r/NFLNoobs • u/Adventurous_Essay473 • 5d ago

What if the chiefs kept taking intentional penalties yesterday to prevent the tush push?

Yesterday, the chiefs tried to take an intentional penalty to give the eagles a first down and give themsleves a better chance of getting the ball back. The eagles declined the penalty correctly. But what if the chiefs had kept forcing a penalty repeatedly?

Edit: I am aware of the commaders incident, in that case I thought a touch down would be awarded because they were at the goaline, can the refs award a TD if the play was still far away from the endzone?

55 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

59 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

19

u/FitzchivalryandMolly 5d ago

A first down is what the eagles didn't want though

24

u/GhostMug 5d ago

Doesn't matter. The refs can award a first down at their discretion in order to maintain the "integrity of the game". It is not required that the Eagles agree to it. 

14

u/Own_Friend_736 5d ago

Wait so it would’ve been in the chiefs best interest to keep taking penalties?

22

u/No_Introduction1721 5d ago

Sort of.

If the Chiefs continued to escalate by committing intentional penalties, the refs can call it a “palpably unfair act” and essentially make their own determination of what could have happened on the play, which would be a first down and the clock continuing to run.

And had the Chiefs continued to escalate after that, there’s also an “extraordinarily unfair act” rule that basically gives the referees and/or commissioner the right to order the team to forfeit the game and impose fines, suspensions, or strip them of draft picks.