We are reader supported. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Also, as an Amazon affiliate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
The 2024 NFL season produced several officiating controversies, but not every viral clip was actually a confirmed missed call.
That distinction matters.
A questionable call can fall into at least three categories:
- a call the NFL later acknowledged was incorrect
- a judgment call that remained disputed
- a correct ruling that looked controversial in real time
Instead of listing every penalty fans argued about on social media, this guide focuses on several of the most notable 2024 incidents and separates documented officiating issues from subjective debate.
Quick Summary: Major 2024 Officiating Controversies
| Game | Play | Main Issue |
|---|---|---|
| Rams vs. Vikings, Week 8 | Sam Darnold facemask in end zone | Missed facemask; play resulted in safety |
| Bengals vs. Ravens, Week 10 | Bengals’ final two-point attempt | Multiple disputed contact/no-call questions |
| Bills vs. Chiefs, AFC Championship | Josh Allen fourth-down sneak | Controversial spot, ruling stood |
| Chiefs vs. Texans, Divisional Round | Hits involving Patrick Mahomes | Disputed roughing/unnecessary-roughness calls |
One important clarification:
The last two games were played in January 2025, but they were part of the postseason for the 2024 NFL season.
That is why they belong in a review of 2024-season officiating.
Rams vs. Vikings: The Missed Sam Darnold Facemask
One of the clearest officiating mistakes associated with the 2024 regular season came on October 24, 2024.
With Minnesota trailing the Los Angeles Rams late in the fourth quarter, Vikings quarterback Sam Darnold was sacked in his own end zone by Byron Young.
The play resulted in a safety.
Replay, however, showed Young grabbing Darnold’s facemask.
No penalty was called.
The missed call was especially significant because Minnesota was trailing by six points at the time. Instead of receiving a 15-yard facemask penalty and continuing its possession, the Vikings conceded two points and then had to give the ball back.
After the game, referee Tra Blake explained that the crew did not have a clear enough view of the facemask action on the field. The NFL’s replay system could not simply create a facemask penalty that had not been called.
This is exactly the type of play that drives debate about expanding replay assistance.
Why Couldn’t Replay Fix It?
At the time, replay rules did not allow the booth to simply add an uncalled facemask foul after seeing it on video.
That creates an uncomfortable situation:
Television viewers can see an obvious foul in slow motion, while the officiating system may still be unable to correct it.
The Darnold play therefore became more than a debate about one missed penalty.
It became an example of the limitations of the replay framework itself.
Bengals vs. Ravens: The Two-Point Conversion Debate
Another major controversy came during Cincinnati’s 35–34 loss to Baltimore on November 7, 2024.
Cincinnati scored a late touchdown and chose to attempt a two-point conversion for the lead.
Joe Burrow’s pass to Tanner Hudson fell incomplete.
But the play immediately generated complaints about possible defensive fouls.
The Bengals believed Baltimore defenders committed illegal contact during the attempt, and replay angles generated widespread discussion about contact involving Cincinnati receivers and Burrow.
No flag changed the result.
Baltimore won 35–34.
Was This a Confirmed Missed Call?
This is where the article needs more precision than the old version.
It should not automatically label every disputed no-call a proven officiating error.
Pass interference, defensive holding and illegal contact involve judgment about restriction, timing and whether the contact materially affected the play.
So the Bengals-Ravens finish belongs on a list of major officiating controversies, but it should not be presented exactly the same way as the Darnold facemask.
The latter was visible as a specific prohibited action.
The former involved several judgment-heavy elements that remained the subject of debate.
That distinction increases credibility.
Bills vs. Chiefs: Josh Allen’s Fourth-Down Spot
One of the biggest postseason officiating debates came in the AFC Championship Game on January 26, 2025.
Buffalo faced fourth-and-1 against Kansas City.
Josh Allen attempted a quarterback sneak.
Officials ruled him short of the line to gain.
Because of the importance of the play and the difficulty of determining the exact position of the football inside a pile, the ruling immediately became controversial.
Replay angles were examined, but there was not sufficient evidence to overturn the ruling on the field.
Kansas City took possession.
Why Ball Spots Are So Difficult
A television viewer sees the yellow first-down line.
Officials do not use that graphic.
The yellow line is a broadcast aid, not the official line to gain.
The actual question is where the football was when the runner became down by rule.
On quarterback sneaks, that can be extremely difficult because:
- the ball disappears inside the pile
- the runner’s knees and body can be hidden
- multiple officials may have obstructed angles
- the exact line to gain can be separated from the visible TV graphic
That does not mean every controversial spot is correct.
It means a replay must provide sufficient evidence to change the original ruling.
The Allen play became another argument for more precise ball-tracking technology.
Chiefs vs. Texans: Roughing and Unnecessary-Roughness Debate
Kansas City’s Divisional Round victory over Houston also produced substantial officiating discussion.
Several penalties involving contact with Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes drew criticism from viewers, analysts and Texans players.
One particularly discussed play involved Houston defenders making contact with Mahomes as he went to the ground.
Officials assessed unnecessary roughness.
Another quarterback-related penalty also generated debate over whether the contact met the threshold for a foul.
Why These Calls Are Different From the Darnold Facemask
Again, classification matters.
A facemask is relatively objective once the grab is clearly visible.
Quarterback-protection calls frequently require more judgment.
Officials must consider:
- timing
- force
- contact location
- whether the quarterback was defenseless
- whether the defender had a realistic opportunity to avoid contact
That makes it possible for reasonable observers to disagree even after watching replay.
These Chiefs-Texans calls were controversial.
That does not automatically make every one of them an officially acknowledged error.
Why Were Fans So Frustrated With NFL Officiating?
The central problem is not simply that officials make mistakes.
Officials have always made mistakes.
The modern problem is the difference between what viewers can see and what the rules allow officials to correct.
A fan may see:
three slow-motion angles + zoom + freeze frame
within seconds.
The official made the original decision:
at full speed + from one assigned position + with players blocking sight lines.
Then replay rules may prevent the league from correcting certain judgment fouls.
That creates the frustrating question:
If everyone watching television can see it, why can’t the NFL fix it?
The answer is often not technological.
It is procedural.
The 2024 Hip-Drop Tackle Rule
The 2024 season also introduced a major safety rule involving the swivel hip-drop tackle.
But the old article overemphasized this as if it produced a wave of live-game penalties.
The NFL deliberately approached enforcement differently.
The rule prohibited a specific tackling technique involving a defender grabbing or wrapping a runner and then unweighting and dropping the hips or lower body onto the runner’s legs.
Importantly, enforcement was expected to rely significantly on postgame review and fines rather than officials throwing flags every time a tackle looked suspicious at full speed.
That context matters when evaluating why some plays that appeared to resemble hip-drop tackles did not produce flags.
The New 2024 Kickoff
The NFL also introduced its dramatically redesigned kickoff format for 2024.
That created new alignment and movement responsibilities for officials.
However, a new rule existing does not automatically mean it belongs in an article about “key missed calls.”
Unless a specific kickoff officiating incident materially affected a notable game, the kickoff rule should remain background context rather than consume hundreds of words.
This is another place where the old article drifted away from its search intent.
What Replay Could and Could Not Fix
Replay is powerful, but it is deliberately limited.
It is particularly useful for more objective questions such as:
- possession
- boundary rulings
- scoring plays
- turnovers
- certain ball spots
- whether a runner was down
Many penalties remain primarily judgment calls made on the field.
That distinction explains why an obvious-looking television replay does not necessarily produce a correction.
The Darnold facemask became such a strong example precisely because the visual evidence looked compelling while the mechanism for fixing the no-call was limited.
Did the NFL Change Replay After 2024?
This is where the article can add genuine information gain instead of ending in speculation.
The league continued expanding the role of replay assistance after the 2024 season.
For 2025, NFL owners approved expanded replay-assist authority covering certain objective aspects of penalties, including situations involving the facemask.
That is directly relevant to the Darnold controversy.
In other words:
2024 exposed a problem → the NFL subsequently expanded the correction mechanism.
That is much stronger content than the old article’s speculative section saying the NFL “could” someday change replay.
Why Not Make Every Penalty Reviewable?
Because there is a trade-off.
If every holding, pass-interference or roughing decision could trigger a detailed review, NFL games could become significantly slower.
There is also a philosophical problem.
Slow motion can distort the appearance of contact.
A relatively ordinary collision at full speed can look severe frame by frame.
The league therefore has to balance:
accuracy vs. game flow
and
objective correction vs. re-officiating subjective judgment.
Replay assist attempts to occupy the middle ground: correct obvious errors quickly without turning every snap into a video review.
Ball-Tracking Technology
The Josh Allen fourth-down controversy illustrates another technological challenge.
The NFL has experimented with tracking technology inside footballs, but knowing where the ball is does not automatically tell officials when the runner became down.
You need two pieces of information simultaneously:
ball position + exact moment the play became dead.
If the ball is buried beneath several players and the runner’s knee is hidden, technology solves only part of the problem.
That is why electronic ball tracking can improve measurements without completely eliminating officiating judgment.
Were NFL Officials Worse in 2024?
This article should not make that claim without league-wide evidence.
A handful of viral mistakes does not establish that the entire officiating system became less accurate.
The more defensible conclusion is:
2024 produced several highly visible controversies that exposed specific weaknesses in the interaction between live officiating and replay.
Those are different claims.
The first requires comprehensive accuracy data.
The second can be demonstrated through documented individual cases and subsequent rule changes.
How to Evaluate a Controversial NFL Call
Before calling a play a “terrible missed call,” ask four questions.
1. What was actually called on the field?
Do not begin with the slow-motion replay.
2. Is the issue objective or judgment-based?
Facemask and boundary questions can be easier to establish visually than whether contact constituted meaningful pass interference.
3. Was the play reviewable under the rules at the time?
A clear mistake is not necessarily a correctable mistake.
4. Did the NFL later acknowledge an error or change the relevant rule?
That provides much stronger evidence than a viral social-media clip.
FAQ
What was one of the clearest missed calls of the 2024 NFL season?
The missed facemask against Vikings quarterback Sam Darnold late in the Rams-Vikings game became one of the season’s most prominent examples.
The play resulted in a safety, and the uncalled facemask could not simply be added through the replay process then in place.
Why couldn’t replay correct the Sam Darnold facemask?
The replay system operating at the time did not provide a mechanism to simply create that uncalled facemask penalty from video review.
The controversy helped illustrate the gap between obvious video evidence and what replay officials were authorized to correct.
Was Josh Allen’s fourth-down sneak a confirmed bad call?
No.
It was highly controversial, but the ruling on the field was that Allen was short, and replay did not provide sufficient evidence to overturn it.
Calling it a disputed spot is more accurate than stating as fact that officials got it wrong.
Were the Chiefs favored by referees in the 2024 postseason?
Individual calls involving Kansas City generated substantial debate.
That alone is not evidence of systematic favoritism.
A credible analysis should evaluate individual rulings rather than infer bias from selected controversial plays.
Did NFL replay rules change after the 2024 season?
Yes.
The league expanded replay-assist authority for 2025 to help officials with certain objective elements of penalties, including facemask situations.
Bottom Line
The strongest criticism of NFL officiating during the 2024 season was not that every controversial call was obviously wrong.
It was that the system sometimes produced a visible mismatch between:
what video could show
and
what replay rules allowed officials to correct.
The missed facemask on Sam Darnold was a clear example.
The Bengals-Ravens two-point conversion, Josh Allen’s fourth-down spot and quarterback-protection calls in Chiefs-Texans illustrate the harder category: high-impact plays involving judgment, incomplete angles or standards that reasonable observers can interpret differently.
Most importantly, the NFL did not simply leave the system unchanged.
Replay assistance expanded afterward, showing that at least some of the weaknesses exposed during the 2024 season resulted in procedural changes.
That is the more useful story of 2024 officiating:
not “referees were terrible,” but where the system failed, why it could not always fix itself in real time, and what changed afterward.