I agree myhometeam, but who is Jones hired to help, the HC or the OC? As an old friend said "Why keep a dog and then bark yourself?" And the Condell ship has sailed, we've had a season and a half to get over that one.
On offence, I thought Collaros played great. I think he should definitely roll out/move out of the pocket more, because when he does, he tends to be more effective/creative. Everyone is complaining about our O-Line, but Edmonton's D-Line is all star quality, and if Collaros is always going to stand in the pocket, their rush can just pin their ears back and always attack that area. Moving Collaros around more would counter that. I also think that we have found our best group of starting receivers. Every one of them produced at critical times. Aultman and Saunders looked great, and Tyms had his best game this year. At RB, honestly, I would go with Schuermann over Gable. Schuermann is just as good at running and blocking, but he is a better receiver. I think this group on O will get better and better, especially with June Jones involved now.
On D, I'm assuming that Reinbold was going with the bend not break approach, and giving Edmonton everything short/mid range, in favour of guarding against the big play. I would prefer to see more man coverage. I think that new corner played well, and Ellis didn't look out of place. Will Hill was invisible, but that is probably a good thing (an indication they were throwing away from his area). Rogers and Leonard are getting experience, and are good young additions. I'd like to see more blitzing and D-Line-produced sacks, however.
On special teams, Speedy Banks played well. He had an extra jump, like he was really trying to make things happen out there.
We could have won this one if Austin had that challenge left at the end. It was pass interference against the guy covering Jones (grabbed Jones' head before the ball arrived).
Entertaining game. Came right down to the wire. Stinks that we lost, but it was fun to watch, and, with an easier schedule ahead, if we string some wins together, we could make a run. I think this team has all of the ingredients to do that.
“I agree myhometeam, but who is Jones hired to help, the HC or the OC? As an old friend said “Why keep a dog and then bark yourself?” And the Condell ship has sailed, we’ve had a season and a half to get over that one.”
But, the team is struggling to find an OC and their playcalling legs. So, until this is sorted out, I would believe that the Condell matter is not settled.
Since Jones is from the offensive side of the ball, I would suggest he COULD be here to provide help with the quarterbacks and the OC, freeing up the head coach for other matters.
But I’m guessing too.
Perhaps he did know, but threw it anyway in order to encourage the Command Centre to review the play - as they should have. Even though he know he'd be taking a delay of game penalty, it might have bene offset by a penalty against Edmonton, and therefore another play.
And what's the downside of throwing it at that point?
Well put, Cats Fan. Plus, we hear that the Command Centre reviews "all scoring plays", but what about this specific one, which might, and I admit it's a might, have resulted in a score if the receiver was not interfered with? Isn't that technically a "scoring play"?
Don't want to open up the video review can of worms, now that the Commish has wisely tightened it. However, a scoring play denied by a possible penalty is still a scoring play.
On the other hand how often is a scoring play over-turned? I still refuse to accept that Reilly scored on that first one, but see Kent's logic in saving his challenge, as it was supposedly reviewed automatically. The biggest problem, in my view, with video review, is that the Command Centre so often rarely seems to "get it right", which is its sole purpose.
“The biggest problem, in my view, with video review, is that the Command Centre so often rarely seems to “get it right”, which is its sole purpose.”
And that’s the issue I have with reducing the number of flags a coach can throw during a game. You’re restricting a team’s ability to appeal a bad call without improving the source of the problem (bad officiating).
What good is there in speeding up the pace of the game when my team could lose it in the end to a bad referee?
An apology afterward from Glen Johnson just isn’t very satisfying.
Scoring plays are automatically reviewed, but that only applies to plays called a score on the field. A potential scoring play, e.g. goal line stand called a stop, are not automatically reviewed. As a play where a score was prevented by an illegal action by a defender would also not be deemed a scoring play, it also would not be automatically reviewed. A coach challenge would normally be required in either case.
In the last three minutes of the fourth quarter, however, any play can be reviewed by the Command Centre. So a potential scoring play or a score prevented by a reviewable infraction could, and should be reviewed. Perhaps Austin just wanted to give the Command Centre to "do the right thing".
On the other hand, why the heck did he call a timeout on the previous play? It's not like he was going to get an extra play in with only two seconds left. I'm guessing that he didn't realize how much time the previous play had taken off the clock. Or was it to give him more time to get the right players in and the right play called?
In the last 3 minutes of the 4th qtr, only standard reviewable calls can be reviewed, not Coaches challengeable reviews, there is a difference
PI is not a standard reviewable infraction, it is a Coaches challengeable infraction
Replay Official Initiated Reviews:
Following the 3 minute warning in the fourth quarter all plays become subject to review by the Replay Official for Standard Reviewable Aspects only.
If the Replay Official wants to review a play, he will notify the referee to stop the game.
Coach Challengeable Penalties are never reviewed as part of any Replay Official Initiated Review.
A team must use a Team Challenge to initiate the review of a Coach Challengeable Penalty.
Article 2 - Standard Reviewable Aspects
The following aspects are reviewable under this category
Scoring as defined in Rule 3
Whether a player has possession of ball in opponent's goal area
Whether a field goal or kicked convert travels between the uprights and over the crossbar
Whether a kicked ball goes dead in opponent's goal area
Whether a player with possession of ball goes dead in own goal area
Whether a field goal or convert attempt scores or is missed
Whether a pass is complete, incomplete or intercepted
Whether a receiver is forced out near a boundary line
Who recovers a loose ball in field of play or goal area
Whether a fumbled ball is recovered immediately
Whether a ball carrier fumbles or is down with contact, out of bounds or scores
Whether a ball carrier was down with contact when the play has been allowed to continue
Whether a pass is forward or onside
Whether a passer has passed or fumbled the ball
Touching of the Ball that is Not in Possession of a Player
Whether a forward pass is touched by a defensive player
Whether a forward pass is touched by an illegible receiver *
Whether a kicked ball has been touched by a player called for contacting the kicker
Who and where all kicked balls are first touched *
Who last touched a loose ball before it goes out of bounds
Boundary Line Rulings
Whether ball carrier stepped on sideline if not ruled out of bounds on field
Whether kick from scrimmage went out of bounds in flight *
Whether a player gains possession of a kick in bounds or out of bounds
Whether a player participates illegally on a play – illegal participation *
Whether a pass is onside or offside
Whether a player is onside or offside on kicks from scrimmage, open field kicks or dribbled balls *
Whether a passer is behind or beyond the line of scrimmage on a forward pass *
Whether two forward passes occur on the same play *
Whether a 1st down had been gained on a 3rd down attempt
Whether forward progress has been ruled correctly on the field
Whether a turnover occurs as a direct result of a major foul during the tackle or attempted tackle that was not called *
Whether a Team A player commits Illegal Interference on a player attempting to field a kick off *
Note: The Standard Reviewable Aspects identified above with an asterisk (*) may result in a penalty being found and applied which was not called on the field during play, or one that was called being nullified.
Article 3 - Coach Reviewable Penalties
The following penalties may be challenged by the coach whether they were called or not called during play
Defensive Pass Interference
Illegal Contact on a Receiver
Offensive Pass Interference
Illegal Interference – Blocking Downfield on a pass play
Note: Should any of the above 4 penalties be challenged, all 4 types will be ruled on
Roughing the Passer
Roughing or Contacting the Kicker
The following penalty may be challenged by the coach ONLY if it was called during play
Illegal Block Penalties on Kick Plays
It was Collaros that called the timeout
You are correct. So, uh, never mind.
Didn't see who had called it. So I guess Collaros wanted to make sure the right play and people were in.
I doubt it would have mattered, as I don't think there was contact before the ball got there. At least not DPI against Jones. IC against Tyms, perhaps, but not DPI.
Thanks Grover for the detailed response on the final play, and why it was not reviewed. And, of course DPI falls under "judgement", so that is why the initial call was made, or not made, on the play.
As always, a voice of reason.
Missed the game but pvr'd it and watched, with many stops, rewinds, and slow mo reviews, which took up several hours on Saturday. All I can say is that June Jones is amazing. He was with the team, what, no more 24 hrs. before the game, and already Collaros, and several others are playing much better.
Happy to see some fight, better play than I expected, and some promise from the league's worst team. I haven't yet totally given up, yet, on this edition of my team.
Good teams win close ball games, bad teams find a way to lose. Cats have been mostly a 500 team for years, they give up points at the end of both halves. The defense plays mostly a very loose prevent defense. You won't win many games playing that style.