Jump to content

Featured Replies

  • Replies 84
  • Views 7.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Taynted_Fayth
    Taynted_Fayth

    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 P

  • same boat.  work til 6 but commute and running around gets me home at like 730.  its recording but I could listen via radio to keep up.. but do I want to?  watching from the beginning is always best a

  • I have honestly no idea how this game will go...  that's probably my favourite thing about this year's bombers.

comment_281313
1 minute ago, rebusrankin said:

I agree with Mark H. on the holding calls that negated our 4 Q td, disagree on the play by Roc at the end. Did not see it as PI and the ball was out of bounds, no way Ottawa catches the inbounds.

Also on that play there receiver pushed off with both hands which ultimately put him out of bounds.

comment_281327
19 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

I agree with Mark H. on the holding calls that negated our 4 Q td, disagree on the play by Roc at the end. Did not see it as PI and the ball was out of bounds, no way Ottawa catches the inbounds.

The first holding call was a bit meh...he wasnt making a play...but it was holding. The second one needed to be called though. And there was no PI....thats called playing football.

comment_281337
11 minutes ago, Rod Black said:

The game was way smoother with the new reduced challenge rule. IMO. 

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

Edited by Taynted_Fayth

comment_281343
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.

comment_281376
2 hours ago, B-F-F-C said:

I've been watching the CFL for over 40 years and I haven't seen the "hands to the face" penalty called except for the past two seasons and it seems our OL have a difficult time keeping their paws off the helmet of the opposition. 

 

We've definitely developed a reputation among the refs, so there's no sliding under the radar on those ticky tacky things anymore...

comment_281379
2 hours ago, B-F-F-C said:

I've been watching the CFL for over 40 years and I haven't seen the "hands to the face" penalty called except for the past two seasons and it seems our OL have a difficult time keeping their paws off the helmet of the opposition. 

 

Not sure about that.  I seem to recall hands to face being called every season I've been watching and I too have watched football for,over 40 years.

comment_281398
10 hours ago, Sard said:

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.

Right and Doug Brown commented on it and said the ref has to smarten up and realize it's a Bomber laying on the turf, not the other way around.

comment_281401

Our O line seems to get caught a lot on the hands to the face. Maybe some teams brought it to the attention of the league that we kind like to punch guys in the mouth and now they are looking for it. I thought all the O Line penalties were deserved last night.

I disagree with the term 'wasted challenge'. That's exactly the type of play that challenges were brought in to fix. It wasn't for the ticky tacky, slow motion, several camera angle, away from the play illegal contacts that coaches often used them for. The 1 challenge rule worked great tonight. Both teams got rid of them early and we could just play ball after that.

Edited by TBURGESS

comment_281407
Just now, Noeller said:

I'd believe this...

I love it! "Hey Mr. ref, sir! That Bomber guy keeps punching me in the mouth every time I rush his QB. It hurts and I don't like it and I don't think it's fair! Wahhhh!"

comment_281408
1 minute ago, TBURGESS said:

Our O line seems to get caught a lot on the hands to the face. Maybe some teams brought it to the attention of the league that we kind like to punch guys in the mouth and now they are looking for it. I thought all the O Line penalties were deserved last night.

I disagree with the term 'wasted challenge'. That's exactly the type of play that challenges were brought in to fix. It wasn't for the ticky tacky, slow motion, several camera angle, away from the play illegal contacts that coaches often used them for. The 1 challenge rule worked great tonight. Both teams got rid of them early and we could just play ball after that.

it is wasted in the sense it shouldn't have to be challenged in the first place. The ref was looking right at the play. How more obvious does it have to get for the ref to do his job properly?  I get challenging things like being down or if the completed pass needed the ground for assistance..etc as those can be bang bang and POV might be skewed, but not plays right in front of the ref who is staring right at the infraction with unobstructed view

comment_281410
2 minutes ago, J5V said:

I love it! "Hey Mr. ref, sir! That Bomber guy keeps punching me in the mouth every time I rush his QB. It hurts and I don't like it and I don't think it's fair! Wahhhh!"

Not exactly......but I'd definitely be willing to bet teams are sending in tape to the league for review, of guys like Sukh Chungh, who regularly "take liberties" on the field.......once the league sees a pattern of behaviour (as there definitely is with a guy like SC) they'll start watching a lot more closely. I'm sure we've done it to other teams...

comment_281413
1 minute ago, Noeller said:

Not exactly......but I'd definitely be willing to bet teams are sending in tape to the league for review, of guys like Sukh Chungh, who regularly "take liberties" on the field.......once the league sees a pattern of behaviour (as there definitely is with a guy like SC) they'll start watching a lot more closely. I'm sure we've done it to other teams...

Like the Dyson cam TSN had? Funny they never did that for any of the Als like Cox, Philion, Ferri, Sanchez.

comment_281418
6 minutes ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

it is wasted in the sense it shouldn't have to be challenged in the first place. The ref was looking right at the play. How more obvious does it have to get for the ref to do his job properly?  I get challenging things like being down or if the completed pass needed the ground for assistance..etc as those can be bang bang and POV might be skewed, but not plays right in front of the ref who is staring right at the infraction with unobstructed view

It was a bad non call that got corrected by a challenge. That's not wasted. That's what challenges are supposed to be for. They are also for in/out and down/not down.

comment_281441
4 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

It was a bad non call that got corrected by a challenge. That's not wasted. That's what challenges are supposed to be for. They are also for in/out and down/not down.

kind of wasted as it was an obvious call that I don't know how the ref missed.

 

That challenge could have been used on the PI in the endzone when the redblack guy tripped on his own feet..no way was that PI

comment_281446

They said at the beginning of last season that the refs warned teams they would be looking for hands to the face blocks.  Seems our nasty boyz are the ones who get called for it the most.  Whatever, **** the rules, we're the meanest team in the CFL.  Eye gouging, nut punching, body slamming sons of guns, just like Mike O'Shea was.

Create an account or sign in to comment