depopulationINC

Hoping we can keep the derailment out of this and thought it might just be an interesting idea to keep a running list of the questionable replays that need to be evaluated at as a group at the end of the season.  

WK 01 - SK @ MON - B. Grant TD that was upheld on potential fumble
WK 01 - SK @ MON - Nik Lewis fumble where no clear arm to ground view was upheld
WK 01 - CGY @ OTT - Jordan catch and being ruled down before fumble being upheld

depopulationINC

Not sure on that double TD play in the Calgary / Ottawa one in week 1, seems most agreed with the call.

Paolo X

I think this was mentioned in one of the other posts, but on that play with Nik Lewis, there was not video evidence to overturn the call on the field. And so that call stood, and I'm okay with that ruling as are others but for of course many Al's fans understandably.

Of course it's quite infuriating for the other two calls when there is clear video evidence yet the incorrect call on the field, as was made in a split second to be fair, stands.  :thdn:
Best Regards, Paolo

Abendschan

Quote from: "depopulationINC"
WK 01 - CGY @ OTT - Jordan catch and being ruled down before fumble being upheld
I was surprised on the above play being ruled down and no fumble. The only view I can come up with is, Was he ruled down by contact because he was in the grasp on the tackle? I can understand if that was the case.
Empire Stadium 1970 - Jack Abendschan autograph

depopulationINC

Quote from: "Abendschan"
Quote from: "depopulationINC"
WK 01 - CGY @ OTT - Jordan catch and being ruled down before fumble being upheld
I was surprised on the above play being ruled down and no fumble. The only view I can come up with is, Was he ruled down by contact because he was in the grasp on the tackle? I can understand if that was the case.

Nope, he has to touch the turf or have momentum stopped and it ruled dead.  Obviously the momentum thing was not a factor.

depopulationINC

Quote from: "Paolo X"
I think this was mentioned in one of the other posts, but on that play with Nik Lewis, there was not video evidence to overturn the call on the field. And so that call stood, and I'm okay with that ruling as are others but for of course many Al's fans understandably.

Of course it's quite infuriating for the other two calls when there is clear video evidence yet the incorrect call on the field, as was made in a split second to be fair, stands.  :thdn:

I agree...I said the same thing in that thread...but felt there was clear debate on it so it doesn't hurt to make the list.  Just because it is on the list it doesn't mean it was a bad review...just ones that should IMO be discussed by the CFL as to why they came to the conclusion they did.  If they said something like...he appeared like he may have been down but we found no clear angle that actually showed it, so did not have enough evidence to overturn....I get it...I mean I would like to see the couple best angles and a comment/explanation...this should not be too much to ask of a league.  It is pissing people off...those people pay to for the product...try to appease the customer....in this case they can easily do that by going public via enlightenment and if need be on occasion showing they got it wrong.

Paolo X

Quote from: "depopulationINC"
Quote from: "Abendschan"
Quote from: "depopulationINC"
WK 01 - CGY @ OTT - Jordan catch and being ruled down before fumble being upheld
I was surprised on the above play being ruled down and no fumble. The only view I can come up with is, Was he ruled down by contact because he was in the grasp on the tackle? I can understand if that was the case.

Nope, he has to touch the turf or have momentum stopped and it ruled dead.  Obviously the momentum thing was not a factor.

Well I don't know what to think on this one for Kamar Jorden of the Stamps any more.

There was a delay on the CFL site in posting the highlights for this game. Then the highlights, which did not include this play, disappeared. Then the highlights reappeared and included this play, but from that replay it appeared to be inconclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field akin to that play by Nik Lewis except that play was ruled a fumble.

And so I am left to agree with the upholding of this call of down by contact on Jorden, based on only what I have seen, much as I ended up changing my mind on that call of TD by Bakari Grant in that other game that also created quite the stir. You did a fine post about that one in the game thread after changing your mind too Discipline.

And so my question is during the game, was there a replay for this call of down by contact on Jorden that was more conclusive than what we can see in the highlights on the CFL site?

dcmoses

Wk 2 - Wpg @ Sask - 2nd Q review awarded an illegal contact on a reciever penalty  against Sask for contact 4 yards off the LoS.

Paolo X

Wk 2 Wpg @ Sask - 4Q review to overturn ruling of fumble on the field by Bakari Grant with recovery by Winnipeg

How in the world was that evidence conclusive so as to overturn the call on the field? I think based on the evidence the call could have gone either way, but in such cases the ruling on the field stands!

Grover

Quote from: "Paolo X"
Wk 2 Wpg @ Sask - 4Q review to overturn ruling of fumble on the field by Bakari Grant with recovery by Winnipeg

How in the world was that evidence conclusive so as to overturn the call on the field? I think based on the evidence the call could have gone either way, but in such cases the ruling on the field stands!

That is exactly what the League has stated on "overturning close calls"

Here’s what Lalji told CFL on TSN host Rod Smith.(from the Al's Rider game last week)

“There’s a lot of disappointment and head shaking at those two calls, especially last night. The league’s position is that the rules haven’t changed but the standard has. They want replay to be just about egregious calls that have been missed, they don’t want grey area. So if it takes two-and-a-half to three minutes to make sure the call gets exactly right, that means that call was too close to overturn.

“I spoke to Glen Johnson and he just said ‘those were not egregious calls. In the minute, minute-and-a-half we want to take to make these decisions in an effort to speed up replay, not slow down the pace of the game, those calls did not meet the standard for obvious, egregious mistakes and we’re just not going to overturn those types of calls. That’s going to be something people around the league are going to have to get used to.'”
[/size]

http://3downnation.com/2017/06/25/cfl-r ... -get-used/

 :?  :?  :?  :?  :?  :?

Thanks to @Doc_Dave for sig

Aerial

I agree with this philosophy of having more impact from what the on-field officials have called.  I like this that the CC won't have as much of a say if in fact this is the case.  If it takes that long on a close play, then go with the on-field official  call.   :thup:

Excellent post there Grover finding that information!  I hope the TSN panel discusses this and the league makes this more apparent for all the fans.
I'm not allowed to comment on lousy officiating - Former Saints General Manager Jim Fink

Grover

Quote from: "Aerial"
I agree with this philosophy of having more impact from what the on-field officials have called.  I like this that the CC won't have as much of a say if in fact this is the case.  If it takes that long on a close play, then go with the on-field official  call.   :thup:

Excellent post there Grover finding that information!  I hope the TSN panel discusses this and the league makes this more apparent for all the fans.

The trouble is, is that the Command Center did overturn the call on the field, so who knows????

Aerial

The Bakari Grant one?  I'd have to see the replay and how low the CC took to see if the length of time for review was too long for the new thinking that if it takes over x amount of time, then the call on the field stands.    :?

slimjim2

What's the point of evaluating the replays at the end of the season?    isn't it a little too late to overturn then?
Since the command centre seems to get a few wrong,  maybe it's time to scrap the challenges.
Last night O'shea threw the challenge flag in OT,   it was a desperation move  hoping that the command centre can look at every player on the field and decide if there was a penalty somewhere.
Is this what the CFL has come to?   not trusting the refs on the field?
Let's scrap the reviews and challenges,  we have refs to call what is happening on the field.   If they blow a call,  too bad it happens,  move on get on with the game,  quit slowing it down.

Aerial

Quote
Last night O'shea threw the challenge flag in OT, it was a desperation move hoping that the command centre can look at every player on the field and decide if there was a penalty somewhere.

If that's how review is being used, then no question that is a big problem.  Bordering on scrapping altogether if they can't figure out a way to eliminate this type of BS.
 


Users Online

97 Guests, 3 Users (5 Spiders)

Users active in past 15 minutes:
raymarkca, ozurak020, Chewbaca1973, Google (5)

Most Online Today: 155. Most Online Ever: 484 (Aug 28 2017, 09:35 PM)