nobody I know seemed to have seen it. Awful call in a game of headshaking officiating. And I'm not a Bengals fan -- I'm happy KC won.

When Cincinnati got the ball with 2:36 or so left, I thought -- this is over. So, while there was all of that unexplainable officiating (the reaching out for the first down included), the Bengals still should have won. You can't ask for a better position when you're on the road in the playoffs, tie game, two TOs left, and you need, what, 60 yards to kick a game-winning FG? I know the officiating hurt on the intentional grounding, but the Bengals missed about as good of a chance as any team is going to get.

When Cincinnati got the ball with 2:36 or so left, I thought -- this is over. So, while there was all of that unexplainable officiating (the reaching out for the first down included

When all of that reaching for a first down was going on, I kept thinking... Why are they talking about forward progress? He didn't score a touchdown and the concept of "breaking the plane" doesn't come into play here. He reached forward, and then VOLUNTARILY brought his arm back. Before his knee went down I believe. The ball should have been spotted where the BALL actually was when he was declared down, correct?

Buy Philly got a lot of help, too

But Philly would have won anyway--SF didn't get jobbed.

4th down non-catch was huge. Philly was smart to run a play fast...

Lane Johnson's fase starts---several of them

Lots of former olinemen on twitter say that it is not a false start, that Johnson and others have figured out a loophole
that refs allow an "adjustment" and so on. But one HOF olineman was seeing false starts. Don't know who is right.

IMO Johnson was not doing an adjustment and timing the snap. He was simulating the start of the snap, at least to my eyes
but it does seem that, as has been discussed, that there has been a change in interpretation of what a false start is.

ChrisBabcock wrote:

When Cincinnati got the ball with 2:36 or so left, I thought -- this is over. So, while there was all of that unexplainable officiating (the reaching out for the first down included

When all of that reaching for a first down was going on, I kept thinking... Why are they talking about forward progress? He didn't score a touchdown and the concept of "breaking the plane" doesn't come into play here. He reached forward, and then VOLUNTARILY brought his arm back. Before his knee went down I believe. The ball should have been spotted where the BALL actually was when he was declared down, correct?

Exactly. I mean, your average knowledgeable fan is going to know that rule only applies at the goal line. That one was really puzzling.

ChrisBabcock wrote:

When Cincinnati got the ball with 2:36 or so left, I thought -- this is over. So, while there was all of that unexplainable officiating (the reaching out for the first down included

When all of that reaching for a first down was going on, I kept thinking... Why are they talking about forward progress? He didn't score a touchdown and the concept of "breaking the plane" doesn't come into play here. He reached forward, and then VOLUNTARILY brought his arm back. Before his knee went down I believe. The ball should have been spotted where the BALL actually was when he was declared down, correct?

No, because the instant the plane is broken, the ball is dead in touch, it's a TD, and nothing that happens afterward matters.

rhickok1109 wrote:

ChrisBabcock wrote:

When Cincinnati got the ball with 2:36 or so left, I thought -- this is over. So, while there was all of that unexplainable officiating (the reaching out for the first down included

When all of that reaching for a first down was going on, I kept thinking... Why are they talking about forward progress? He didn't score a touchdown and the concept of "breaking the plane" doesn't come into play here. He reached forward, and then VOLUNTARILY brought his arm back. Before his knee went down I believe. The ball should have been spotted where the BALL actually was when he was declared down, correct?

No, because the instant the plane is broken, the ball is dead in touch, it's a TD, and nothing that happens afterward matters.

Correct. For a TD. But this was not a TD... Which is my point. They gave him "forward progress" for reaching, but then on his own brought the ball back to his body, presumably to avoid losing control or someone swatting at it and causing a fumble. He voluntarily reversed the progress of the ball. Kind of like if a running back retreats a little bit to find a better seam, they don't give him forward progress. Because he took it upon himself to go backward and wasn't forced backward.

I just read the pool report with the refs explanation of the intentional grounding. He stated that part of the reason was Burrow didn't get out of the pocket and didn't throw beyond the line of scrimmage. Looking at the play again, the ball indeed was quite short of the LOS.