Round of applause for the refs tonight...from what I saw... it was a very well called game.
its sad when this is a topic.
that doesnt reflect well on CFL officials.
True...But there is hope ... and why not key on the positives for once....with all the chit hitting the fan lately.
Amazing what it looks like when you're a neutral observer, just as well reffed as that last Riders game , I would say.
I was not neutral I was cheering for Hamilton...
The one call that i did not like was the field goal by fleming. from the angles they showed on tsn it appeared to be a fg. even fleming was pis*** off at this and i was too
If anything the camera angle showed the ball was on the same plane as the goal post... which begs another question.. since the ball was too high to actually hit the post , did they consider it a dead ball? or just the fact it was not between.
I would think that they considered it dead ball, Can't really tell by the angle they use whether it would have gone through or not. would be easier with an angle from above, or below. why does he kick so high anyway? if it had been at least low enough so everyone could see it go through then he would at least have an argument.
Well the ref had the angle below I guess we just have to trust his judgement unless the CFL impliments a goal cam Hell ...lets put flashing red lights on the posts
yep exactly right, they had the best angle. I like this flashing red lights idea, lets impliment it a Taylor field for a test run :lol:
Did not see the play, but how can the ball be too high? Does not the scoring area extend up above the height of the poles?
Well thats the question, the ball was above the top of the goal post, so did they rule it like it would have hit the goal post if lower.. or was it just not between the posts at the point it crossed
It was not between the posts at the point it crossed but it was real close
In order for it to be a dead ball it has to hit the post not be in line above it.
Can you imagine the riot if a single point would have tied a game but it was called a dead ball because it hit the imaginary post.
Just wondering HT, did a bunch of Eskies gangbang your GF once or something? Is that why you have such a deep loathing for them? You actually cheer for Hamilton...your long time "bitter" rivals against a non-divisional oponent? I never cheer for the Stamps nor do I cheer against them...I just cheer for my team. But you have this deep dissension for the EE that quite frankly makes you look juvenile. Maybe it's the payroll thing...oh wait, you're an Argos fan so it can't be that. You get your back up when anyone says anything disparaging against your beloved double blue, yet you turn around and do the exact same thing towards another franchise...you're such a friggin' hypocrite.
I was chearing for Hamilton as well
Whats the problem?
But with the way Fleming has been kicking this year you have to give the refs the benefit of the doubt :twisted:
I picked HAMILTON , to win...........in BIG DAVES , great pool. :roll:
This win was GREAT for the CFL as a whole. Hamilton fans needed something like that for their franchise. I would have been just as happy if this happened to..... B.C. :roll:
EDMONTON , was placed # 2 and # 1 in 2 CFL power rankings, this week :lol: :roll: :lol:
Some fans have accused me of hating the CITY of Hamilton. :roll:
Which is far from true. :lol:
Am I the only one who hates EDMONTON? :roll: :lol: Edmonton is 1 of the teams that always goes over the so called , "cap". :roll:
I always cheer for the EAST against WESTERN teams unless the game has play off implications for the ARGOS.....It didn't :lol: BUT, SASK....is my WESTERN TEAM
I get upset when people say UNTRUE things about TORONTO.
You certainly get upset when people say that EDMONTON is OVER RATED.........which they are.
LIGHTEN UP , and take a big PILL. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Anyone has a right to cheer for whoever they like and don't even have to give account for it. That's the beauty of living in a free country .
As for that field goal , it was pretty dumb of those TSN anylists trying to tell from that replay where the ball was. Not even all the NFL replay guys with all their great wisdom could have seen how far up field the ball was while it still looked like it was on the inside of the post. Score - refs 1 , anaylists -0 on that one. Atleast the refs could look straight up from where they were standing and seen that . No way you could tell from way back where that camera was . :roll:
BTW , I too cheered for the Ti-Cats :lol:
I was just about to say the same thing. We would need some kind of 3D replay to show where the ball was when it crossed the goal line.
Or: run two synchronized cameras, one in the end zone and one on the goal line. Replay them frame-by-frame until the goal-line camera shows that the ball has crossed the goal line. Then look at the end-zone camera to see if it is between the goal posts or not.
As for the ruling, it was not a dead ball, because if it had been the Esks would not have scored a single. (Lucky for them: it was the only point they scored in the second half!) It's only a dead ball if it strikes the goal post and bounces back into the field of play.
Just to remind everyone: if the ball goes above the goal post, directly above the upright, it is WIDE! It must be BETWEEN the uprights to be three points.
And in case you were wondering, I was cheering for the Tiger-cats as well.