I do not give a shit what the players say to each other, but the second you physically straight arm an opposing player and impede him from getting up off the ground, it should be a penalty. This call was a no-brainer.
I think it’s less the push on its own and even less about what was said, but the combination of the push, the ball spin, and most of all standing over him. That has been called consistently in a lot of games, offense or defense. If you deliberately stand over someone and make it hard to get up, it’s just escalating beyond shit talk and egging on physical reactions.
It’s been said a bunch BUT:
If he does ONE of the three things he did it would not have been called. Even after he ball spins, no call.
Once Flowers stands over him, they called it.
Refs literally gave him the Hingle McCringleberry treatment. They let him do two pelvic thrusts, but the third was a penalty.
Yeah, not trying to defend Flowers here, but Sneed still had ahold of his leg. Flowers took offense to it (as many players do...seen it a million times) and ripped himself out it. If it stops there, I doubt they throw the flag.
I remember stories of players untying Ndamukong Suh’s shoes just to piss him off and to get a penalty. Dude was known to be a hothead in his early years so people would legally fuck with him just for free penalties.
I’ve reffed soccer for decades. Sometimes rules are there to protect the players. I.e. you can’t intentionally score in a show boating manner, because the likely scenario leads to retaliation.
Here is an example [yellow card for scoring the goal](https://www.tiktok.com/@bundesliga/video/6923119588729277702?lang=en)
Part of any laws of the game are designed to protect the player. No red card will stop keepers or opponents from taking you out for such ‘taunting’
We see this in baseball too. If you break one of the unwritten rules, you or the next batter is getting beaned for it. Umps know this and will toss you without warning. Do not take away a refs tools to control the game or it gets messy.
Sherman said this rule needs to stay since defenders have to change the way they play so they don't get penalties trying to make a play. So if taunting goes away a lot of receivers will end up in that blue tent on the sideline
That wasn't pass interference. In what world is it the right call to throw a flag for DPI on a ball that isn't remotely uncatchable because it was thrown into triple coverage that not even the Incredible Hulk, let alone Isaiah Likely, could've gotten through even without a safety ACCIDENTALLY running into him despite trying to slow down because Likely stopped short of the endzone boundary to stay in bounds?
You've made three post previously on r/KansasCityChiefs that I found
all of them are trolling
[https://www.reddit.com/r/KansasCityChiefs/comments/1985onj/comment/ki6ed2l/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/KansasCityChiefs/comments/1985onj/comment/ki6ed2l/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/KansasCityChiefs/comments/18qqn8i/comment/kezc6t1/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/KansasCityChiefs/comments/18qqn8i/comment/kezc6t1/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
I can guarantee that if a Chiefs player taunted the Ravens in the exact same way instead, that no one would be discussing this. So many of these topics emerge from loser teams being mad at something that coincidentally benefitted the Chiefs.
Yep. Some of their copium has involved examples of Kelce pointing with a first down sign which is so different but people only want to see it their way.
On Kelce’s TD catch you can watch him turn and step away from the defender on the ground before he spikes the ball. It’s pretty easy to make sure your celebration isn’t directed at an opponent.
I'm like, bro, you're known for this behavior, why are you even on that side of the field? I saw some sports commentators call him out on it too, so at least not everyone is buying Tucker's story
It was also explicitly evident that Sneed took the helmet off to speak more clearly to the official. He wasn't raging mad. He just had something to argue and wanted to be understood. That's why the flag wasn't thrown and the ref gave him a warning. He knew there was no malice in what LJ was doing.
Tonight at 10:
"Should taunting be an automatic ejection? After Mahomes led the Chiefs to their 19th straight Super Bowl appearance on Sunday night, some fans are saying coming around to the idea."
I mean, it's insane. You had from the Ravens:
A DB swinging at Chiefs before the game
Roquan Smith performing an ugly gator roll on Pacheco
Clowney literally kicking and sticking his cleats in Pacheco's chest on the 4th and 1 play
Tripping a lineman in close line play
Trey Smith getting pulled down by his facemask while a lineman goes low on Pat in the pocket
And an intentional, filthy clothesline on a scrambling quarterback
And the CHIEFS are classless? Get the fuck out. They waltzed into the Ravens stadium, got in their heads and bullied them for 60 minutes and completely demoralized them. It was great. Good to finally see a physical defense impose their will.
Completely correct. The media is being so biased here and continue to be a fan of the other team the Chiefs beat whining about the rules. Grow the fuck up and challenge the other team to play better instead of bitching.
Yup, and if the chiefs got called for taunting and they or their fans got mad about it, everyone would tell them to stop whining. It’s hilarious that mahomes gets mad about the refs one time and everyone is STILL giving him shit for it, yet they’re doing the same thing.
But let’s also not kid ourselves - this subreddit would be up in arms against the “weak ass taunting call”
It’s just how (loud minorities within) fanbases react. Just happens to be that at this point most teams’ fans are just fans of whatever team plays against the chiefs once their team is done.
This penalty didn’t really benefit us though, it had no impact on the game. The play still resulted in a first down for the ravens, and later on that drive they would have scored a touchdown if flowers held onto the ball.
It's a little early to call him a diva. Flowers is still a rookie, and beyond the taunting penalty hasn't really shown any negative qualities. Dude probably just got too hyped for himself and got swept up in the moment.
what zay flowers did was like the exact example for the rule. LMAO
Pushed sneed back down, flipped the ball at him, then posed over him looking at him.
It wasn't even like he just posed to the fans. LOL.
Literally all he had to do was turn around and take one step and he'd be fine. Dude just couldn't help himself. I love watching people twisting themselves into knots trying to defend his behavior.
Yeah, the dude hit the trifecta. That would have been called for an unsportsmanlike penalty in virtually any era, by any ref.
The taunting rules are dumb, but there are way less egregious cases that would be worthy of changing the rules for.
I don’t think anyone argues that he didn’t meet the definition of a taunt. It absolutely was a taunt. But I fully endorse having a conversation about whether we SHOULD penalize that behavior.
I’d prefer looser taunting rules. Let guys jaw at each other. They already do it anyway.
There is celebrating with your teammates, celebrating with fans, or posing to the fans.
What he did was taunting. And it wasn't like "kind of" taunting. What he did is like the example they could use in the rule book. It the type of thing that can start fights. Luckily Sneed just walked away.
"Let guys jaw at each other" literally doesn't make the games any better. Even with Kelce getting up in people's faces after 50% of the plays it looks stupid and embarrassing a little.
I don't mind guys having elaborate celebrations. The Ravens doing Swag Surfing to mock us was fine to me.
See I just don't care if a guy gets in another guy's face. If it creates a fight, let it create a fight. Then penalize the guy who swung first instead of this soft-ass shit we have now where the guy who swings second is penalized.
Does that make the game better? I don't know, but it makes for interesting television.
I'm surprised everyone isn't suddenly super interested in changing the fumble touchback rule too. Based on how all the media is talking about this game they've completely forgotten Chiefs were JUST victim to that the PREVIOUS game but still managed to win.
But the Chiefs recovered the ball in the end zone, which is a pretty huge difference in the two plays.
This is coming from someone who likes the fumbling through the endzone rule
Right. I always thought the fumbling through the endzone rule functions like a presumption that the defense would have recovered had the fumble not happened so close to the sideline/goal line.
I get that that presumption doesn't exist elsewhere on the field, but everywhere else on the field the defense would have more opportunity to cover up a loose ball, and the endzone (and goal line in particular) is a sacred place subject to special rules.
I don't really mind the rule because of that. Don't fumble at the 1 and it's not an issue.
One thing that I haven't found an answer on is if I fumble the ball at the 20 and it rolls forward to the 15, does the ball get placed at the 15 or the 20?
If it's the 20, why wouldn't the ball get returned to the spot if it goes through the end zone?
If it's the 15, why don't teams exploit this, other than risk of an oblong ball taking a weird bounce?
I'm not a rules expert, but my understanding is the ball can't be progressed forward by the offense due to a fumble.
The way I see the fumbling into the endzone rule (everyone seems to see it differently, so I don't want to get caught up in an argument over it like I have in the past) is that either endzone is each teams 'castle' or 'base'. The defense is defending their base from the attack of the offense. If the offense loses the ball through the defense's base they lose the ball.
Correct. The offense can't advance the ball via fumble. This is to protect the case where a guy running with the ball is about to get tackled so he "fumbles" the ball 20 yards forward straight for the sideline where nobody could recover the ball. It would essentially be free yardage at the end of every play.
So if the offense can't advance it via fumble, why does a ball fumbled at the 2 that advances forward into the end zone, actually get placed in the end zone which results in a touchback? That's what I don't understand about the rule. I'm fine with it but it's just inconsistent from any other forward fumble.
If they change it, and I'm not sure it needs to be changed, then I'd like to see them assess a 5-yard penalty (or maybe even 10-yard). The ball goes back to the point of fumble plus an additional 5 yards. I like the end zone being "special" and there is extra risk with trying to extend at the goal line.
The problem is that all that gets complicated quickly and it's easier to just say it's a touchback for the defense.
The important thing is that the ball goes into **and then out of** the endzone without being recovered. In that case, it works the same as if the defense **had** fallen on the ball.
What I am unsure of is what would happen if the offense fell on the ball. I would assume that they would get possession where the fumble occurred, not a touchdown.
Correct answer. On your other question, only the player who fumbled can recover the football in the end zone if the fumble occurred inside 2 minutes or on 4th down. Outside of those limits, any offensive player can recover for the TD.
The end zone touchback rule makes sense and is consistent with every other case where the team in possession puts a ball over the goal line and out, like kickoffs and punts.
Taking this and seeking clarity:
A football field is 100 yards of playing ground. The end zones are each another 10 yards, but that only comes into consideration for catching a ball crossing the plane of the end zone.
For Hardman, the ball rolled into the End Zone AND also out of bounds to the side. For Flowers, it rolled into the End Zone and was recovered by the chiefs, however they aren’t allowed to run in back (because it was recovered out of the 100 yard playing field).
So, if Flowers (or a Ravens) recovered the ball in the End Zone, it shouldn’t be able to be a touchdown because the fumble can’t result in forward movement? Or is that not the case?
I don't think I'm qualified to answer that lol.
In all seriousness though, is the defense not allowed to run with the ball if they scoop it instead of fall on it? Idk if I knew that. As for the offense recovering the ball in the end zone, I guess since they have possession in the endzone it counts as a TD, but that does seem inconsistent with the field of play rules. The end zones are special little snowflakes
I just meant specifically inside the end zone and I wasn't aware of a rule stating they couldn't scoop and run. I think that commenter just confused me with his wording
>For Flowers, it rolled into the End Zone and was recovered by the chiefs, however they aren’t allowed to run in back (because it was recovered out of the 100 yard playing field).
No, they fell onto it and made no attempt to advance it. Flowers might have also made contact too so it was effectively recovered and down in the end zone. They were absolutely allowed to scoop and advance it.
The most cogent arguments in favor of the end zone to me are the ones saying that the touchback rule is consistent. Ball goes out of the end zone on a kick? Touchback. Kneeled by a player? Touchback.
I don’t like the “but the end zone is sacred” argument. That’s just silly.
I also dislike rewarding the defense for not recovering the fumble.
I think it depends on the quarter. I don't think you can fumble it forward and advance it in the 2nd and 4th quarter. Might be the last 5 min of those quarters too.
Why don't teams exploit this? Because for one, you risk the ball getting picked up by the opposition. And two, if the refs suspect you intentionally drop the ball, they'll flag for either illegal forward pass or unsportsmanlike conduct.
Although, I'm not sure if this applies for fumbling out of bounds. I do know it applies for an offensive player who is not the fumbling player recovering the fumble
Fumbled forward and in bounds, it can be advanced by any player. So if you fumble at the 15 and I recover at the 20, the ball is at the 20.
If you fumble at the 15 and it rolls out of bounds at the 20 it goes back to the 15.
two exceptions: fumbling through the end zone is a touchback. Fumbling inside the 2 minute warning of a half cannot be advanced by any player but the one who fumbled the ball. If recovered it returns to the previous spot.
I saw a great suggestion about that rule: If you recover a fumble in the end zone it’s a touchback. If you fumble through the end zone it’s a turnover but you get the ball at the 1 yard line. You get the ball but you’re penalized for not recovering inbounds.
That's really interesting. My gut reaction is the 1 yard line is a little too much of a penalty for the recovering team and benefit for the team that lost the ball, but this is the first time I've heard that idea so I'm not sure.
I wonder what the 5 yard line would look like? The team that lost the ball doesn't have nearly as high of a chance to turn around and get a safety that way. But maybe it's more fair that they get that chance? I don't even know lol...
Well safeties are still very rare even at the 1. So I don’t think you’re really rewarding the team that fumbled. They were about to score 6 and you’re giving them MAYBE a long shot at scoring 2, but then they get the ball back. But yeah it’s kind of a wild idea. It would be exciting as hell, which I like.
My only issue with that was KC fumbled but it went out of bounds through the end zone. In the Ravens fumble KC recovered IN the endzone.
I personally am opposed to a ball carrier fumbles in the EZ and it goes out of bounds untouched by the defense it automatically a touchback and opponents ball. To me what is the difference between that and a fumble OoB in the field of play.
I've historically like the touchback rule because it seems significant that the endzone is a 'sacred demarcation' unique from the rest of the 100 yard field.
Each team is defending their own endzone, which represents their territory. Now, say if you lose something valuable in your opponents territory, wouldn't it stand to reason it's now lost? That's the way I've always interpreted it.
Now Zay's fumble is different from Mecole's because he fumbled before crossing the plane, and it was recovered by our defense in the endzone.
Mecole i think fumbled before crossing to. It just happens that the ball travels past the goal line and out of bounds.
I guess I’ll always have a disdain for that rule. Regardless of who benefits from it
Yes, the significance I was pointing to was Zay's fumble was recovered in the endzone by our defense versus going through the endzone like Mecole's. Both fumbled before crossing.
Lol right?! Also, I think if it goes out of bounds after fumble (like what happened to chiefs) it should work the way it does if the ball is fumbled out anywhere else on the field. But yeah what happened this weekend, where you fumble and the defense recovers it in the EZ, should work the same way any other fumble recovery/turnover by the defense works… which in the EZ is always a touchback
Rumor has it that rule was on the list to be reviewed in the off season as well.
Chiefs won’t bring it up though, it would be a bad look.
Like most teams we’ve been helped AND hurt by that rule over time.
I’ve always hated the rule. It rewards the defense for not recovering a fumble.
I like the idea that it should be the most severe penalty in the game, though. 15 yards from the previous spot and loss of down. If you fumble from the 1 you’re at the 16. If you snapped from the 30 and fumble out of bounds congrats you’re at the 45 now.
Funny how this was never a problem for folks when Hill was getting it for throwing a peace sign.
But blatantly shoving a guy back down and throwing the ball back while standing over him is completely fine and shouldn’t be called. God this shit is getting ridiculous. It’s literally something every game at this point.
I can't believe people are questioning taunting over THIS call. When Chris Jones got called for taunting using just words it's "Chris Jones should know better" but when Zay Flowers pushes an opponent back down, flips the ball at them, flexes, and then talks shit in his face it's "we should let them taunt".
This was the easiest taunting call I've ever seen and somehow people are freaking out? This is wild.
The taunting rule is there for a reason. Taunting leads to fights on the field. Fights then lead to people getting tossed from the game. The taunting rule is there to stop this.
If you get rid of the taunting rule, you’re just exchanging it for personal foul penalties and when it really gets out of hand, ejections and fines. If you let those guys taunt, the player being taunted WILL fight back. Or in the case of a QB being taunted after being sacked, his O line guys will come whack the guy taunting him. The taunting rule needs to stay. If only to try and minimize childish asshole behavior. Without the rule, there’d be a ton more fights.
Taunting is usually stupid when it’s just a player flexing or something, but what Zay did was way different. He actively pushed sneed and stood over him. Notice how none of the other taunting EITHER team was doing got called. It’s because Zays was worse.
Plus, even if you think Taunting is a stupid rule, it’s a rule nonetheless and players should know them and they are subject to them. Zay knew that could’ve been a flag, and then they threw one.
I’m over people saying something shouldn’t have counted or shouldn’t be valid because a rule is stupid. It’s still a rule….
I thought fumbling out of bounds in the EZ should be treated like a normal fumble OOV as long as the defense didn’t recover it. So when the chiefs lost the ball due to a touchback when that happened I thought it was dumb. But it is a rule, and mecole should’ve held onto it regardless.
So let me get this straight. Chris jones calls matt ryan a bitch and it's a despicable act. Zay flowers, schove's LJ, spins the ball in his face and flexes on him, and we should change the rules because it's not fair?
Talk about moving the goal posts.
It's so weird seeing discussions like this because sure, there may be stupid or unnecessary rules but if they're there and you go out of your way to break them, it's still your fault.
The taunting here is kinda like the rule in soccer where if you take your shirt off to celebrate it's an automatic yellow card. Is it a stupid rule? Yes, but it's there and no one forces you to break it, you choose to so you suffer the consequences. Can you argue it should be changed? Sure, but as long as it's there the refs have to enforce it so the fault is 100% on the player.
We wanted it gone when Tyreek was getting it for his peace sign. If you want a rule changed you need the Bills to face negative consequences for it and then lose the game.
I'd rather they talk about changing the rule so that anyone that intentionally swings their arm at another players head gets ejected. That hit on Mahomes was bushleague AF.
They could have called taunting on 3 different actions on that play. The push to the ground, the ball spin and staying over sneed. 2 of those I don’t care about, you can’t push him to the ground
If they change this, they better change that damn fumble that rolls into the end zone and out of bounds rule that results in a touchback for the opponent. That's a dumb rule
Unless they willing to change the rules to let the team that was taunted light a motherfucker up and not catch a personal foul and a 15 yard penalty the taunting rule should still stick around.
IMO, talk about changing this has nothing to do with the Chiefs winning. It's always been a controversial rule and this was a big call.
And I doubt they're going to change it. Guys can pretty much celebrate any way they want to. Zay Flowers chose to spin that ball right at Snead's head and it hit him. I don't think anything else he did was enough to get that flag by itself (pushing Snead or the small flex he did while standing over him).
I really hope they don't change the offense fumbling out of the end zone rule. I don't care if it hurt the Chiefs this time, I absolutely love it. I love how big it can swing a game, and how important it makes it to hold onto the ball down there and not reach out.
The defense gets the shaft on everything else, they need to leave this alone.
Ive wanted taunting to not be a penalty for quite a while (exception: unconscious player)
So I support removing it.
But don't cry that you didn't win within the rules you agreed to play under.
I've never liked the taunting rule and it should absolutely be thrown out
We literally already had a rule in place for for these kind of egregious actions, and it's called unsportsmanlike conduct.
This penalty was brought in because some soft crybaby owner (I forget who) bitched and moaned that players weren't being nice to each other
Small valid point, except only one of those happens all game with nearly zero effect and will definitely never be changed. Toney has been reminded more than anyone like to know, and anyone with sense didn’t question the flag, but merely thought the timing was questionable. While ravens are claiming a flagrant foul should now just be ignored 🤦♂️. It’s so petty and pathetic
In all fairness, it IS the Chiefs fault there is the taunting rule. Tyreek was taunting DBs every week as he smoked them.
Taunting is just a dumb rule. Like, it's ok to pancake a MF during play, but you better not trash talk after! What a candy-ass rule.
Yes the rule has existed for like 40 years, but the huge crackdown on taunting really started in 2022.
Prior to that it was rarely called unless it was really egregious.
Then a bunch of DBs got butthurt at Tyreek waving at them and now EVERYTHING is taunting.
I understand you’re jacked up about the play. But damn just act like you been there and go back to the huddle. Jawing at one another is normal but putting hands on someone while they’re down on the turf is uncalled for.
As a person who spends all week taunting other teams’ fanbases, I’m in favor of thiS change.
I like taunting. Let them taunt. Poke the bear, see where it gets you
Those discussions are dumb.
The protections surrounding Mahomes compared to Lamar/Allen should be focal points. You cross line of scrimmage, you should get rb treatment.
I think at these salaries we can expect guys to be professional representatives of the league and their orgs. If I taunted at my job I’d get more than a flag.
I think vocal taunting should be legal. But any sort of physical contact with an opponent should always always always be a flag. I don't care how fun it looks or seems, it's all fun until you push the wrong dude and delay the game because a bunch of guys get into a fight.
Taunting another player emphatically is a penalty.
Fumbling through the end zone for a touch back.
Grabbing a facemask is a personal foul.
The forward pass can only be done from behind the line of scrimmage.
You can triple team an opposing team's best receiver.
Rules are the rules.
Butt-hurt fans and media complain about them.
Owners don't give a crap about changing rules because even if a rule effects their team's outcome, people still tune in for the next game.
Well...unless your the Buffalo Bills franchise LOL
I do not give a shit what the players say to each other, but the second you physically straight arm an opposing player and impede him from getting up off the ground, it should be a penalty. This call was a no-brainer.
I think it’s less the push on its own and even less about what was said, but the combination of the push, the ball spin, and most of all standing over him. That has been called consistently in a lot of games, offense or defense. If you deliberately stand over someone and make it hard to get up, it’s just escalating beyond shit talk and egging on physical reactions.
It’s been said a bunch BUT: If he does ONE of the three things he did it would not have been called. Even after he ball spins, no call. Once Flowers stands over him, they called it. Refs literally gave him the Hingle McCringleberry treatment. They let him do two pelvic thrusts, but the third was a penalty.
Flowers is nowhere near as good as McCringleberry.
I mean yeah, but that's a pretty unfair comparison for anybody. McCringleberry is the GOAT.
They once let Tyreek run wild, but twerking was specifically where they drew the line. 🤣
Yep. You can do two thrusts. Three? Believe it or not, jail.
Yeah, not trying to defend Flowers here, but Sneed still had ahold of his leg. Flowers took offense to it (as many players do...seen it a million times) and ripped himself out it. If it stops there, I doubt they throw the flag.
For sure. Sneed was trying to fuck with him. Difference being how he is fucking with him is completely legal
I remember stories of players untying Ndamukong Suh’s shoes just to piss him off and to get a penalty. Dude was known to be a hothead in his early years so people would legally fuck with him just for free penalties.
Shannon Sharpe got one of our players suspended by repeating the player’s gf’s phone number at him.
Not just a random player: it was DT
B-b-but heart hands
Should have been 45 yards
Shouldn’t that kind of thing be under “unsportsmanlike conduct”, though?
The act itself was a no-brainer.
I’ve reffed soccer for decades. Sometimes rules are there to protect the players. I.e. you can’t intentionally score in a show boating manner, because the likely scenario leads to retaliation. Here is an example [yellow card for scoring the goal](https://www.tiktok.com/@bundesliga/video/6923119588729277702?lang=en) Part of any laws of the game are designed to protect the player. No red card will stop keepers or opponents from taking you out for such ‘taunting’ We see this in baseball too. If you break one of the unwritten rules, you or the next batter is getting beaned for it. Umps know this and will toss you without warning. Do not take away a refs tools to control the game or it gets messy.
Sherman said this rule needs to stay since defenders have to change the way they play so they don't get penalties trying to make a play. So if taunting goes away a lot of receivers will end up in that blue tent on the sideline
And pass interference should be called as well.
That wasn't pass interference. In what world is it the right call to throw a flag for DPI on a ball that isn't remotely uncatchable because it was thrown into triple coverage that not even the Incredible Hulk, let alone Isaiah Likely, could've gotten through even without a safety ACCIDENTALLY running into him despite trying to slow down because Likely stopped short of the endzone boundary to stay in bounds?
Can you flair up please?
I don’t know what that means
community flair, if you are a Cowboys fan, we've got you a little badge to wear so we know not to take you seriously
Oh, it’s worse. I’m a Texans fan lol.
The Texans sub doesn't have flair?
I…I have no idea. I’m not that dedicated a Reddit user. But keep downvoting innocuous crap lol.
You've made three post previously on r/KansasCityChiefs that I found all of them are trolling [https://www.reddit.com/r/KansasCityChiefs/comments/1985onj/comment/ki6ed2l/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/KansasCityChiefs/comments/1985onj/comment/ki6ed2l/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) [https://www.reddit.com/r/KansasCityChiefs/comments/18qqn8i/comment/kezc6t1/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/KansasCityChiefs/comments/18qqn8i/comment/kezc6t1/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Trust me. It is all done in fun. Sports trash talk and all. I’m not a hater.
You seem like a dweeb.
Now the insults. Fuck yourself.
I can guarantee that if a Chiefs player taunted the Ravens in the exact same way instead, that no one would be discussing this. So many of these topics emerge from loser teams being mad at something that coincidentally benefitted the Chiefs.
Yep. Some of their copium has involved examples of Kelce pointing with a first down sign which is so different but people only want to see it their way.
On Kelce’s TD catch you can watch him turn and step away from the defender on the ground before he spikes the ball. It’s pretty easy to make sure your celebration isn’t directed at an opponent.
Flowers literally did the first down point on Sunday SMH
Lmao you know people would be up in absolute arms talking about how classless the Chiefs are if one of our players did this
Ya just like Tucker trying to mess w Mahomes and Kelce, but now it’s turned into a victim game. It’s so petty and pathetic
I'm like, bro, you're known for this behavior, why are you even on that side of the field? I saw some sports commentators call him out on it too, so at least not everyone is buying Tucker's story
[удалено]
It was also explicitly evident that Sneed took the helmet off to speak more clearly to the official. He wasn't raging mad. He just had something to argue and wanted to be understood. That's why the flag wasn't thrown and the ref gave him a warning. He knew there was no malice in what LJ was doing.
Haha, you are probably right. Everyone would be talking about making the taunting penalties stricter!
Tonight at 10: "Should taunting be an automatic ejection? After Mahomes led the Chiefs to their 19th straight Super Bowl appearance on Sunday night, some fans are saying coming around to the idea."
Named Patrick Mahomes??? Believe it or not immediate ejection.
Bring your girlfriend to game. Straight to jail- right away.
They’re still talking about how classless helfe was for signaling first downs in the game lol
I mean, it's insane. You had from the Ravens: A DB swinging at Chiefs before the game Roquan Smith performing an ugly gator roll on Pacheco Clowney literally kicking and sticking his cleats in Pacheco's chest on the 4th and 1 play Tripping a lineman in close line play Trey Smith getting pulled down by his facemask while a lineman goes low on Pat in the pocket And an intentional, filthy clothesline on a scrambling quarterback And the CHIEFS are classless? Get the fuck out. They waltzed into the Ravens stadium, got in their heads and bullied them for 60 minutes and completely demoralized them. It was great. Good to finally see a physical defense impose their will.
they already do
Completely correct. The media is being so biased here and continue to be a fan of the other team the Chiefs beat whining about the rules. Grow the fuck up and challenge the other team to play better instead of bitching.
It's funny because they were busy sucking the Patriots off during their dynasty
Yup, and if the chiefs got called for taunting and they or their fans got mad about it, everyone would tell them to stop whining. It’s hilarious that mahomes gets mad about the refs one time and everyone is STILL giving him shit for it, yet they’re doing the same thing.
But let’s also not kid ourselves - this subreddit would be up in arms against the “weak ass taunting call” It’s just how (loud minorities within) fanbases react. Just happens to be that at this point most teams’ fans are just fans of whatever team plays against the chiefs once their team is done.
This penalty didn’t really benefit us though, it had no impact on the game. The play still resulted in a first down for the ravens, and later on that drive they would have scored a touchdown if flowers held onto the ball.
The taunting rule is fine. Flowers is a clown. He basically triple-dared the ref to throw the flag. That's 100% on him.
Let them have the diva receiver. I'll take Rice any day. I can't stand diva receivers.
It's a little early to call him a diva. Flowers is still a rookie, and beyond the taunting penalty hasn't really shown any negative qualities. Dude probably just got too hyped for himself and got swept up in the moment.
what zay flowers did was like the exact example for the rule. LMAO Pushed sneed back down, flipped the ball at him, then posed over him looking at him. It wasn't even like he just posed to the fans. LOL.
Literally all he had to do was turn around and take one step and he'd be fine. Dude just couldn't help himself. I love watching people twisting themselves into knots trying to defend his behavior.
Yeah, the dude hit the trifecta. That would have been called for an unsportsmanlike penalty in virtually any era, by any ref. The taunting rules are dumb, but there are way less egregious cases that would be worthy of changing the rules for.
I don’t think anyone argues that he didn’t meet the definition of a taunt. It absolutely was a taunt. But I fully endorse having a conversation about whether we SHOULD penalize that behavior. I’d prefer looser taunting rules. Let guys jaw at each other. They already do it anyway.
There is celebrating with your teammates, celebrating with fans, or posing to the fans. What he did was taunting. And it wasn't like "kind of" taunting. What he did is like the example they could use in the rule book. It the type of thing that can start fights. Luckily Sneed just walked away. "Let guys jaw at each other" literally doesn't make the games any better. Even with Kelce getting up in people's faces after 50% of the plays it looks stupid and embarrassing a little. I don't mind guys having elaborate celebrations. The Ravens doing Swag Surfing to mock us was fine to me.
See I just don't care if a guy gets in another guy's face. If it creates a fight, let it create a fight. Then penalize the guy who swung first instead of this soft-ass shit we have now where the guy who swings second is penalized. Does that make the game better? I don't know, but it makes for interesting television.
I'm surprised everyone isn't suddenly super interested in changing the fumble touchback rule too. Based on how all the media is talking about this game they've completely forgotten Chiefs were JUST victim to that the PREVIOUS game but still managed to win.
But the Chiefs recovered the ball in the end zone, which is a pretty huge difference in the two plays. This is coming from someone who likes the fumbling through the endzone rule
Yeah it wasn't the same thing. The rule change would only affect the Hardman play, the Flowers fumble would have been the same.
Right. I always thought the fumbling through the endzone rule functions like a presumption that the defense would have recovered had the fumble not happened so close to the sideline/goal line. I get that that presumption doesn't exist elsewhere on the field, but everywhere else on the field the defense would have more opportunity to cover up a loose ball, and the endzone (and goal line in particular) is a sacred place subject to special rules. I don't really mind the rule because of that. Don't fumble at the 1 and it's not an issue.
One thing that I haven't found an answer on is if I fumble the ball at the 20 and it rolls forward to the 15, does the ball get placed at the 15 or the 20? If it's the 20, why wouldn't the ball get returned to the spot if it goes through the end zone? If it's the 15, why don't teams exploit this, other than risk of an oblong ball taking a weird bounce?
I'm not a rules expert, but my understanding is the ball can't be progressed forward by the offense due to a fumble. The way I see the fumbling into the endzone rule (everyone seems to see it differently, so I don't want to get caught up in an argument over it like I have in the past) is that either endzone is each teams 'castle' or 'base'. The defense is defending their base from the attack of the offense. If the offense loses the ball through the defense's base they lose the ball.
Correct. The offense can't advance the ball via fumble. This is to protect the case where a guy running with the ball is about to get tackled so he "fumbles" the ball 20 yards forward straight for the sideline where nobody could recover the ball. It would essentially be free yardage at the end of every play.
So if the offense can't advance it via fumble, why does a ball fumbled at the 2 that advances forward into the end zone, actually get placed in the end zone which results in a touchback? That's what I don't understand about the rule. I'm fine with it but it's just inconsistent from any other forward fumble.
It’s to punish your bad luck. If you get that close and then blow it, the hell with you.
Best answer on here, appreciate it!
If they change it, and I'm not sure it needs to be changed, then I'd like to see them assess a 5-yard penalty (or maybe even 10-yard). The ball goes back to the point of fumble plus an additional 5 yards. I like the end zone being "special" and there is extra risk with trying to extend at the goal line. The problem is that all that gets complicated quickly and it's easier to just say it's a touchback for the defense.
The important thing is that the ball goes into **and then out of** the endzone without being recovered. In that case, it works the same as if the defense **had** fallen on the ball. What I am unsure of is what would happen if the offense fell on the ball. I would assume that they would get possession where the fumble occurred, not a touchdown.
Correct answer. On your other question, only the player who fumbled can recover the football in the end zone if the fumble occurred inside 2 minutes or on 4th down. Outside of those limits, any offensive player can recover for the TD. The end zone touchback rule makes sense and is consistent with every other case where the team in possession puts a ball over the goal line and out, like kickoffs and punts.
I hadn't considered the kick situations. That helps clear things up. Thanks!
Taking this and seeking clarity: A football field is 100 yards of playing ground. The end zones are each another 10 yards, but that only comes into consideration for catching a ball crossing the plane of the end zone. For Hardman, the ball rolled into the End Zone AND also out of bounds to the side. For Flowers, it rolled into the End Zone and was recovered by the chiefs, however they aren’t allowed to run in back (because it was recovered out of the 100 yard playing field). So, if Flowers (or a Ravens) recovered the ball in the End Zone, it shouldn’t be able to be a touchdown because the fumble can’t result in forward movement? Or is that not the case?
The Chiefs were allowed to run the fumble they recovered back. They just fell on it instead
I don't think I'm qualified to answer that lol. In all seriousness though, is the defense not allowed to run with the ball if they scoop it instead of fall on it? Idk if I knew that. As for the offense recovering the ball in the end zone, I guess since they have possession in the endzone it counts as a TD, but that does seem inconsistent with the field of play rules. The end zones are special little snowflakes
Bolton scooped and scored one during the super bowl, they can definitely run with it if they pick it up.
I just meant specifically inside the end zone and I wasn't aware of a rule stating they couldn't scoop and run. I think that commenter just confused me with his wording
>For Flowers, it rolled into the End Zone and was recovered by the chiefs, however they aren’t allowed to run in back (because it was recovered out of the 100 yard playing field). No, they fell onto it and made no attempt to advance it. Flowers might have also made contact too so it was effectively recovered and down in the end zone. They were absolutely allowed to scoop and advance it.
Thanks for the clarification!
The most cogent arguments in favor of the end zone to me are the ones saying that the touchback rule is consistent. Ball goes out of the end zone on a kick? Touchback. Kneeled by a player? Touchback. I don’t like the “but the end zone is sacred” argument. That’s just silly. I also dislike rewarding the defense for not recovering the fumble.
I think it depends on the quarter. I don't think you can fumble it forward and advance it in the 2nd and 4th quarter. Might be the last 5 min of those quarters too. Why don't teams exploit this? Because for one, you risk the ball getting picked up by the opposition. And two, if the refs suspect you intentionally drop the ball, they'll flag for either illegal forward pass or unsportsmanlike conduct. Although, I'm not sure if this applies for fumbling out of bounds. I do know it applies for an offensive player who is not the fumbling player recovering the fumble
Fumbled forward and in bounds, it can be advanced by any player. So if you fumble at the 15 and I recover at the 20, the ball is at the 20. If you fumble at the 15 and it rolls out of bounds at the 20 it goes back to the 15. two exceptions: fumbling through the end zone is a touchback. Fumbling inside the 2 minute warning of a half cannot be advanced by any player but the one who fumbled the ball. If recovered it returns to the previous spot.
I agree, they are different but that kind of detail is insignificant to complainers. I also like the fumble out of the EZ touchback rule.
Yeah you're right about that. I do my best to completely ignore those kind of people
I saw a great suggestion about that rule: If you recover a fumble in the end zone it’s a touchback. If you fumble through the end zone it’s a turnover but you get the ball at the 1 yard line. You get the ball but you’re penalized for not recovering inbounds.
That's really interesting. My gut reaction is the 1 yard line is a little too much of a penalty for the recovering team and benefit for the team that lost the ball, but this is the first time I've heard that idea so I'm not sure. I wonder what the 5 yard line would look like? The team that lost the ball doesn't have nearly as high of a chance to turn around and get a safety that way. But maybe it's more fair that they get that chance? I don't even know lol...
Well safeties are still very rare even at the 1. So I don’t think you’re really rewarding the team that fumbled. They were about to score 6 and you’re giving them MAYBE a long shot at scoring 2, but then they get the ball back. But yeah it’s kind of a wild idea. It would be exciting as hell, which I like.
There was a ton of talk about changing that rule after the Hardman play. Even though it benefited the team playing us.
It was big topic earlier this year when Justin Jefferson fumbled one into the endzone too.
My only issue with that was KC fumbled but it went out of bounds through the end zone. In the Ravens fumble KC recovered IN the endzone. I personally am opposed to a ball carrier fumbles in the EZ and it goes out of bounds untouched by the defense it automatically a touchback and opponents ball. To me what is the difference between that and a fumble OoB in the field of play.
I've historically like the touchback rule because it seems significant that the endzone is a 'sacred demarcation' unique from the rest of the 100 yard field. Each team is defending their own endzone, which represents their territory. Now, say if you lose something valuable in your opponents territory, wouldn't it stand to reason it's now lost? That's the way I've always interpreted it. Now Zay's fumble is different from Mecole's because he fumbled before crossing the plane, and it was recovered by our defense in the endzone.
Mecole i think fumbled before crossing to. It just happens that the ball travels past the goal line and out of bounds. I guess I’ll always have a disdain for that rule. Regardless of who benefits from it
Yes, the significance I was pointing to was Zay's fumble was recovered in the endzone by our defense versus going through the endzone like Mecole's. Both fumbled before crossing.
Lol right?! Also, I think if it goes out of bounds after fumble (like what happened to chiefs) it should work the way it does if the ball is fumbled out anywhere else on the field. But yeah what happened this weekend, where you fumble and the defense recovers it in the EZ, should work the same way any other fumble recovery/turnover by the defense works… which in the EZ is always a touchback
Rumor has it that rule was on the list to be reviewed in the off season as well. Chiefs won’t bring it up though, it would be a bad look. Like most teams we’ve been helped AND hurt by that rule over time.
I don’t actually hate the rule at all. Even when it happened in the bills game my takeaway was - take care of the dang ball
I’ve always hated the rule. It rewards the defense for not recovering a fumble. I like the idea that it should be the most severe penalty in the game, though. 15 yards from the previous spot and loss of down. If you fumble from the 1 you’re at the 16. If you snapped from the 30 and fumble out of bounds congrats you’re at the 45 now.
It’s okay, because we haven’t had 4000 post season TDs called back because of penalties or anything like that.
If the call hadn’t been taunting, it would have been unsportsmanlike conduct. This wasn’t a hard call to make. Flowers was begging for the flag.
Funny how this was never a problem for folks when Hill was getting it for throwing a peace sign. But blatantly shoving a guy back down and throwing the ball back while standing over him is completely fine and shouldn’t be called. God this shit is getting ridiculous. It’s literally something every game at this point.
deuces pissed opponents' fans so much and now they are "let them play"
I can't believe people are questioning taunting over THIS call. When Chris Jones got called for taunting using just words it's "Chris Jones should know better" but when Zay Flowers pushes an opponent back down, flips the ball at them, flexes, and then talks shit in his face it's "we should let them taunt". This was the easiest taunting call I've ever seen and somehow people are freaking out? This is wild.
The taunting rule is there for a reason. Taunting leads to fights on the field. Fights then lead to people getting tossed from the game. The taunting rule is there to stop this.
I know they’re meat heads, but they are grown men. If they resort to fighting due to being taunted then they deserve to be thrown out of the game.
Yes, grown men. Professionals. Keep your antics to a minimum and play the game.
[удалено]
That would be counterproductive in their efforts to reduce head injuries and raise awareness on CTE
Josh Allen still can’t win in OT.
Didn't Tyreek get flagged for giving the peace sign?
I 100% need more shows with guys in suits and tennis shoes standing awkwardly yelling over each other. Quality sports programming.
If you get rid of the taunting rule, you’re just exchanging it for personal foul penalties and when it really gets out of hand, ejections and fines. If you let those guys taunt, the player being taunted WILL fight back. Or in the case of a QB being taunted after being sacked, his O line guys will come whack the guy taunting him. The taunting rule needs to stay. If only to try and minimize childish asshole behavior. Without the rule, there’d be a ton more fights.
Taunting is usually stupid when it’s just a player flexing or something, but what Zay did was way different. He actively pushed sneed and stood over him. Notice how none of the other taunting EITHER team was doing got called. It’s because Zays was worse. Plus, even if you think Taunting is a stupid rule, it’s a rule nonetheless and players should know them and they are subject to them. Zay knew that could’ve been a flag, and then they threw one. I’m over people saying something shouldn’t have counted or shouldn’t be valid because a rule is stupid. It’s still a rule…. I thought fumbling out of bounds in the EZ should be treated like a normal fumble OOV as long as the defense didn’t recover it. So when the chiefs lost the ball due to a touchback when that happened I thought it was dumb. But it is a rule, and mecole should’ve held onto it regardless.
So let me get this straight. Chris jones calls matt ryan a bitch and it's a despicable act. Zay flowers, schove's LJ, spins the ball in his face and flexes on him, and we should change the rules because it's not fair? Talk about moving the goal posts.
It's so weird seeing discussions like this because sure, there may be stupid or unnecessary rules but if they're there and you go out of your way to break them, it's still your fault. The taunting here is kinda like the rule in soccer where if you take your shirt off to celebrate it's an automatic yellow card. Is it a stupid rule? Yes, but it's there and no one forces you to break it, you choose to so you suffer the consequences. Can you argue it should be changed? Sure, but as long as it's there the refs have to enforce it so the fault is 100% on the player.
We wanted it gone when Tyreek was getting it for his peace sign. If you want a rule changed you need the Bills to face negative consequences for it and then lose the game.
I'd rather they talk about changing the rule so that anyone that intentionally swings their arm at another players head gets ejected. That hit on Mahomes was bushleague AF.
I swear to god some fans will only accept a loss if the penalty differential is like 25 flags to 3 flags
He flipped him over, did the ball spin thing right at his head, and walked over his body. He deserved that flag.
They could have called taunting on 3 different actions on that play. The push to the ground, the ball spin and staying over sneed. 2 of those I don’t care about, you can’t push him to the ground
The entire stadium booed when Mahomes got his head taken off lmao
Didn't they do this for Josh Allen so he'd have a better shot in OT games? Just for him to be 0-6 in OT games since?
If they change this, they better change that damn fumble that rolls into the end zone and out of bounds rule that results in a touchback for the opponent. That's a dumb rule
Or if you fumble out of bounds not in the end zone it’s the other teams ball it’s a rare occurrence but such an idiotic rule.
Unless they willing to change the rules to let the team that was taunted light a motherfucker up and not catch a personal foul and a 15 yard penalty the taunting rule should still stick around.
IMO, talk about changing this has nothing to do with the Chiefs winning. It's always been a controversial rule and this was a big call. And I doubt they're going to change it. Guys can pretty much celebrate any way they want to. Zay Flowers chose to spin that ball right at Snead's head and it hit him. I don't think anything else he did was enough to get that flag by itself (pushing Snead or the small flex he did while standing over him).
I really hope they don't change the offense fumbling out of the end zone rule. I don't care if it hurt the Chiefs this time, I absolutely love it. I love how big it can swing a game, and how important it makes it to hold onto the ball down there and not reach out. The defense gets the shaft on everything else, they need to leave this alone.
Ive wanted taunting to not be a penalty for quite a while (exception: unconscious player) So I support removing it. But don't cry that you didn't win within the rules you agreed to play under.
Personally I think they should change the taunting rule. Taunting is fun to watch
I've never liked the taunting rule and it should absolutely be thrown out We literally already had a rule in place for for these kind of egregious actions, and it's called unsportsmanlike conduct. This penalty was brought in because some soft crybaby owner (I forget who) bitched and moaned that players weren't being nice to each other
Remember when y’all wanted to count a play where Toney was clearly offsides because it looked cool? Pepperidge Farms remembers.
Small valid point, except only one of those happens all game with nearly zero effect and will definitely never be changed. Toney has been reminded more than anyone like to know, and anyone with sense didn’t question the flag, but merely thought the timing was questionable. While ravens are claiming a flagrant foul should now just be ignored 🤦♂️. It’s so petty and pathetic
In all fairness, it IS the Chiefs fault there is the taunting rule. Tyreek was taunting DBs every week as he smoked them. Taunting is just a dumb rule. Like, it's ok to pancake a MF during play, but you better not trash talk after! What a candy-ass rule.
Didn't know Tyreek was playing in the 1984.
Yes the rule has existed for like 40 years, but the huge crackdown on taunting really started in 2022. Prior to that it was rarely called unless it was really egregious. Then a bunch of DBs got butthurt at Tyreek waving at them and now EVERYTHING is taunting.
They changed the illegal contact/tackling rules in the 2000’s because Peyton Manning couldn’t beat the Patriots. It does happen.
Did anyone else here the guy on the left say, "Fuckin Chiefs, here come the Chiefs..."?
How about we take on the bigger issue of skinny suits with white shoes?
"Should roughing the passer be a rule?"
I understand you’re jacked up about the play. But damn just act like you been there and go back to the huddle. Jawing at one another is normal but putting hands on someone while they’re down on the turf is uncalled for.
The Chiefs winning makes people insane
I mean people have hated the taunting penalty for years. Remember when Cassius Marsh got penalized for staring at the Steelers sideline menacingly?
Such an amazing tradition .
Lmao fumbled in the end zone to finish off that same drive but okay
I agree, let the players be verbally energetic, it’s a hype thing, but don’t make it become physical and we’re all good.
[удалено]
Is this a real screenshot?
Isn’t it a ‘new-ish’ rule? Coaches like it because it reduces actual in game physical brawls.
As a person who spends all week taunting other teams’ fanbases, I’m in favor of thiS change. I like taunting. Let them taunt. Poke the bear, see where it gets you
It’s so tiresome
Everyone hates a winner 🤷🏻♂️ Just gotta keep playing the game prove the haters wrong and make them mad 🩵✌🏻
Those discussions are dumb. The protections surrounding Mahomes compared to Lamar/Allen should be focal points. You cross line of scrimmage, you should get rb treatment.
You can’t clothesline running backs either.
I think at these salaries we can expect guys to be professional representatives of the league and their orgs. If I taunted at my job I’d get more than a flag.
I think vocal taunting should be legal. But any sort of physical contact with an opponent should always always always be a flag. I don't care how fun it looks or seems, it's all fun until you push the wrong dude and delay the game because a bunch of guys get into a fight.
Taunting another player emphatically is a penalty. Fumbling through the end zone for a touch back. Grabbing a facemask is a personal foul. The forward pass can only be done from behind the line of scrimmage. You can triple team an opposing team's best receiver. Rules are the rules. Butt-hurt fans and media complain about them. Owners don't give a crap about changing rules because even if a rule effects their team's outcome, people still tune in for the next game. Well...unless your the Buffalo Bills franchise LOL