Did It Not Seem Like We Had To Beat The Refs Too!!

Last night we not only beat Winnipeg but we also had to beat the refs. Let's recap. There was the punt that was out that they gave Winnipeg a spot on our one yard line. There was the fumble that was clearly out of bounds when it was touched by Winnipeg and then the "audio" was not working?? Then when Maas went deep for a touchdown to seal the game we get a holding call. Now granted there were a few errors on our part but it seemed as though the refs were arguing amoungst themselves? All I can say is thank goodness we won because if not we would have a lot to complain about!!!!

Agreed. It was almost as if the refs had been instructed to make any call that would keep Winnipeg in the game.

The holding call on Hage ( I think ) was a bad call from what I saw on the replay. The non - review call on Holmes' fumble was absurd and the explanation given on the 5th quarter was a cover up for the officials. All that aside, congrats to our Cats, they played with pride and got the win. That's all that matters.

I agree... too many times in most of the games played this year, the Ref's have been the 13th man.. against the Cats. Until George Black is no longer running the show.... things are not likley to improve.

One other place where we got burned by the refs is on the last play before halftime. Brock was down on contact with 3 seconds left and the ref was busy fishing the whistle out of his pocket!! We should have had a crack at a field goal then. (It would have been a real test of Boreham at about 45 yards). I know that the clock on TV and the official timer are not perfectly synchronized, but they can't be out by that much.

Out West you always have to play way better than the other team ,way better because of that ref factor.

Overall the refs were not that bad. The holding call to bring back the Flick TD was bogus. The fiasco of the fumble out of bounds was bizzare. The last play of the first half was the Cats fault. With 8 seconds to go, they failed to get up on the ball when time was whistled in, wasted 4 seconds prior to the snap. The TV does not match the game clock. Seemed like 2 bad calls that appeared to temporarily keep the Bombers in the game. The Cats DID get away with some obvious holding calls. The ref performance always depends on point of view.

The Hage call was legit. Hands to the face. The Hudson call was technically a hold, but often not called. The clock management issue at the end was our fault. We should have called time out before the play. You can't use the clock on the TV to judge if there was time left. it often lags. We also caught a big break on our first TV drive when they called Malveaux for interference when Vaughn clearly pushed off. Having said all that, I thought the officiating crew had a very bad night. Inconsistent, and borderline calls at key moments can really change a game.

If you only look at the calls that go against you, you're going to think the refs are against you every game.

What about the phantom pass interference against Winnipeg (that should have been offensive pass interference against Hamilton) that set you guys up at the 4 yardline for your first TD?

You can't argue that the refs didn't gift you that one.

Ya,true,although I never saw it CHML's crew agrees with you.(on my way home at the time )

man u guys always complainn about the refs if u ask me there should have been like 3 more holding calls on the kittens plus maas kept on intentionally grounding and that pushing off by vaughn and we got thew call that was the killer... But there really isnt anything to complain about because the bombers got cocky and got their butts handed to them... :x

I'd have to agree that the one interference call was bogus. Vaughn clearly pushed off. But Maas did only ground the ball once. The other times the ball made it past the line of scrimmage. The placement of the out of bounds punt by Winnipeg was a bad call. It definitely went into the endzone. The so called Holmes "fumble and Bomber recovery before the ball went out of bounds was a pathetic call and even more so, the fact they couldn't review it makes you wonder why we bother to say we have "instant replay".

There was one other play that I thought was very questionable. Just before the end of the first half the Bombers had the ball and made a pass out to the flat. Now it all happened quickly, but I swore I saw the ball skip off the gorund and the receiever catch it off the bounce. He paused as if waiting for a whistle, but since none came, he ran for bout 6 yards. To me it looked like the Cat defenders were standing around expecting the play to be repealed. But the refs marked the ball and the game continued from there. Again, I didn't see the replay on the Jumbotron...could have missed it as I was watching the action on the field waiting for the ball to be moved back.

The refs also blew the pass interfence on T.V, which went in our favour, maybe they spent the rest of the game making up for that call.

Update to my last posting. On another thread many feel that the pass in question was a lateral. I wondered if it had been but from my vantage point (and lack of replays) I couldn't tell. My bad!

If you mean the "throw" that started on the 35 yard line of Winnipeg to the latest BB NFL cut (Thurman?)... that was ruled a lateral, as buddy recovered the ball on the 34 yard line - at least TSN showed that play several times, to show that Winnipeg was legal on that one.

I think he was definitely interfered with when he broke to the corner. I would assume that is when the ref decides to call the penalty. Now if the defender doesn't interfere with him, then Vaughn has his separation and there is no need to push off (which he did). I wonder if that was the reason behind the call??

Based on this reasoning I may argue we weren't "gifted".

So Vaughn pushes off to get separation, we agree on that. What did the Winnipeg defender do? Simply not allowing separation does not constitute interference.

The interference call was bogus, but there was illegel contact on Vaughan earlier on the same play, without that contact Vaughan would have been clear in the end zone. It was the wrong call, it should have been called at the 20yd line instead of the 4, but Winnipeg have no cause to complain.
The holding call on Hudson was bogus, the pass that was called a lateral was marginal, very difficult to tell from the TV because of the camera angle. The punt that might of gone into the end zone was similar, a marginal call that might have looked in or out depending on where you were standing.
The fumbled punt was clearly out of bounds when the Winnipeg player touched it, why do we have replay call reviews if they can't even get it right after watching over in slow motion? The refs seem to be too reluctant to overturn a call. There is no point in delaying the game with that nonsense, let's scrap the video replay now, don't even wait till the end of the season.

I agree, I think the infraction happened about 5 yards into the play when vaughn made his first move (to the post) then to what I remember being a corner pattern.

The player grabbed him around the hips for a step or so once he broke to the corner.

That being said I just saw the post above me and I agree it could have been called illegal contact, but I am unsure of the difference when the ball has been thrown to that player. I guess it depends when Maas let the ball go.

With respect to the Holmes fumble. If the audio was not working on that particular reviewable play (I really don't care if the ball was touched in or out of bounds by Winnipeg). I am wondering what would happen if say Hamilton had a favourable call and Winnipeg wanted to dispute it. Would it be allowed to be disputed and reviewed with a possibility of a decision turnover barring in mind that one play could not be reviewed because of equipment malfunction? What is the rule on that in the CFL? If such a situation arises again, is there something in place to preserve fairness? As far as I can see, if one of the plays can not be reviewed because there is a problem with the equipment, then the remaining game should be played with out the possibility of any more reviews. Is this a possibility?