Hurley: Officiating kind of ruined the Super Bowl ... for the second straight year

BOSTON -- It's always a dangerous dance, wading into this water, but here goes: Officiating ruined the Super Bowl. Again.

I want to be as clear as possible about this, because messages can get twisted and contorted and bent around. So the issue is this: After 58 minutes without one single flag being thrown for defensive holding, the officiating crew called defensive holding on a third down to keep a drive alive for the Kansas City offense, thus allowing the game-winning points to be scored. It's the second straight year for that exact scenario to play out in front of millions of eyeballs in the NFL's premiere event.

That's not good.

Last year, it was Bengals linebacker Logan Wilson holding Cooper Kupp's hips on a third-and-8 in the final two minutes of the game. The Rams scored moments later to go up 23-20, which held as the final score. The Super Bowl was ruined by overzealous officiating in a critical spot.

This year, it was Eagles defensive back James Bradberry grabbing a slight hold of JuJu Smith-Schuster as the receiver pivoted to change directions, a penalty that was again called inside the two-minute warning of the fourth quarter. It allowed the Chiefs to drain the clock from 1:49 to just eight seconds while kicking the go-ahead field goal.

For all intents and purposes, it ended the game. And on the same level, it ruined the game.

To be clear, the call didn't steal the Super Bowl from the Eagles. An unforced fumble leading to a defensive touchdown plus two horrific coverage breakdowns gave the Chiefs 21 points in this game, and a horrific punt didn't help matters, either. A lack of penalty flag on Bradberry wouldn't have given the Eagles anything except a chance to tie or win the game in the final moments.

But the Eagles ... and the viewing public ... and the betting public were robbed of seeing that play out. Because an official determined that for the first time all game, a defensive player had inhibited an offensive player from getting down the field.

It was suspect, it was unnecessary, and it was, more than anything, disappointing.

For his part, Bradberry admitted to a jersey tug when talking to reporters inside the losing locker room. And by the letter of the law, the case could be made that a penalty had been committed.

But in the context of this game, the standard had been established. Defensive holding on slight contact was not being called. Ask any player from any era at any level, and they'll tell you that they play the game as it's being called. If the flags are flying liberally, then defenders know to make no contact. If the flags are staying in officials' belts, then there's some grabbing and hand-fighting that's certain to follow. Whatever that standard may be, players know it and adapt to it within games. As long as it stays consistent, both sides know the deal. When a call comes in 58 minutes after that standard has been established, it's a problem.

That's really it. That's the issue. (Though, to be fair, spending half the night dissecting the specific requirements of a catch while knowing full well that NFL head of officiating Walt Anderson was going to make a ruling based off gut feeling was an issue, too.)

Last year in the Super Bowl, zero defensive holding penalties had been flagged prior to the game-altering penalty called on Wilson. This year, zero defensive holding penalties had been called prior to Bradberry's play on Smith-Schuster.

That both happened inside of two minutes of the fourth quarter in a tight game, that both directly led to the game-winning points ... it's not good for the game.

Hopefully that much was clear, but in a world where officiating alters rules where it sees fit and where the definitions of a catch remain undefinable, very little actually is clear. But the point is  simple: The players are great, the games are great. There's just no need for officials to interject themselves when it's not necessary to do so. That benefits nobody -- except, in the short burst, the Rams last year and the Chiefs this year.

For now, Chiefs fans are happy, and Eagles fans are angry. Rightfully so on both accounts. It's everybody else -- those who wanted and deserved to see the Eagles try to mount a game-tying or game-winning drive, and those who were just as eager to see the Chiefs make a stop -- who lost. Again.

Most of us would have liked to have seen the Eagles get the ball with 1:45 left in the game, needing a field goal to tie and force overtime or a touchdown to win. It would have provided the captivating ending that this particular game certainly deserved. The spectacular athletes who had entertained the world for four hours would have delivered a proper finale, one way or another. But the Eagles didn't get that chance, and neither did we.

But there's always next year.

You can email Michael Hurley or find him on Twitter @michaelFhurley.