CFL backs Command Centre re Lions game

Via 3Downnation…
http://3downnation.com/2018/09/26/cfl-says-got-replay-calls-right-ticats-loss-lions/

“… league spokesman Lucas Barrett said in a statement. “But we have reviewed the Command Centre’s decisions and they meet our standard.?

The CFL has “standards? for the Command Centre???

Perhaps the 2 point call was correct on review (but conclusive?), but the so-called “incomplete pass? fumble reversal was bogus IMO. Ball came out, arm ready to pass, on the hit and it was the momentum of the QB being tackled that caused his arm to come forward.

If the CFL actually has any CC standards, they must be embarrassing low.

I think the standard is a 4 drink minimum and a few good huffs on the bong pipe . They seriously can’t sit there with a straight face and tell us that they got that strip sack call right…can they ?? :o ???

And in the past they have readily admitted their mistakes. Changing their way I guess.

It’s a shame. Such a great product like the CFL soiled by their never ending search for competent officiating. It’s like CFL’s version of Quest For Fire.

That Official could not have been in better position to make that call.
Crouched position, down low, staring right down the line
He emphatically called it OB.

Total CFL hit job on the Cats. I don’t care what they say after the fact to cover their arses. Their explanations carry no weight with me. Their credibility is burnt to a crisp in my eyes…

And he still managed to get it wrong. Because everyone knows the Command Centre never makes mistakes. ::slight_smile:

There’s no way the replay showed conclusively that the foot was in bounds. Way too fuzzy, and any green seen between the line and the shoe could very easily have been colourbleed from the sides.

You know, in looking at this replay above again, I’m wondering if anyone else thinks that maybe Burnham didn’t maintain control of the ball and that catch shouldn’t have counted for that reason. In all the debate over his foot being in bounds I wasn’t even watching the rest of the play. Food for thought…

I don’t disagree on the Burnham call. It was very close and I have seen some photos that show the turf between his toe and the white line.

What I do disagree with is the fumble being overturned. In my eyes, it was 100% a fumble and I don’t believe for a second that there was enough evidence to overturn the call. Jennings may have been moving his arm forward, but if he was, it was only slightly, and what caused the ball to come out was the contact from Westerman, not him weakly throwing it. Awful call.

Why does it always seem like we get screwed the worst by the command centre?

I agree, Was a great bull rush by Westerman
He clearly separated the QB from the ball, It was not even close to a throw

Jennings arm/wrist/hand were going forward because the ball went forward after he was thumped by Westerman ,great job Westerman!

The two point conversion ,we all saw the green between the shoe, close enough, and his hand seemed to be just under the ball when his hand and the ball touched the turf .

They got it correct ,if coaches { 3 coaches made the call ,HC gets credit} could do it over they’d kick the FG or punt it out at the 5-10 yard line hopefully …and we may have won…now to stop Wally Saturday ,the Eastern Semi Final Preview…?

If Jennings arm was coming forward, Westerman’s head and shoulder were clearly in the way, and Westerman was not noticeably moved as if he had been pushed by Jenning’s arm. There is no way that I can see he was trying to pass. And if he was, since he 'was in the grasp", it should have been intentional grounding as the ball did not cross the line of scrimmage, and there was no receiver immediately available.

Bogus call, bogus back-up by the league. Not saying there is an anti-Hamilton conspiracy, but I would certainly say there is an anti-competency thing going on.

Neither call should have been overturned. From what I have seen, there is no video showing undisputable evidence to change the calls on the field.

I think you might be right, the ball may have been trapped by Burnham.

I’m positive the CC didn’t look at anything past the toe.

Yes indeed, agree with you pointing the fumble on the play and is exactly what I thought.

After the fact now, Ti-Cats must play smarter football here on in for the remaining games of the 2018 season.

If you have the opportunity to seal the game with a Field Goal take it, don’y play around or give any advantage to the other team, this is just stupid football.

Get aggressive, be aggressive and show the Lions that this is your home turf and start hammering BC!!

GO CATS GO!!!

Absolutely. I didn't follow the play through, but having done that as you say, it looked like Burnham trapped it. Maybe that is why he was so non-commital in the post-game interview? He didn't have any idea about his foot, but knew that he had trapped, rather than caught, the ball.

It's almost as if the Control Centre, like most of the rest of us, was only focusing on his foot and where it came down when their job is (or should be) looking at the entire play. Yet another question mark I suppose. Gotta win by a bunch this weekend to remove any doubt so we can get past this.

It could be colour bleed but deep down we all know it was turf. If that exact play had occured to Speedy B and he was ruled out of bounds then Ticat Nation would be having a fit about those 4 turf strands visible between his foot and the sideline. The CC probably has a couple of more camera angles and zoom in ability that were not shown on TSN.

As for the Jennings fumble, don’t even get me started on that one. That was conclusively a fumble no matter which camera angle showed it. That was pure larceny by the CC.