Tiger-Cats @ Riders

[Mr Dee]

Congratulations Calgary. You won a Mickey Mouse challenge on a downfield block which happened a second before the catch, and quite away from the play. Not the intent of the challenge rule at all, but since it was challenged so quickly, it shows that you're employing someone to look specifically for calls like that...as a fall back...in case the play goes against you. Again, not in the spirit of the rule.

The basis of the challenge rule was sound. Unfortunately it has been bastardized and now it reflects poorly on the league and the refs.

It's worth keeping, but get it fixed. It's innovative and can still be used effectively. Clean it up, for the actual play that affects the game, not the one 20 yards away, which never would have been called and has no effect on the play.

[JCon]

10 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

Congratulations Calgary. You won a Mickey Mouse challenge on a downfield block which happened a second before the catch, and quite away from the play. Not the intent of the challenge rule at all, but since it was challenged so quickly, it shows that you're employing someone to look specifically for calls like that...as a fall back...in case the play goes against you. Again, not in the spirit of the rule.

The basis of the challenge rule was sound. Unfortunately it has been bastardized and now it reflects poorly on the league and the refs.

It's worth keeping, but get it fixed. It's innovative and can still be used effectively. Clean it up, for the actual play that affects the game, not the one 20 yards away, which never would have been called and has no effect on the play.

I don't agree with this.

You have no idea how an illegal contact downfield could have affected a receivers route and affected the decision the QB was making. The rule is in place for a reason. 

And, if they do have someone looking for it, good for them. We probably do too.

[Ripper]

On ‎24‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 10:05 PM, Jacquie said:

He moved the ball slightly after he tilted it. I've never seen that called before but he didn't just tilt it.

 

[Ripper]

On ‎25‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 8:34 AM, LeBird said:

Hamilton were without the RB and were down to mostly Fantuz. Saskatchewan are a better team but did not beat much yesterday

Missing both our starting OG's for the year. Injury excuses for the Cats?  Boo hoo. Everybody has injuries.. You have to win with the guys on the field no matter who that is.

[TrueBlue4ever]

7 minutes ago, Ripper said:

 

That's a Mickey Mouse call too (maybe moreso because the teams weren't even "set"). If they are going to call it, then be consistent. I see the centre moving the ball around a lot on all teams on many snaps, and it never gets called. And I'm not sure how this creates an unfair advantage for the offensive team pre-snap. If it is the rule, then call it, but call it all the time ,and players will adjust. But to call it once in a blue moon, and with a key third and inches coming up where gripping the ball pre-snap would seem to be normal, seems really ticky-tack to me (yes, even if it is against the 'Riders),

[Ripper]

1 minute ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

That's a Mickey Mouse call too (maybe moreso because the teams weren't even "set"). If they are going to call it, then be consistent. I see the centre moving the ball around a lot on all teams on many snaps, and it never gets called. And I'm not sure how this creates an unfair advantage for the offensive team pre-snap. If it is the rule, then call it, but call it all the time ,and players will adjust. But to call it once in a blue moon, and with a key third and inches coming up where gripping the ball pre-snap would seem to be normal, seems really ticky-tack to me (yes, even if it is against the 'Riders),

I agree. The markers have it on the sidelines anyway, so if center moves ball 2 inches it changes nothing. The reason I posted the video was more to why the Rider fans were happy it was called, because we have had it called on us before. Bottom line is when the ball is spotted, you can tilt it but can NOT move it forward. That's why it was called

[Mr Dee]

15 minutes ago, JCon said:

I don't agree with this.

You have no idea how an illegal contact downfield could have affected a receivers route and affected the decision the QB was making. The rule is in place for a reason. 

And, if they do have someone looking for it, good for them. We probably do too.

Illegal contact on a receiver is quite a different matter, and I agree, there's no way to tell how illegal contact could affect the play, BUT, that's not what happened on that play, now is it? If you look at the play I mentioned, it has no impact on that particular play, but because, it's within the scope of challenges..it had to be called. No discretion. 

And that's what I'm talking about. Streamline the challenge rule so that we don't get the petty challenges that prolong the game. 

[Tracker]

56 minutes ago, Mark F said:

what kind of car do  you have?

Taurus SHO

[JCon]

1 hour ago, Mr Dee said:

Illegal contact on a receiver is quite a different matter, and I agree, there's no way to tell how illegal contact could affect the play, BUT, that's not what happened on that play, now is it? If you look at the play I mentioned, it has no impact on that particular play, but because, it's within the scope of challenges..it had to be called. No discretion. 

And that's what I'm talking about. Streamline the challenge rule so that we don't get the petty challenges that prolong the game. 

But that was my point. Illegal downfield blocking should be treated the same. If it's illegal, it should be called. Can't pick and choose when to apply rules or when to follow them.

The current batch of refs is so horrible, I don't trust them to make any calls.

[Tracker]

2 hours ago, JCon said:

But that was my point. Illegal downfield blocking should be treated the same. If it's illegal, it should be called. Can't pick and choose when to apply rules or when to follow them.

The current batch of refs is so horrible, I don't trust them to make any calls.

Absolutely agree. Can't remember which running back said it, but he said that he didn't need the best blockers in the league to get his yardage, just one who were consistent. All sports are the same with blown calls by the zebras, but the lack of consistency infuriates the fans, coaches and managers. I do not see how that can be reduced to zero errors, but it ought to be able to get better. In the Sask-Hammy game there was a very controversial call on the 'cats center for rocking/moving the ball prior to the snap, but apparently there was at least one instance when the Rider center did exactly the same thing with no whistle. That pretty much cost the 'Cats the game and I can only imagine Austin's meltdown when he reviewed the game films,

[blueandgoldguy]

Watching sportscentre the other day and they pointed out the Riders moved the ball slightly forward before the snap later in the game and there was no call.  Riders had some big breaks in that game, but with that said, Hamilton should have not allowed the game to come down to a few plays like that.  I guess they aren't as good as many, including myself, thought they were at the beginning of the season.

[holoman]

ppfffft if moving the ball 2 inches is a 'Game changer' you're playing the wrong game. 

[LeBird]

6 hours ago, tracker said:

The prospect of the Riders beating the Argos fills me with mixed feelings- like seeing your car being driven off a cliff by your mother-in-law.

I'd be OK with that if the cliff was straight down and at least 200 feet deep.  Besides, now with compulsory insurance you only loose $200.