Can you really blame the ref here?

Ignorning whether or not the play should be reviewable.
Can we really blame the ref?
The is pretty much what the refs saw

This is the view from the endzone camera.

Quite the difference

I never did blame the ref at all.

blame the people who made the rule against using replays to determine fumbles.

As I said “Ignoring whether or not the play should be reviewable…”

someone must be if im ignoring if the play should be reviewable, then the refs are to blame.

Why should someone be blamed?
You cant tell what happened on the first view.

Wow I remember that play and I didn't even see that endzone view! THAT is what instant replays are for. I think the league needs to take a look at rules. THat is a momentum changing play right there.

It's actually a double standard when you think about. In the Argo/Bomber game tonight, the ref was allowed to not only review the challenge called by the Argos, but if he saw something else (the lateral that wasn't) then he could overturn that as well. It would seem, that a coach should just challenge anything in the hope that ref overturns something else.

"Ignoring whether or not the play should be reviewable" compells me to vote the 'ref at fault' option. If the League has determined that an incorrect play outcome cannot be reviewed and corrected with the advantage of views that the head ref does not immediately have on the field, then the onus to make the correct decision must fall to the head official, in consultation with other officials who may have better angles on a play. If the argument is most always "the officials cannot see," and this seems to be bandied about, then the League/Director of Officiating has the responsibility to rewrite the practices concerning where the officials are placed before and where they move to during plays. This to help ensure that at least one official has a reasonably satisfactory angle on the play to ensure a correct decision.

It is a lot easier said than done.....The ref could have moved to the other side but then the same play could have happened from the first side and his view still would have been blocked.

Football is not like baseball where the ump knows the ball is coming from there and the runner is coming from here so the place place to view it will be here.
And even then they blow calls.

In football each ref has a certain area to watch. Anything can happen anywhere and it is impossible to see it all.

It is like crime. Unless you want one police officer per citizen following them around 24/7, they cannot see all criminal events - even then, they would miss things. Refs cannot see all things from all vantage points. You cannot blame a ref for something he cannot possibly see - the first video is a good example of a wall off 5 or 6 big men blocking the view of the ref who enters at the left just before the end of the video. So for blaming the ref'ing (defined as the officials on the field), I have to vote "no".

I don't think that ref'ing has gotten worse over time, but instant replay, slow motion, half-dozen camera angles, etc. sharpen our, the spectator's, 20-20 vision and have put an after the fact microscope on them.

Having said that, that technology and those angles now exist and should be available to sharpen the league's (represtented by the refs on the field) view. So I certainly agree that it should be a reviewable play (on another post, RO made the suggestion that any play should be reviewable, but you only get one wrong challenge per half so teams won't run rampant with requests for review - a position with which I wholeheartedly agree).

I don't know who's fault it was. Referee's poor judgement or the play not reviewable. All I know is that Beveridge took the ball away and it should have been ruled a fumble recovery for Hamilton.
What happened to the guy in the booth who could have called for a review.

...if kel were here he'd boo the ref...

Isn't there supposed to be a referee behind the play to look for that sort of thing? I would say the backjudge was asleep at the switch if he didn't notice that play.

PS- there is an official there, he must have been looking at the cheerleaders not to notice that the Cats' player had the ball when the whistle blew.

ro1313 makes some valid arguments. I think the replay rule needs to be reviewed. The Official can only call what he sees.

I couldn't believe it either when I heard that. They ask the coach what it is that he wants reviewed, but then if the ref sees something else in the review he can make a call on that. Stubler called for the review on whether the player was down by contact, and then the ref overturned the ruling on the field because of a forward lateral. If the ref can make a decision based on anything that he sees, then why bother to ask the coach what he wants to have reviewed?

It makes me think that Taafe should have called for a review not on fumble possession, but on down by contact. Then Hamilton would've gotten the ball!

...kinda screwed....

Someone should be blamed because the incident makes the league look bad.

The official that blew the whistle is the one to blame because the play was not dead.

I don't like the excuse that on one particular view you cannot tell. The onus should be on the officiating crew to see as much of the play as possible.

It was clearly viewable from one particular angle, and no official was there to see it.

You must ask the question: Why was the play whistled?

If you are using the excuse that the officials couldn't see the play, then what excuse do they have for blowing the whistle?

It may appear that Armstead is down, but he doesn't have the ball. Beveridge has the ball, falls down, but is not touched.

The play should not have been whistled.

Recall last season when a Montreal player made an interception and an official blew the whistle because he thought it was an incomplete pass.

Excuses were made that the official didn't see the Montreal player coming from behind. That was no excuse. The official should not have blown his whistle until he saw the ball hit the ground, which it didn't.

Similarly, the official that blew the whistle this time is the one to blame, because the play was not dead, neither Armstead or Beveridge were down by contact.

The official could not see that Armstead no longer had the ball and blew the whistle when Armstead was down

Nevertheless, the error is with the official for blowing the whistle. If he doesn't see that the ball carrier is down by contact then he has made the wrong call. Armstead was no longer the ball carrier.

he'll be held accountable for that. forward progress is on of the bigger things that officials focus on - how do you measure forward progress without seeing the ball?

having said that, also consider the speed of the game. this is an easy call with the correct angle and the privelege of slo-mo replay. the official on the sceen needs to make a call with the information he has at the full speed of the game.

can you blame the ref? yup. should this replay be used as a learning opportunity? absolutely - and you can be absolutely certain that it will be.