so, many were in disagreement with the refs who called a guy offside because his fingers were offside. Supposedly one of the reason our refs suck.
Well, this weekend, in the NFL games I watched and happened to notice, the same call was made in at least two different games, and twice in one of them. Guess NFL refs suck too. Thing is, the guys in the booth had no problem with it at all.
in all honesty, I do not believe him being there made any difference.
also, with all the crowd noise and qb barking out signals and players grunting, his mouth would have had to be 1 inch from the refs ear for any chance of a whisper to be heard. Don't think he was anywhere near that close. I could be wrong of course, but then that is half the fun of having an opinion
In the CFL game, you're talking about the Plesius play against the Argos. In the NFL game (the one where it happened twice), you're talking about Michael Bennett against the Cardinals. You are aware that in the NFL, they are not one yard off the line, yes? Bennett was literally lined up on Arizona's side of the ball. Because of the difference in the rules, you can't compare the plays.
Having said that, the refs in the CFL sucked this year for reasons outside of one call in one game. I know you put capes on for the refs, but if you say the officiating wasn't atrocious this season then you are blind or being purposefully obtuse. It was nearly universal - from fans to players to coaches to owners to reporters - that the officiating in the CFL was simply not good enough this year. And in the Year of the Terrible Refs it was a controversial call (though one I agree with) that was the lasting memory from the Grey Cup. It was fitting that the season would essentially end on a borderline call. But hey, keep putting on those capes. At least the refs have one guy willing to drink their Kool Aid.
Because the call was highly controversial. Even if I agree with something, I am able to look at it subjectively and see why others may have a problem with it. While I think the correct call was made, I understand why others might not feel that way. It's helpful to not be rigidly stuck to the idea that everything is black and white.
If Banks had been tackled after a 10 yard return of the punt and the call for blocking in the back was made, there would be no "controversy".
Banks returns the punt for a touchdown and suddenly the call is "controversial"? Please. :roll:
Was it a penalty or not?
Clearly it was.
End of controversy.
Same situation as a dangerous hit in hockey.
Was the hit dangerous or not?
It doesn't matter if the player who was hit skated away relatively unharmed or suffered a career-ending injury.
Not that I expect an Argos fan to be impartial, but I will try to explain why some see it as a controversial call.
For starters, the block did not play any role in the outcome of the play. The Stamps player who was hit, Karl McCartney, said himself that he was not going to be able to tackle Banks.
Secondly, similar blocks occurred on returns this year and weren't flagged.
Thirdly, the time of the game. Near the end is when refs in all sports tend to "swallow the whistle." (To use your hockey comparison, something that gets called a penalty during a Jan. 14 game between the Blues and Sharks does not get called in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals.)
Fourthly, it's not just fans, but journalists who question whether a flag should have been thrown.
Now, I have already said that I think the right call was made; HOWEVER, I see why some disagree. It was a judgment call, it was not cut and dry.
That shouldn't matter, although I know sometimes it seems that it does. However, it was close enough that the official couldn't really let it go.
Similar? Yes. Exactly the same? Not so sure. While I can't guarantee this, I suspect that most, if not all, of the similar calls were probably from the side rather than from behind, or were only from behind because the player being blocked turned his back at the last second to try to draw the penalty.
And I hate when officials do that. For me, a penalty is a penalty is a penalty. When it happens shouldn't come into play at all.
Most fans and most journalists I've heard from all agree that the block was from behind, i.e. an illegal block. The only controversy seems to be around whether the official should have thrown the flag given the points you've mentioned above. So to me, there's no question - it had to be called.
I can also see why some people disagree. The problem is that they're just plain wrong.
Well that is a stupid Hamilton fan comment - as usual.
I expect no better.
It doesn't matter of which team I am a fan. If it happened to the Argos, I'd be pissed, but I would still agree that it was a penalty.
So, did the thirteenth man on the field impact the play in the Grey Cup between Saskatchewan and Montreal when the field goal was missed on the last play of the game?
I guess that shouldn't have been called either.
And for those of you that might have missed it,here it is.....you be the judge. CFL/NFL Refereeing-Doesn't matter,it SUCKS on both sides of the border,in both leagues....plain and simple,no ifs, ands or buts about it,period.Makes one wonder just how much old Jerry Jones paid the refs off to assure that "America's Team" :thdn: won that game. :thdn: it certainly looks like the "FIX" was in,if you ask me. :twisted: I can't wait to hear from all the referee apologists on here and how they are going to spin doctor this one into how great a job the refs are doing and how they don't affect the outcome of any games :roll:
But, but , but let's bring US officials here :lol: ....
Good job. Pass interference is one of the biggest big negating play foul in football. As the NFL is throwing the football more and more you see the same problems there. In our league that play could have been challenged 8)
That's hilarious. As a general rule, the quicker a guy throws his hands up in the air in the "I'm innocent" gesture, the more likely he is actually guilty. In this case, the ball hadn't even hit the ground yet.