Burn the 2019 Witches vol III

The blocked field goal counts as a recovered fumble, with the turnover listed as a turnover on downs.

[b]STATISTICAL SCORING RULES SECTION 8 – PUNTS & FIELD GOAL ATTEMPTS (b) Kicks that do NOT cross scrimmage line: [/b] (1) If a kicker should attempt a punt and the ball fails to cross the line of scrimmage, a loose ball is created. This will not count as a punt and the eventual outcome of the play will determine the way it should be recorded. A fumble will be charged to the kicker, and the play may evolve into either a rushing or passing play, or a team loss if tackled behind the LOS. If the opposition recovers the ball, the kicker will be charged with a Fumble Lost.

This is not rocket science.
We can speculate till the cows come home, why we lost.
But only 1 Stat that matters - if you score 1 point in the 3rd, and get shut out in the 4th-quarter - you deserve to lose.
I don't know about the brain-trust, but if you are set to kick the winning field goal, only 2 things can go wrong:

  1. you get a penalty.
  2. you get the ball blocked.
    How much thought was put in place to prevent either?
    If you spot the ball 3 yards behind where it should have been placed - do u think the ball would have been blocked?
    Just saying......

The Eagle

Trajectory, angles, timing of the jump to block etc isn't science ??.

One interception, two fumbles (one on that weird Banks double reverse, pass threat), a missed FG that would have kept us in the lead, still trouble on the deep throws, and we still had a chance to win it! And, let’s be honest, how many times have you seen a defender leap high behind his D-line and actually contact, let alone, block a FG? A lucky fluke for Robeson and the Stamps.

I was very pleased with the play of the Cats, on the road, in Calgary, against a tough team. Hated the loss, but thought over-all, they put in a strong performance. Coulda, shoulda, but with a spot of luck, woulda!

Cats had a D player in the recent past who jump blocked at least 2 FG attempts from close in. Turned out he was locker room poison so he was dumped. Name quickly forgotten.

With 56 seconds left in the game with the ball on the Calgary 35 it is 3rd down. Ticats should have left their offence on the field, ran the clock down to 37 seconds (and perhaps drawn Calgary offside getting a first down) and then called timeout, brought in LH and attempted the (hopefully) winning field goal. This would have given BLM 35 seconds or less to try to get into field goal range making it that much more difficult for them. As it turned out, due to the block, the point is moot. However food for thought for future, perhaps? 8)

The first part makes some sense as long as the ref noticed you were calling time out. I recall this was a problem in a recent game.

It’s called a shank under pressure.

And what do you think the chances are of a long snapper who practices 7 yard snaps his entire career making that 3 yard adjustment on his first try?

Interesting to note that it was another chippy game, at least when HAMs defense is on the field. Their reputation , it seems , is earned…

While dissecting the blocked field goal, there has been lot of talk about the height of Roberson's jump as well as the trajectory of Lirim's kick.

However in the post-game interview Tre Roberson gives credit to his D-Line for getting a huge push that allowed him to get a few steps closer towards Lirim. Rewatching the footage actually confirms this. This was not just a fingertip block. He got close enough that the ball actually hit him around the elbow.

Basically our O-Line is at least partially to blame for the blocked FG.

And yet, we only had 3 penalties called against us.

Just goes to show, we need to play virtually error free against Calgary if we want to win.

We did run the clock down to 2 on the play clock, same result with regards to timing.

I would say you are correct, if the ball is teed up 7 yards behind the LOS then the O-line is over 2 yards behind it

https://pbs.twimg.com/card_img/1173231843979796482/4yOJPKbE?format=jpg&name=600x314

Great shot there, Grover. If our O-Line got a push forward of a couple of yards then the ball likely clears the pile.

Nice pic.

I’m not sure what the solution is here. No O-line pushes forward like they are run-blocking on a field goal or punt - their job is to stop people from getting past them. It’s a completely different approach, and attempting to push people back would increase the chances of them getting through.

It would seem like there is no way to get to a guy in Roberson’s position on the field to stop him from jumping. I’m surprised more field goals are not blocked in this manner. Roberson could have been a yard further back, or jumped a foot less, and still been in a position to block it.

If TSN understood that there are more than just offensive players on the field, Roberson would have been player of the game.

We don’t know, and likely won’t ever know, if anything, related to the hold and kick was off the norm.
There might have been something, there, that had the trajectory of the ball lower than usual, but I don’t think so. I see it as an oustanding, game-winning, memorable play by Roberson – an incredible jump, at the right time, in the right place. And, I expect it to be viewed, over and over, across the league with many attempts, to dupicate it, made in games to come.

Agreed.

Calgary needed a once in a lifetime play to squeak by us. And they were at home. All the other teams should know they're in for a battle whenever they play us. Calgary caused 5 turnovers & still barely beat us.

The theoretical ideal kicking angle is 45 degrees for maximum distance. But if kickers try to get it that high they can't get enough velocity behind it. I read a study on field goal kicking. It was done for rugby field goals but I wouldn't think there would be a large difference in the results. The study showed the ideal kicking angle was just over 30 degrees and the preferred angle of kickers was almost identical. The results indicated that at the line of scrimmage a properly kicked ball would have a height around 12.5 feet give or take. They showed a graphic after the game which showed the ball as it's blocked at just over 10 feet which would indicate that it was kicked at a lower than normal trajectory. Although based on Grover's graphic above it looks like even at a normal trajectory he might have touched and deflected the kick.

If that happens in the Grey Cup I’m sure their fans will be distraught.