Al Bradbury

Crash: As I understand the rule… as long as you have control of the ball when you go out of bounds it doesn’t matter what happens after that.

Section 9 of the 2019 CFL Rule Book: “The ball is Out of Bounds when a player in possession of the ball touches a Sideline, Sideline in Goal, Dead Line or the ground or any other object on or beyond these lines.”

But was he actually “in possession of the ball” if he couldn’t manage to keep control when he hit the ground?

From what I remember, the standard is that a player is deemed to have control if he has “made a football move” (e.g. turned upfield, switched the ball to his other hand) after catching the pass. The receiver in this case did not do that, his “two steps” basically carrying his momentum out of bounds for less than a second. Therefore, no catch.

I find TSN shows less and less replays, if any, of questionable penalties.

It wouldn’t surprise me if the CFL has instructed TSN to gloss over possible errors by the refs in hope of making them not look so incompetent at times.

Referees did not cost them this game.

They themselves cost them this game.

He was not “in possession” at that point. It was yet to be determined

Guys, honestly. Please watch the replay of that play and describe what you think 59 Okafor is doing to his man. Perhaps easing the guy’s fall after he stumbled to make sure he does not hit the ground very hard? And then lying on top of him to protect him in case of shrapnel?

For those who need it (I had to skim through to find it), it happens around 3:08 in the stream.

Our lineman tackled theirs to the ground. Number 59. I didn’t see it on game day either, since TSN glazed over it and didn’t do a good job on the replay showing it, but ExPat is right, it is a good call unfortunately.

Some of the RTPs though were REALLY borderline, and the RTK call at the end was a really crappy new rule that they need to change (IMO, as soon as the ball hits the kicker’s foot, it should be a “while the ball is in flight” penalty, meaning it would be applied after the return - this way, you still protect the kicker, but also don’t ruin block kicks… But that’s a whole different topic).

I thought that as well. Hits occurred no more than a second at most after the ball had left the QB’s hand. Not likey a DL player or LB can avoid contact that quickly.
After watching the games tonight - one still in progress - I’m noticing that the officials are NOT tossing flags if a QB is contacted immediately after throwing the ball. Only hits that are too high (head) or too low (below the knees) should be called if the QB has just released the ball.
In last night’s game there were a couple of calls for hits on QBs - one was definitely late, the other was not. There needs to be some standard for RTP calls (what is constitutes a late hit) because from what I’ve seen this weekend, it’s not consistent.

Bradbury’s crew is “flag happy”! So why does it take so long for Al to waddle into camera range to announce the call ? It makes me wonder if they’re running their calls through the “eye in the sky” for verification.

All the flags slow up the game. >:(

Pat Lynch( thanks to Grover for the reply :)on downsizing)


Bradbury reminds me of Buzz Ligthyear…Way too many flags thrown. Let the boys play.

I always thought Al reminded me of stand from American Dad.

CatsFan: I don’t read the rule that way.

The rule says the ball is out of bounds when a receiver touches the sideline etc. Like I said…he could have done a double pirouette and landed on his nose…but anything that happens after he was out of bounds doesn’t matter.

For me, the issue is that he caught the ball in bounds and had possession when he crossed the sideline. I thought the replay showed it clearly because he was facing the field with the ball when he caught it.

Anyway…it’s history now but I mentioned it to show that it wasn’t just the Tiger-Cats that were on the receiving end of a dubious call.

To tell the truth, other than the abundance of flags, I thought Bradbury’s crew did a decent job. Pretty well every call was a violation of the rule. Now, about the rules … :wink: