Game Day Thread- Bombers vs Riders LDC

[Mark H.]

so... we're moving the ball at the start of the game with the short stuff then we decide the long bomb would be better. Well how's that working for us?

 

Why assume the Riders didn't make adjustments after the first TD drive?

[17to85]

 

so... we're moving the ball at the start of the game with the short stuff then we decide the long bomb would be better. Well how's that working for us?

 

Why assume the Riders didn't make adjustments after the first TD drive?

 

if they'd connected on those plays Marcel would have looked brilliant. pull the riders D in on the short stuff early then exploit them over the top when they move up. Sadly you still need to execute no matter what it called. 

[ediger]

Bombers will never win the GC with etch and marcel at the controls both are clowns.

 

More or less agree with this. Both of them are serviceable coordinators, but neither one is going to put together a dominant package. Sadly, we didn't really have our pick of coaches this off-season. We had to settle for whomever was willing to enter this completely unknown situation. Hopefully after this season, some better guys will be available and will be willing to jump on with a team that appears to be heading in the right direction.

[ediger]

oh, and Ricky Foley gives me a late 90's Vanilla Ice sort of vibe. Gross.

[Mr Dee]

 

so... we're moving the ball at the start of the game with the short stuff then we decide the long bomb would be better. Well how's that working for us?

 

Why assume the Riders didn't make adjustments after the first TD drive?

 

 

Further to that, we stopped going to those short passes that were successful early because of our absolute lousy field position through the second quarter.

 

I love the new guy Stoudermire, but that one mistake of catching the ball deep, instead of letting Sask. get a single, cost us big time.

[Fraser]

so... we're moving the ball at the start of the game with the short stuff then we decide the long bomb would be better. Well how's that working for us?

Why assume the Riders didn't make adjustments after the first TD drive?

Further to that, we stopped going to those short passes that were successful early because of our absolute lousy field position through the second quarter.

I love the new guy Stoudermire, but that one mistake of catching the ball deep, instead of letting Sask. get a single, cost us big time.

He made it up

[17to85]

 

 

so... we're moving the ball at the start of the game with the short stuff then we decide the long bomb would be better. Well how's that working for us?

 

Why assume the Riders didn't make adjustments after the first TD drive?

 

 

Further to that, we stopped going to those short passes that were successful early because of our absolute lousy field position through the second quarter.

 

I love the new guy Stoudermire, but that one mistake of catching the ball deep, instead of letting Sask. get a single, cost us big time.

 

it was one of many things that cost us. Giving up 2 safeties cost us (one intentional one because of a poor snap) taking penalties cost us, a busted coverage cost us, a few narrow misses on catches cost us. Trying to pick out one thing is a fools errand. 

[Mr Dee]

 

Further to that, we stopped going to those short passes that were successful early because of our absolute lousy field position through the second quarter.

I love the new guy Stoudermire, but that one mistake of catching the ball deep, instead of letting Sask. get a single, cost us big time.

He made it up

 

 

 

 

Further to that, we stopped going to those short passes that were successful early because of our absolute lousy field position through the second quarter.

 

I love the new guy Stoudermire, but that one mistake of catching the ball deep, instead of letting Sask. get a single, cost us big time.

 

it was one of many things that cost us. Giving up 2 singles cost us (one intentional one because of a poor snap) taking penalties cost us, a busted coverage cost us, a few narrow misses on catches cost us. Trying to pick out one thing is a fools errand. 

 

 

Far be it for me to suggest that was the turning point of the game and I should have stipulated it was one of the reasons, in the second quarter, where because of these failings, we struggled in field position.

I was only talking about the second quarter and the field position that stopped our momentum.

Yes, Stoudermire did make it up, and will be a force going forward, but it was a mistake and it did cost us.

[rebusrankin]

Anybody else think that within 5 years of being out of football, Foley is either going to be in jail or in the gutter?

[Fatty Liver]

Anybody else think that within 5 years of being out of football, Foley is either going to be in jail or in the gutter?

 

Based on what?

[iso_55]

Foley acts like a thug. Always did. 

[rebusrankin]

 

Anybody else think that within 5 years of being out of football, Foley is either going to be in jail or in the gutter?

 

Based on what?

 

On the field and in interviews, he comes across as a thug and a creep.

[iso_55]

 

 

Anybody else think that within 5 years of being out of football, Foley is either going to be in jail or in the gutter?

 

Based on what?

 

On the field and in interviews, he comes across as a thug and a creep.

 

I hear his brother's a real winner. Banned from Riderfans.

[Fatty Liver]

 

 

 

Anybody else think that within 5 years of being out of football, Foley is either going to be in jail or in the gutter?

 

Based on what?

 

On the field and in interviews, he comes across as a thug and a creep.

 

I hear his brother's a real winner. Banned from Riderfans.

 

No alive and well on Riderfans, goes by the name of Area51 and he's a total ass, especially when discussing the Bombers.

[iso_55]

Like Dwight Anderson, Foley's day will come.

[Goalie]

That non PI call on the sask db on our opening drive where we were marching down the field, man that was the worst non call i've ever seen, how do they miss that on the field and the bigger question is, how do they miss it on the replay too,we should have won that challenge, giving us the ball on the 1 yard line, TD is almost a certainty from there. That's the game really when you think about it, that none call cost us the game, Not enough evidence to over turn it? BULL SHIIIT

 

Seriously, if you can't get the call right on replay, then why bother having it. It's just bullcrap. Even the biased obviously cheering for the riders TSN announcers thought that was an obvious PI call. That non call, pretty much, in the big picture, cost us the game, took 7 points away from us and in a way killed our momentum to start the game, opening drive, marching down the field... what should have been 3 at least but more than likely 7, and was nothing on a bunk bullshiiit non call, that killed the bombers momentum early in the game. 

[TBURGESS]

The Non-PI call was the right call.  The DB turned his head enough to locate the ball.  He got his hand on the ball in front of the receiver.  The only thing you could call him on is the arm on the shoulder and they almost never call that unless the DB turns the receiver and he didn't.  I didn't expect a call the first time I saw it at game speed and I didn't expect one when I saw it over and over in slowmo.  That's exactly the kind of non-PI that shouldn't be reversed on a challenge. It was the right call by O'Shea to throw the challenge flag just in case.

 

I did think the Riders were off side on Durants 9 yard run.  It wasn't the only time in the game that I thought a receiver was off side.  Half the time it was us and almost none of them were called.

[HardCoreBlue]

The Non-PI call was the right call.  The DB turned his head enough to locate the ball.  He got his hand on the ball in front of the receiver.  The only thing you could call him on is the arm on the shoulder and they almost never call that unless the DB turns the receiver and he didn't.  I didn't expect a call the first time I saw it at game speed and I didn't expect one when I saw it over and over in slowmo.  That's exactly the kind of non-PI that shouldn't be reversed on a challenge. It was the right call by O'Shea to throw the challenge flag just in case.

 

I did think the Riders were off side on Durants 9 yard run.  It wasn't the only time in the game that I thought a receiver was off side.  Half the time it was us and almost none of them were called.

we see it different. The defender did not turn his head at all. It was pi no question. Screening, illegal contact take your pick. But that didn't lose us the game.

[17to85]

That non PI call on the sask db on our opening drive where we were marching down the field, man that was the worst non call i've ever seen, how do they miss that on the field and the bigger question is, how do they miss it on the replay too,we should have won that challenge, giving us the ball on the 1 yard line, TD is almost a certainty from there. That's the game really when you think about it, that none call cost us the game, Not enough evidence to over turn it? BULL SHIIIT

 

Seriously, if you can't get the call right on replay, then why bother having it. It's just bullcrap. Even the biased obviously cheering for the riders TSN announcers thought that was an obvious PI call. That non call, pretty much, in the big picture, cost us the game, took 7 points away from us and in a way killed our momentum to start the game, opening drive, marching down the field... what should have been 3 at least but more than likely 7, and was nothing on a bunk bullshiiit non call, that killed the bombers momentum early in the game. 

That is exactly why I said before the season even started challenging PIs was a stupid idea. Guarantee it's out of the game next season. It's too subjective. By the definition in the rule book it's a penalty.... but in reality that's the kind of play you can justify letting go. But if you review it you should be going by the book. 

[17to85]

The Non-PI call was the right call.  The DB turned his head enough to locate the ball.  He got his hand on the ball in front of the receiver.  The only thing you could call him on is the arm on the shoulder and they almost never call that unless the DB turns the receiver and he didn't.  I didn't expect a call the first time I saw it at game speed and I didn't expect one when I saw it over and over in slowmo.  That's exactly the kind of non-PI that shouldn't be reversed on a challenge. It was the right call by O'Shea to throw the challenge flag just in case.

 

I did think the Riders were off side on Durants 9 yard run.  It wasn't the only time in the game that I thought a receiver was off side.  Half the time it was us and almost none of them were called.

it's not that, he got their early, the review showed it. Would be a lame call to make at game speed, but when you review it how can you not say that he got there early? It's exactly why the idea behind challenging PI is utter nonsense. It's all still a judgement call on review and that makes reviews impossible to be worth while. 

[Tracker]

 

The Non-PI call was the right call.  The DB turned his head enough to locate the ball.  He got his hand on the ball in front of the receiver.  The only thing you could call him on is the arm on the shoulder and they almost never call that unless the DB turns the receiver and he didn't.  I didn't expect a call the first time I saw it at game speed and I didn't expect one when I saw it over and over in slowmo.  That's exactly the kind of non-PI that shouldn't be reversed on a challenge. It was the right call by O'Shea to throw the challenge flag just in case.

 

I did think the Riders were off side on Durants 9 yard run.  It wasn't the only time in the game that I thought a receiver was off side.  Half the time it was us and almost none of them were called.

we see it different. The defender did not turn his head at all. It was pi no question. Screening, illegal contact take your pick. But that didn't lose us the game.

 

The defender in question definitely made contact with his body before the ball arrived, and that's pass interference in any book. On the rider's last TD run, Wild was held, and Brackenridge  was also way offside in that other critical play. The Riders may have gotten some bum calls but it sure seems to me that we got ours at game-changing moments.

[TBURGESS]

 

The Non-PI call was the right call.  The DB turned his head enough to locate the ball.  He got his hand on the ball in front of the receiver.  The only thing you could call him on is the arm on the shoulder and they almost never call that unless the DB turns the receiver and he didn't.  I didn't expect a call the first time I saw it at game speed and I didn't expect one when I saw it over and over in slowmo.  That's exactly the kind of non-PI that shouldn't be reversed on a challenge. It was the right call by O'Shea to throw the challenge flag just in case.

 

I did think the Riders were off side on Durants 9 yard run.  It wasn't the only time in the game that I thought a receiver was off side.  Half the time it was us and almost none of them were called.

it's not that, he got their early, the review showed it. Would be a lame call to make at game speed, but when you review it how can you not say that he got there early? It's exactly why the idea behind challenging PI is utter nonsense. It's all still a judgement call on review and that makes reviews impossible to be worth while. 

 

In slow motion he got there early?  Is that what we want the standard for overturning a non-call to be?  I don't think so.   I do agree, however, that PI challenges are utter nonsense. 

[17to85]

 

 

The Non-PI call was the right call.  The DB turned his head enough to locate the ball.  He got his hand on the ball in front of the receiver.  The only thing you could call him on is the arm on the shoulder and they almost never call that unless the DB turns the receiver and he didn't.  I didn't expect a call the first time I saw it at game speed and I didn't expect one when I saw it over and over in slowmo.  That's exactly the kind of non-PI that shouldn't be reversed on a challenge. It was the right call by O'Shea to throw the challenge flag just in case.

 

I did think the Riders were off side on Durants 9 yard run.  It wasn't the only time in the game that I thought a receiver was off side.  Half the time it was us and almost none of them were called.

it's not that, he got their early, the review showed it. Would be a lame call to make at game speed, but when you review it how can you not say that he got there early? It's exactly why the idea behind challenging PI is utter nonsense. It's all still a judgement call on review and that makes reviews impossible to be worth while. 

 

In slow motion he got there early?  Is that what we want the standard for overturning a non-call to be?  I don't think so.   I do agree, however, that PI challenges are utter nonsense. 

 

He got there early at regular speed too. I have no problems letting it go when the ref is watching live, that's part of the judgement call, but when you review something and you see the infraction occur why isn't it over turned? The fact that the review process is still subject to discretion means it's useless. We have seen wildly different things overturned or not over turned on PI this year. Drop the system now because it's a joke. 

[Mr Dee]

There is absolutely no doubt that the defender got there early. What's debatable is whether he turned his head to locate the ball.

The review cannot judge whether his head was turned but clearly contact was made early.

O'Shea was right and the review was wrong making these reviews inconsistent and therefore unreliable.

[James]

 

The Non-PI call was the right call.  The DB turned his head enough to locate the ball.  He got his hand on the ball in front of the receiver.  The only thing you could call him on is the arm on the shoulder and they almost never call that unless the DB turns the receiver and he didn't.  I didn't expect a call the first time I saw it at game speed and I didn't expect one when I saw it over and over in slowmo.  That's exactly the kind of non-PI that shouldn't be reversed on a challenge. It was the right call by O'Shea to throw the challenge flag just in case.

 

I did think the Riders were off side on Durants 9 yard run.  It wasn't the only time in the game that I thought a receiver was off side.  Half the time it was us and almost none of them were called.

we see it different. The defender did not turn his head at all. It was pi no question. Screening, illegal contact take your pick. But that didn't lose us the game.

 

 

agreed except you could say it did lose it for us.... he got there way early and blocked kelly's vision