The Canadian Football League has admitted a video-replay official shouldn’t have overturned a call that would have given the Ottawa Redblacks possession of the football in the Montreal Alouettes’ end of the field in the fourth quarter of Friday’s game at TD Place stadium.
“After reviewing the play, we believe that there wasn’t enough indisputable evidence to overturn the call on the field of a fumble,? a league spokesman wrote in an email.
An unnamed source has admitted it...That is far from the league admitting it
When Cohon or Johnson says it,,,,then the league has admitted it
There are some bad calls even with video replay. Welcome to football. And I get it: part of having boards like this is to allow fans to argue and re-argue the close ones and do some venting.
But here is what I am concerned about. Montreal, with just as much to play for as we will have Friday, went into TD Place last week and didn't win by much, with this questionable call going their way. This is the same Montreal that handled Toronto in SkyDome pretty easily, where the Cats were unable to win two lose ones. The Cats have won exactly one road game so far this season, one where the Bombers self-destructed at the end of the game with a time count violation on Hamilton's two. Fantuz is out and there are some other questionables.
Conclusion: beating the RedBlacks Friday in Ottawa will not be easy.
Fortunately I do not believe that the focus of the fans matters very much. What matters is the focus of the players, and I am confident that they will not be distracted by all the stuff that's been flying around here. But for those of you who believe in psychokinetics, time to stop worrying about the past and start willing the Cats to victory Friday night.
They screwed up the call. Why cant YOU just admit it!!! :roll:
Admit what?
That video review overturned the call twice?
The truth is that the play was so close that neither confirming nor overturning the call would be wrong
The call is not the issue
The issue is that the league did not admit that they were wrong
Glad to hear the league admits they screwed up - it was a horrible call. That call probably saved the Als season
No it wasnt and the league admitted nothing and the Als would still be in first even if they had lost the game
“After reviewing the play, we believe that there wasn’t enough indisputable evidence to overturn the call on the field of a fumble,? [b]a league spokesman wrote in an email[/b].It's nice to see the league admitted they got it wrong
Agree slimjim, no one is perfect and good on them to fess up.
The calls will go either Montreal or Toronto’s way…it seems it’s a must to have them in the playoffs…I guess Ottawa and Hamilton are to be happy with their stadiums and nothing else???
Despite denials from some... the Als were given the last game vs RedBlacks with the unbelievable reversal on the 4th quarter review of the London fumble deep in Al's territory. Talk about a gift!
The many TSN replay angles were clear there was no Ottawa contact. There's supposed to be irrefutable evidence to reverse an on-field call (of a fumble)... there was none. What's the point of video review if they are going to screw it up.
It makes you question their competence or bias.
The video review incompetence and Als win certainly has influenced the final standings in the East.
That is where you are wrong. If the play is so close and there is not enough evidence to overturn the rules says that the ruling of the field stands.
I’d say it’s a bit of a stretch to say that “the Als were given the last game…” since there is not guarantee that the REDBLACKS would have scored had they been given possession or that the Als wouldn’t have come back (had Ottawa scored) and re-taken the lead. There was still enough time in the game for either team to win. That being said, it would have been a momentum changer for Ottawa and it IS POSSIBLE that they would have won instead of the Als.
Totally agree !!
The ruling on the field SHOULD have stood up after the first review. To say it was ACTUALLY looked at the second time would be a guess. The first review took almost 5 minutes while the second took less than 15 seconds :? As someone posted earlier, to reverse the reversal at the time would have been worse than saying so AFTER the game was over. :thdn:
Gift to the Als??? ABSOLUTELY!!
Not exactly a banner week for CFL officiating.
The difference is that I saw London’s calf on the ground. It was not there 15 seconds before the fumble but it was there just before. To me there was evidance to overturn it. but the timing was close. But it was close enough that someone else sees it differently. That does not mean there is not enough evidance…If I was making the call I would have overturned it…but it was close enough that I can understand someone seeing it differently
To me there is no evidance when you cannot see the ball and the body part that touched the ground( and I remember a fumble being overturned when the ball was never visible) I saw the ball and the calf…There is enough evidence
The question is when did the ball come free? No picture showed that the ball was out before the knee went down at the very least the ball is contested by both players when the knee touched. The ball is moving but so is London's arm. To me it looks like he still has his arm under the ball while Abdhula is trying to strip the ball. the ball is moving but so is London's arm. Considering that it is impossible to make out with freeze frames how could the official claim a turnover at game speed ! In a contested situation the rules state that the team keeps possession of the ball.
What surprised me the most was that Campell was even allowed to challenge after the original review. If you challenge something that is not reviewable you get a delay of game penalty. You can’t challenge a turnover because it’s automatically reviewed anyway, but I don’t know if there’s a penalty for throwing the challenge flag in that situation. But if you can’t challenge the turnover, why should you be able to challenge the review of the turnover, when what you are ultimately challenging is the still the turnover itself?
That was a challenging sentence to type.
Anyway, I was shocked that he wasn’t given a delay of game penalty.
You are ignoring what the officials on the field may have seen live that was not visible in the replays. The league’s statement actually contains a very succinct explanation of the situation: “After reviewing the play, we believe that there wasn’t enough indisputable evidence to overturn the call on the field of a fumble?.
The call on the field was a Montreal fumble. Period. That call should not have been overturned unless the video showed indisputable evidence that the call on the field was incorrect. The long-standing precedent is that when the video does not provide indisputable evidence contrary to the ruling on the field, then the ruling on the field must stand.
There is no requirement for explicit video evidence that supports the ruling on the field. The burden of proof is on the replay to disprove the the ruling on the field.
Even if we discover new evidence tomorrow that proves that the ruling on the field had been incorrect, it wouldn’t change the fact that the ruling on the field was improperly overthrown at the time. The replay official should not have overthrown the ruling based on the evidence available to him at the time. Complaining about ambiguity of the video is a moot point. The league’s own rule is that ambiguity in the video means the ruling on the field must stand.
The second review might have been the most bush league thing i have ever seen.
Its a delay of game penalty, or the side judge that sees the flag throws it back and him and tells him to cut it out or hes getting an objectional conduct penalty.