3 stars plus hh elk hunting season

[wbbfan]

20 minutes ago, Booch said:

we got mugged a lot more than they did in the dline holding...but we got away with a few...call that a wash

The Bonds INT...That was a good call...he had help from the ground...a good play tho and forced a punt but we didnt get jobbed there...the PI on on Holm was straight crap tho...and Osh needs to challenge that....he is weak and slow onthe challenges...often

Yeah I think we got away maybe with more tugs, but they got away with the most egregious plays. Guys like paddy and Stan know exactly what they can get away with. 
 

I’ve got no gripe going either way in the call on bonds pick. That was a tough play to call with all but one angle at super slow mo. My only issue is the quality of the challenge review, and the integrity of the process. I want that to be strong and consistent. 
 

18 minutes ago, blue85gold said:

I don't think it would have been overturned. They call accidental PI on any DB that breathes on a receiver as they fall down. The receiver can trip the DB and then shove them down but the way they call it the DB can't do anything. 

I don’t agree, I think it’s clear he didn’t trip the wr. I also think it’s critical to throw those challenges if you think they won’t over turn it. Make it stand out and appeal it. Force the league to address it and change. Allowing them to brush it under the rug is being complicit. 
 

also, we had a time when those calls were super soft. But that was overhauled a couple years ago. It’s not that way any more. Incidental dpi is not that common and WRs don’t dive and draw calls easily. 

[Booch]

20 minutes ago, blue85gold said:

I don't think it would have been overturned. They call accidental PI on any DB that breathes on a receiver as they fall down. The receiver can trip the DB and then shove them down but the way they call it the DB can't do anything. 

never know...but it was obvious Holm had nothing to do with it.....they overturned the Bonds one which was the right call BTW...but a way tougher call to over rule

[Super Duper Negatron]

Popped over to Riderfans and apparently we won because the refs favour the Bombers. Never change.

[Booch]

Just now, wbbfan said:

Yeah I think we got away maybe with more tugs, but they got away with the most egregious plays. Guys like paddy and Stan know exactly what they can get away with. 
 

I’ve got no gripe going either way in the call on bonds pick. That was a tough play to call with all but one angle at super slow mo. My only issue is the quality of the challenge review, and the integrity of the process. I want that to be strong and consistent. 
 

I don’t agree, I think it’s clear he didn’t trip the wr. I also think it’s critical to throw those challenges if you think they won’t over turn it. Make it stand out and appeal it. Force the league to address it and change. Allowing them to brush it under the rug is being complicit. 
 

also, we had a time when those calls were super soft. But that was overhauled a couple years ago. It’s not that way any more. Incidental dpi is not that common and WRs don’t dive and draw calls easily. 

yeah I stand by my comment that Osh is a pansy at times with his challenge opportunities...goes home way too often at end of game with it still in his pocket

For a guy when times were tougher around here and he was scuffling as a coach he sure showed a lot more balls and with trickery....extracting whatever he can out of obscure rules....challenge flags...going for it...got a couple Cup wins and now like a lot of his rostering and talent decisions....he's coasting and being all status quo...He used to have a big set of onions....seems like he a couple Glossett's tucked in his cargo shorts now

2 minutes ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

Popped over to Riderfans and apparently we won because the refs favour the Bombers. Never change.

yeah I gonna peruse once i get some work done...I'll need some entertainment

[Super Duper Negatron]

29 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

Yeah, you can see that slipping out and hitting the turf. It's better that they got it right, no one can say 'that's why they won'

Someone on another site pointed out the rule says automatic reviews aren't supposed to take more than 60 seconds. That felt like about 10 times that but maybe because of a commercial break?

[17to85]

1 minute ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

Someone on another site pointed out the rule says automatic reviews aren't supposed to take more than 60 seconds. That felt like about 10 times that but maybe because of a commercial break?

That was definitely a gripe i had. They took their sweet time when I thought reviews were supposed to be a quick yes it's obvious or no it's too close to tell so they're not spending hours trying to figure it out.

Cfl reffing is just so bush league sometimes.

[Eternal optimist]

3 minutes ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

Someone on another site pointed out the rule says automatic reviews aren't supposed to take more than 60 seconds. That felt like about 10 times that but maybe because of a commercial break?

It was also the end of the 3rd quarter.

[wbbfan]

4 minutes ago, Booch said:

yeah I stand by my comment that Osh is a pansy at times with his challenge opportunities...goes home way too often at end of game with it still in his pocket

For a guy when times were tougher around here and he was scuffling as a coach he sure showed a lot more balls and with trickery....extracting whatever he can out of obscure rules....challenge flags...going for it...got a couple Cup wins and now like a lot of his rostering and talent decisions....he's coasting and being all status quo...He used to have a big set of onions....seems like he a couple Glossett's tucked in his cargo shorts now

yeah I gonna peruse once i get some work done...I'll need some entertainment

I don't know if he can bust through this plateau he has reached as a coach, while still being here. I think we are going to be locked in to a lot of the same stuff, for a long time. I think when things come to an end here, how ever and when ever that happens, he could take the next step. 

[Super Duper Negatron]

2 minutes ago, Eternal optimist said:

It was also the end of the 3rd quarter.

I don't think so. Elks took possession and punted from the same end after it was overturned.

[HardCoreBlue]

3 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

That was definitely a gripe i had. They took their sweet time when I thought reviews were supposed to be a quick yes it's obvious or no it's too close to tell so they're not spending hours trying to figure it out.

Cfl reffing is just so bush league sometimes.

They're taking cues from the NHL command centre where reviews sometime take 3 1/2 days to determine a result.

[Mark H.]

17 minutes ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

Someone on another site pointed out the rule says automatic reviews aren't supposed to take more than 60 seconds. That felt like about 10 times that but maybe because of a commercial break?

I don't know how long it was, but winning a game on a call like that is not great, no matter what other circumstances may exist.

[BomberBall.]

9 hours ago, 17to85 said:

I'd love to see collaros run like he did on the TD more. That kind of escape act used to be his bread and butter. Too often now he just plays tackling dummy when the pocket breaks down. 

couple of those deep shots were absolute dimes...

 

and the refs were utterly embarrassing. WJ by rights should have had 2 more sacks except the LOLks offensive line was allowed to wrap an arm around his neck if he got too close to Ford. The PI that took away the Holm interception was the biggest joke of a call I have ever seen. Dude trips on his own feet and it takes away an INT. Gross. 

I was at the game and I about lost my voice on that ridiculous PI call.  Did the TSN commentators say anything about it?

[blue85gold]

50 minutes ago, Booch said:

never know...but it was obvious Holm had nothing to do with it.....they overturned the Bonds one which was the right call BTW...but a way tougher call to over rule

Never know but they would have had to say definitively that Holm's feet hadn't touched the receivers. I haven't seen that angle that shows that but maybe I missed it. 

[Bubba Zanetti]

58 minutes ago, BomberBall. said:

I was at the game and I about lost my voice on that ridiculous PI call.  Did the TSN commentators say anything about it?

Crickets

40 minutes ago, blue85gold said:

Never know but they would have had to say definitively that Holm's feet hadn't touched the receivers. I haven't seen that angle that shows that but maybe I missed it. 

Holm's feet did not make contact with the receiver at all. Not whatsoever.

[Booch]

1 minute ago, Bubba Zanetti said:

Crickets

Holm's feet did not make contact with the receiver at all. Not whatsoever.

and he didnt tug on jersey....have any in his hand...or make a pushing motion...had his hand placed on the back as taught todo

[HardCoreBlue]

1 hour ago, Super Duper Negatron said:

Popped over to Riderfans and apparently we won because the refs favour the Bombers. Never change.

Yea, duh.

[Booch]

Just now, HardCoreBlue said:

Yea, duh.

yeah I read the 14 pages of hilarity too

[Bigblue204]

I don't understand how in BC didn't get called for PI against Parker, but Holm DID on essentially the same play. 

[BBlink]

Collaros was pinpoint on his throws which was awesome to see. 

It looked to me (as someone who isn't really a football guy so take it for what it's worth) that Edmonton was playing extremely close to the line on first down and running downhill. Wish we would have stretched their defense out on first down a bit more. But credit to the Elks D.

Kyrie Wilson and Tony Jones had great games, not so much Kramdi (making tackles after getting beat). D-line, didn't seem like they were getting a tonne of pressure. DBs...too many breakdowns. Not sure what was happening there. Was great to see Bonds make a big play in a game like that but sucks it was called back.

Not the best game but it was a short week. I think that shone through a bit. Happy with how the team rallied in the 4th with the gale force winds at their back.

Edited 4 hours ago by BBlink

[Bigblue204]

21 minutes ago, Booch said:

yeah I read the 14 pages of hilarity too

If the refs miss a call one game....they shouldn't be allowed to call it any other game. That's essentially the logic being used over there.

[blue85gold]

22 minutes ago, Bubba Zanetti said:

Holm's feet did not make contact with the receiver at all. Not whatsoever.

Anyone have a video? Was at the game and couldn't tell for sure on the big screen.

I can't find anywhere, not in the highlight packages.

I'm going by what Holm said https://3downnation.com/2025/06/26/12-thoughts-on-the-winnipeg-blue-bombers-improving-to-3-0-with-win-over-edmonton-elks/

“In this league, if he falls, it’s probably a penalty, so that’s what we err on the side of,” said Holm. “If a defensive player falls, it’s nothing. When an offensive player falls, it’s (pass interference). I didn’t really need to even be near him a little bit — I could have played the ball later, so I could be maybe a yard off. It’s how this league is, so I gotta know that.”

Incidental pass interference is most often called when a receiver is accidentally tripped by a defensive back. Watching the replay back, it didn’t look like Holm made any contact with Julien-Grant’s lower body — the receiver appeared to trip over his own feet.

“I don’t know that you can win that one (if you challenge the call),” said head coach Mike O’Shea. “I don’t think Evan Holm even touched him. Evan says he didn’t really touch him, but he also said, ‘We’re not winning that challenge, coach.’ He liked that we didn’t (challenge). Evan’s so good and so clean in his coverage, I don’t know that he touched him. It looked like the receiver might have tripped himself, like stubbed his toe. Evan had his hand out, but I don’t think he pushed him.”

[Bigblue204]

Also Lyin guy still being a little salty B****

[Booch]

1 minute ago, blue85gold said:

Anyone have a video? Was at the game and couldn't tell for sure on the big screen.

I can't find anywhere, not in the highlight packages.

I'm going by what Holm said https://3downnation.com/2025/06/26/12-thoughts-on-the-winnipeg-blue-bombers-improving-to-3-0-with-win-over-edmonton-elks/

“In this league, if he falls, it’s probably a penalty, so that’s what we err on the side of,” said Holm. “If a defensive player falls, it’s nothing. When an offensive player falls, it’s (pass interference). I didn’t really need to even be near him a little bit — I could have played the ball later, so I could be maybe a yard off. It’s how this league is, so I gotta know that.”

Incidental pass interference is most often called when a receiver is accidentally tripped by a defensive back. Watching the replay back, it didn’t look like Holm made any contact with Julien-Grant’s lower body — the receiver appeared to trip over his own feet.

“I don’t know that you can win that one (if you challenge the call),” said head coach Mike O’Shea. “I don’t think Evan Holm even touched him. Evan says he didn’t really touch him, but he also said, ‘We’re not winning that challenge, coach.’ He liked that we didn’t (challenge). Evan’s so good and so clean in his coverage, I don’t know that he touched him. It looked like the receiver might have tripped himself, like stubbed his toe. Evan had his hand out, but I don’t think he pushed him.”

thinking isnt knowing tho....lol

1 minute ago, Bigblue204 said:

Also Lyin guy still being a little salty B****

wish he wasnt too scared to post here....he does enjoy taking riderfans nuts in his mouth there tho lol

[Bigblue204]

52 minutes ago, Booch said:

thinking isnt knowing tho....lol

wish he wasnt too scared to post here....he does enjoy taking riderfans nuts in his mouth there tho lol

100% "we're going to lose tonight" lol. have some back bone man.

[Stickem]

.....Well the game showed Zack is back.....hope he can keep it going

....Also showed that Demski's physical problem, that made him a game time decision, kind of evaporated...Played a great game and was having fun out there

.....Liked our defensive effort mostly....blew coverage on a Elk receiver that cost us a td but otherwise a good showing....Kept Ford from revving his engine and taking off most of the game ...I believe Zack out rushed him and that's saying something ...heh heh.....AND that bull$hit call on Holm for interference was unbelievable....That was a pic that should have stood....Hope Wheatfall is good to go next game ...he took a pretty good rap and sort of disappeared after that....Can't lose his clutch play....All in all beat a a club on 4 days rest ...has to make the team feel good... 

....