Sard
-
Posts
969 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by Sard
-
-
12 minutes ago, Jimmy Pop said:
Yeah but doing it that way you miss out on the 200 people who flashed their nips.
You make an excellent point... I rescind my previous post.
- MOBomberFan, Jimmy Pop and Nickthesizz
-
3
-
I would have preferred that they do the picture during the game as more of a candid shot. There was one done at the Bomber season opener at New Mosaic and it was done that way. You get to see a lot more faces because you don't have a bunch of people standing up and waving. I can't see myself because the guy in front of me had his hands up.
-
I think that Maas' over-reaction was totally uncalled for. It definitely wasn't an obvious PI, and arguably should have gone against Edmonton considering the receiver had his arm around the defender. I believe that the non-call was the correct one in this case.
-
-
1 hour ago, Booch said:
It is a pretty unconventional method, and the fact it was discussed and orchestrated from withing the coaching staff was evident in a couple instances on the theatrics of the "injury"...totally bush and something I have never seen in the way they did it. Generally if you wanted to use this gray area a guy would take a knee pretty much after play was over, or before the play clock started, and with this I have no issue, but doing it after the team has come to the line, or the 20 second clock started was pretty pathetic.
That fact that this is part of your gameplan/strategy just goes to show the type of character that Jones has, and that it most likely leads to a pretty good summation that he probably is still doing other things to circumvent the rules...history does repeat itself and and a leopard never changes his spots.
But so be it...let them revel in their self assurance they have turned a corner...if anyone is smoke and mirrors right now it is them, and doubt they surpass us in standings, and pretty sure Wally will turn things around there and end up ahead of the Riders too...and they can tweet away on twitter about how the play-offs are going as spectators
The funny thing about all this is that if the Bomber's and Oshea did this tactic...could you imagine the uproar about it, and I bet too that guys like Suitor and some others would condemn it too, unlike the attitude they have about it now
Absolutely agree with the first paragraph. It's one thing to stay down after the play to slow the other team down, it's another thing entirely to wait until the ball is about to be snapped and then drop as if you've been shot by a sniper. It happens quite a bit in professional soccer and it's disgusting to watch. Totally unsportsmanlike and a very pathetic way to play a game.
- SPuDS, shadybob and Bigblue204
-
3
-
2 hours ago, ALuCsRED said:
How can TSN not have cameras on both sides of the end zone? The angles for the possible fumble on Montreal's overtime TD was horrible. I think it may have been a fumble.
Absolutely agree... in the shot from inside the endzone, it looked like the hit popped the ball loose, and from the other angle he was hit back around the 2 or 3 yard line, so based on that, I believe the ball was loose before he crossed as well.
-
Flanders
-
Darvin Adams
-
-
I've found over the years that Murray Clark (no longer a head referee, but still part of the crew) really does seem to have a bias against Winnipeg. I distinctly remember a play a few years back when you could see on the play that the Bomber QB at the time (I believe it was Buck) took a nasty headshot and Clark was right there in the background staring right at Buck as he got hit and didn't call RTP. It was so blatantly obvious that he missed the call, it wouldn't surprise me if that one play could be the reason he's not a head referee anymore.
-
-
36 minutes ago, Taynted_Fayth said:
I agree but they have a few wrinkles to work out. That's 2x in the past 2 games (I think) Osh has had to waste a challenge on stupid bad calls the ref's should have gotten in the first place. That PI on Adams was right in front of the ref staring right at the infraction. I get ref's F'up sometimes but this is showing a complete lack of comprehension as to what their job is
Absolutely agreed on the Adams non-call that required the wasted challenge, the ref wasn't even 10 yards away, looking right at the 2 players and the Ottawa player elbowed Adams in the face with no call.
The one I also don't get from a few plays earlier is when the receiver fully runs over the defender, how does that penalty go against the defence. Can't remember who it was, but one of the Ottawa receivers ran right through a Bomber defender basically standing still and they got the illegal contact penalty... made absolutely no sense.
- Brandon Blue&Gold and Mr Dee
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, HardCoreBlue said:
I like what you propose all the way to where I bolded it. Don't like this part at all. Gets at why even have refs on the field then. We have the technology nowadays for that to happen and I'm uneasy with that.
The bolded part can completely take the on field human aspect out of the game plus to much subjectivity and potential controversy with the word significant.
Well thought out proposal though.
Really like the idea of needing a timeout to call a challenge but I would still tack on a time limit for them to call a challenge (30 seconds seems appropriate).
Assess a ten yard delay of game for a failed challenge as well.
Also, how about taking the ipads off the field relying on old fashion vision in real time. Sure have in up in the press box but that 30 second rule to challenge will take care of that.
All of this maximizes whether a coach really feels he has a case to challenge.
I don't think that the intention of the iPads was for challenges, I think it was to give the players the ability to review what they were doing and seeing on the field so that they can improve their play/exploit something that they see their opponent doing.
- HardCoreBlue and SPuDS
-
2
-
2 hours ago, Rich said:
Yeah. It's the same setting.
Ok, in that case my vote is to put it back to gold.... I find the box in the top banner to be somewhat distracting.
Another note, I really like how the banner at the top is always there. I didn't like how it used to disappear (specifically the notifications). Keep up the good work Rich
-
13 hours ago, Rich said:
I found this setting, but it turns out it also puts a box in the header to show where you are. See the box around the Forums link in the header right now.
I tried the blue but it doesn't look any better then the black that is there right now. The box was hidden before because it was gold on gold.
I don't really care for the box in the header. Curious what other people think.
I agree that the box in the header is ugly. I was actually referring to the page numbers at the top and bottom of the threads though (unless it's the same setting). It appears to stand out much more now though.
-
The past few years have included a good number of the most exciting games that I can remember. Win or lose, if the game is exciting and I'm entertained, then I feel like I'm getting value for my money. With the exception of the Calgary game this year, I have had the pleasure of watching some pretty exciting and entertaining games, and even that one stinker had it's moments.
Overall, MOS has done a great job of fielding a team that puts on an entertaining show.
- Nash00, Mr Dee, blue_gold_84 and 2 others
-
5
-
4 minutes ago, 17to85 said:
I would agree with you expect that just last week the c'mon centre allowed after review Montreal to get all up in Nichols face.
The intention may be for it to be black and white but the c'mon centre cares not for rules.
Fair point... The c'mon centre definitely has to improve in order for the challenge system to work properly.
-
16 hours ago, Gotmilt said:
I still feel like that's a judgement call, when slowed down you can call the penalty on every play. I feel like these calls should be made in real time and at game speed.
There's no judgement call when it comes to a head shot or hitting below the knees on the QB, either it happened or it didn't. The timing is irrelevant so full speed or slowed down, either it happened or it didn't which is why I think that would be a valid challenge.
-
2 hours ago, Gotmilt said:
I really don't think the number of challenges is the problem, the problem is being able to challenge judgement calls such as PI and roughing the passer.
As far as I'm concerned, the only part of RTP that should really be challengeable is the head shot, or hitting below the knees. Anything else is timing and is a judgement call which as you say are the problem.
-
Andrew Harris
-
-
I like the new look... one piece of feedback would be that I find that there isn't enough contrast between the current page number indicator and the rest of the page numbers. Might just be my monitor, but I feel like I have to look at it a little too closely to see which page I'm on.
All in all, fantastic work.
-
3 minutes ago, Noeller said:
that one by the fullback is going to give me (and hopefully some WBB players...) nightmares for a long time....
Another example of trying to knock a guy down rather than wrap him up. Loffler had him slowed down and was about to wrap up his legs when another Bomber defender (can't remember who it was but I think it was one of the LBs) came in shoulder first and just knocked him out of Loffler's grasp... if he had tried to wrap the fullback up, it would have been a gain of somewhere around 10 rather than whatever ridiculous number it ended up being (too lazy to look it up right now)
Blue Bomber Pano shot
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
It was taken at the beginning of half time, pretty much right after the players left the field.