Now first of all I want to say that I do not mean to offend the Stamps or their fans at all with this topic, nor do I mean to take the legitimacy of their win away from them. This is also not an attempt to be a poor loser, and should not be taken that way. This is simply a discussion about whether or not a ruling on one of (if not the) rarest of plays in Canadian football was wrong in this years West Semi Final.
Now to the actual topic.
So I got into the age old CFL vs NFL debate (yeah I know) with some guys, on a different forum, that were just bashing the CFL (on a thread about Grey cup) for no good reason.
So I went to this (http://www.13thman.com/cflvsnfl.html) for reference, and found something interesting.
On a field goal attempt, the defending team may return a missed field goal to the kicking team's end zone for a Touchdown. [b] On a convert attempt after a touchdown, the defending team may return a missed kick convert to the kicking team's end zone for 1 point, or if the convert was a rush or pass play may return a fumble or interception for 2 points. [/b]Now, we all know the bolded happened in the west-semi, as the Stamps blocked a Saskatchewan convert, and returned it for 2 points.
But, according to this site (which does not source it's information), the rules say that on a missed kick where the defence returns the ball to the end-zone, the defence scores 1 point. Not 2.
Again, I don't want to take their victory away from them, and the point difference wouldn't have led to a tie or loss for the Stampeders, but just felt that this would be an interesting and notable topic to bring up