An official’s flag was thrown on the second play, during which Montreal scored. Higgins said the flag would have penalized B.C. for lining up offsideWell that should put an end to this part of the debate.
As I noted in the game day thread the TD would not have tied up the game... the convert could have however. With Baron Miles back there everyone knows that is not a gimme extra point. If I recall correctly he blocked one against Montreal last year by jumping over the center and followed that up with a repeat performance this season against SK... Therefore scores sits at 19-18 with about 55 seconds to go. We'll never really know how it could have ended!
And that has what do to with the fact that BC was offside?
So this is 2 games this season that the reffing has helped to decide football games in Wally's favour at home and in both cases the CFL has egg on it's face and apologizing all over themselves. This is a disgrace.
Everything! A lot of people on here have insisted that the game should have been tied (assuming the touchdown stood). There is absolutley no gurantee that's what would have happened. That's what I'm saying.
I know what you are saying.....but that is not what this thread is about.
This thread is meant to put an end to the speculation that Montreal was going to be called for
operating a horse and buggy without a licence.
Posters were trying to say the TD would not have counted because of the penality. This thread shows that to not be the case.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the lost TD on the messed up call.
Whether or not it was offside, BC played an awesome game.
You mean because they needed the officials' help to win a game at home in the final minute of the fourth quarter in which their running back ran for over 200 yards? :roll:
But still, you do have to give them some of the credit.
BC's defence, which had been pretty porous so far this season, did hold Montreal to 12 points, and did not allow one offensive touchdown (but for that mess at the end of the game).
That's pretty impressive really, even though some of the blame must fall on the Als' players and coaches. . . but you must still recognized that the Lions' coaches and players get paid to play the game too, and their defensive coaches and players did a bang up job.
I give the B.C. D-line lots of credit. However, the fact remains that Avon Cobourne rushed for almost 100 yards in ONE HALF of football. If we'd given him the rock in the first half, he might well have racked up over 200 yards just like Mallett. As for our offense, sure, they held us in check, and I've given the Lions credit for that in my power rankings, but I'd hardly call their performance 'impressive.' When you need the help of the officials to scrape out a win at home against a team you've owned in your building for the past 9 years, you don't really get to call it an 'impressive' performance.
Not so sure. . . the fact remains that the BC defence had been very poor up to this game, and in this game they held the Als to 12 points, and did not allow one offensive touchdown. . . and if the mess at the end had not occurred, then they would have allowed only one offensive touchdown.
So, for that defence to accomplish that is, in my book, impressive.
Not really. Like I said, Cobourne ran all over them in the second half, and only our crappy playcalling in the first half saved them. I don't think the Lions' run defense problems have been solved at all. The next time they face a team willing to run the ball that can also throw the ball deep, they will get destroyed.
Also, had the game been tied up, it would have likely gone to OT. No guarantee they wouldn't have given up another TD in overtime.
I am glad Higgins got the “phantom call” issue dealt with. I know on LD, some fans thought that flag was the big issue, when clearly it was more of a distraction.
But something else Higgins says has me wondering. The review booth is just watching the TV feed like the rest of us. I assume they are watching it in high def. Well anyone who has ever been to a bar where they have that one annoying TV that is a direct feed, not going through a decoder box, knows that there is a delay. Depending on what feed the booth is watching, the play may seem about to begin but actually be nearly over before they see it. Then add in similar delays from the paging system and there is an obvious problem.
And one that is likely easily fixed. As a suggestion, once the onfield officials blow a play in, have some type of lockout system they can trigger to block the review pagers. Coaches can still challenge, but the booth needs to make a determination BEFORE play is whistled in. Maybe the lock-out can even be done at the snap of the ball. And this will never happen again.
wow, some BC fans will stretch to unimaginable lengths to try and believe this win wasn't tainted. :cowboy:
The game was not tainted at all and I am by no means a BC fan. To say that this game was tainted would be the same as saying every game that tere was a suspect call would be tainted so literally since fans on one tem or the other always feel that the refs jobbed them then every single game would be tainted.
Yeah, that's pretty much the feeling I get from reading their posts, too. No surprise, though....what else would you expect from the followers of a squad that pretty much sets the standard for low-class behavior? I wonder what management will have to apologize for next week.....
Haha...you guys both said "taint"! Nasty.
But seriously. BC's defense hasn't been horrible. It has been inconsistent. They played well against Edmonton, and were good against Toronto as well. Okay, so what if Toronto makes everyone's defense look good? The point is that they haven't been horrible in every game, just in 3 or 4 games. Mostly they just can't figure out what the hell they're doing out there! Sometimes they get it right, other times...not so much.
But still....taint....Hahahahahaha! :lol: