Chiefs...Browns Game Day Thread

[Adamixoye 604]

I can't believe some of you are making me take the side of the refs, but the two things everyone is pointing to I think the refs got right:

• I've never seen the grounding call in that situation, but apparently that's the rule
• On the Dee Ford play I noticed he got a big jump as the play happened.  It was very close but I think he was objectively offsides.  The frustrating thing was the officials and/or the broadcast didn't make it clear, and the announcers were absolutely lost.  But on the replay you see the official throw the flag immediately, the broadcast didn't notice it.  It wasn't the after-the-fact conspiracy/bias call that some of you are making it out to be.

Now, there were a lot of other bad calls.  Lots of ticky-tack holding calls.  Missed pick call on Cleveland on the 4th down before the half.  Missed roughing on Mahomes when he got dragged down.  Bad spot on a couple of plays that went against us.  Etc.

[qnet 1,158]

21 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

I can't believe some of you are making me take the side of the refs, but the two things everyone is pointing to I think the refs got right:

• I've never seen the grounding call in that situation, but apparently that's the rule
• On the Dee Ford play I noticed he got a big jump as the play happened.  It was very close but I think he was objectively offsides.  The frustrating thing was the officials and/or the broadcast didn't make it clear, and the announcers were absolutely lost.  But on the replay you see the official throw the flag immediately, the broadcast didn't notice it.  It wasn't the after-the-fact conspiracy/bias call that some of you are making it out to be.

Now, there were a lot of other bad calls.  Lots of ticky-tack holding calls.  Missed pick call on Cleveland on the 4th down before the half.  Missed roughing on Mahomes when he got dragged down.  Bad spot on a couple of plays that went against us.  Etc.

I'd like to see the grounding call for myself, but if it's like I'm thinking it is, makes me wonder why they never call it, ever, on any other team, if it indeed is a rule. 

[Mloe68 1,521]

1 hour ago, Chiefsfan1963 said:

I agree, to me 8-1 means you had to stop a few people.

What makes me laugh even harder is how the Rams are going to put 50 up on KC when they have 14 in the Saints game. Saints give up 26 pts per game, Chiefs 25.

Yep. Defenses are getting roasted all over the place. Our answer to their offense is our offense.  

[FANATIC 852]

27 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

Yep. Defenses are getting roasted all over the place. Our answer to their offense is our offense.  

Exactly

[jetlord 10,210]

10 minutes ago, Adamixoye said:

I can't believe some of you are making me take the side of the refs, but the two things everyone is pointing to I think the refs got right:

• I've never seen the grounding call in that situation, but apparently that's the rule
• On the Dee Ford play I noticed he got a big jump as the play happened.  It was very close but I think he was objectively offsides.  The frustrating thing was the officials and/or the broadcast didn't make it clear, and the announcers were absolutely lost.  But on the replay you see the official throw the flag immediately, the broadcast didn't notice it.  It wasn't the after-the-fact conspiracy/bias call that some of you are making it out to be.

Now, there were a lot of other bad calls.  Lots of ticky-tack holding calls.  Missed pick call on Cleveland on the 4th down before the half.  Missed roughing on Mahomes when he got dragged down.  Bad spot on a couple of plays that went against us.  Etc.

Explain this to me.  I thought the 10 sec. run off only applied to a running clock.  If the clock was stopped so the spike was delay, then why was the run off applicable which forced the Chiefs to use the last T.O.?  Just wondering.

[Chiefsfan1963 1,101]

2 minutes ago, jetlord said:

Explain this to me.  I thought the 10 sec. run off only applied to a running clock.  If the clock was stopped so the spike was delay, then why was the run off applicable which forced the Chiefs to use the last T.O.?  Just wondering.

It seems to me it was a WTF moment and the refs didn't know how to handle it.

[Adamixoye 604]

7 minutes ago, jetlord said:

Explain this to me.  I thought the 10 sec. run off only applied to a running clock.  If the clock was stopped so the spike was delay, then why was the run off applicable which forced the Chiefs to use the last T.O.?  Just wondering.

Catch in-bounds, clock is running, offsides penalty on CLE that is declined by KC.

Now the clock is stopped.  I thought it was going to start as soon as the ball was set by the refs, but maybe I'm wrong?  Mahomes spikes it and they say that's not allowed.  The team that the penalty is against is either charged a TO or there is a 10 second runoff, KC took the TO.

If the clock WASN'T going to start again, then I guess I get the rule.  Although someone pointed out on Twitter that the grounding rule requires you're under pressure, so there is that.

If the clock WAS going to start again, and again I really don't know, then I don't at all understand why it would be a penalty.

Again, though, the rules guy they brought in insisted it was all correct.  It will be interesting to see if the league comments on it during the week.

[kkuenn 3,613]

13 minutes ago, jetlord said:

Explain this to me.  I thought the 10 sec. run off only applied to a running clock.  If the clock was stopped so the spike was delay, then why was the run off applicable which forced the Chiefs to use the last T.O.?  Just wondering.

Here is what I sent understand, if they spiked it before the clock ran then why was 1 second off the clock? Should have been 9 seconds and not 8 then if he did it. 

[jetlord 10,210]

6 minutes ago, kkuenn said:

Here is what I sent understand, if they spiked it before the clock ran then why was 1 second off the clock? Should have been 9 seconds and not 8 then if he did it. 

I still think the refs blew it.  If the clock was running, then it wasn't intentional grounding.  If it wasn't, then 10 secs. shouldn't have been run off.  Can't have it both ways.

[Mloe68 1,521]

37 minutes ago, jetlord said:

Explain this to me.  I thought the 10 sec. run off only applied to a running clock.  If the clock was stopped so the spike was delay, then why was the run off applicable which forced the Chiefs to use the last T.O.?  Just wondering.

I’m hoping the media does their job and we get an explanation because I don’t get it either. And burning that time out was huge. 

[robgar 1,046]

quite simply.. we downed the ball to stop, a stopped clock..this is a penalty.. mahommes explanation is even clearer. 

 

This was not the worst officiated game in history... not even close..

 

 

[robgar 1,046]

or have you forgotten the referee strike?

[qnet 1,158]

9 minutes ago, robgar said:

quite simply.. we downed the ball to stop, a stopped clock..this is a penalty.. mahommes explanation is even clearer. 

 

This was not the worst officiated game in history... not even close..

 

 

After reading all the explanations, your post made me understand the clearest. 

[Chiefsfan1963 1,101]

15 minutes ago, robgar said:

or have you forgotten the referee strike?

Yep, the replacement refs may have sucked but at least the sucked for all teams. 

[jetlord 10,210]

17 minutes ago, robgar said:

quite simply.. we downed the ball to stop, a stopped clock..this is a penalty.. mahommes explanation is even clearer. 

 

 

 

I get that part.  But if it was a stopped clock, why the ten second run off?  Andy, at his post game presser said he thought he knew all the rules but this one the refs pulled out of left field.

[Mloe68 1,521]

21 minutes ago, robgar said:

quite simply.. we downed the ball to stop, a stopped clock..this is a penalty.. mahommes explanation is even clearer. 

 

This was not the worst officiated game in history... not even close..

 

 

Why make us burn a time out to avoid a ten second runoff?

[kkuenn 3,613]

25 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

Why make us burn a time out to avoid a ten second runoff?

Because if they ran the 10 seconds off then the half was over

 Using the timeout kept it at 8 seconds to go.

[jetlord 10,210]

46 minutes ago, kkuenn said:

Because if they ran the 10 seconds off then the half was over

 Using the timeout kept it at 8 seconds to go.

You missed the question.  If the clock was stopped, there shouldn't have been a time run off and taking the T.O. wouldn't have been necessary.

[kkuenn 3,613]

2 minutes ago, jetlord said:

You missed the question.  If the clock was stopped, there shouldn't have been a time run off and taking the T.O. wouldn't have been necessary.

I understood it was not stopped as we took the completed pass and declined  the off sides.

 

I dont know any more, shit is confusing me. I hope an article explains it

[Mloe68 1,521]

From Cleveland Plain Dealer today the beat writer for the Browns wrote....Love this.

There are two ways to play a team like the Chiefs: play scared and lose by two touchdowns or go on the attack -- and still lose by two touchdowns. (Hey, the Chiefs are the real deal.)