Bakari Grant made a highlight reel catch for a TD that was called back because of a Chris Williams offside call(his 3rd of the game). Receivers are offside on almost every down. Why do the refs let it go so often? If they called it consistently, then maybe players would be more careful.
don't question the refs. apparently they are omnipotent and all-knowing and never wrong. :roll:
You could also be accused of whining!:roll:
It's called the Elgaard Rule.
by then it was obviously too late. I agree that these offside penalties by the receivers who take a running start before the ball is snapped, is called differently in each game. I have noticed for the last couple of years that Regina is almost constantly offside on every passing down, by their receivers, and it is hardly ever called !!! I guess it just depends on who the ref is, and which team is the offending party !! <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
Tip, how dare you insinuate a lack of consistency on the part of the refs? Sheesh don't have a mind of your own. Be a sheep and believe that all calls are fair and any missed ones could NEVER be to blame for a loss or a win. :roll:
I believe the officials allow receivers to enter the neutral zone during their "waggle". If they go past the neutral zone before the ball is snapped, an offside is supposed to be called. Don't ask why this exception is made to what is essentially a "black and white" rule like offside - that's just the way it is. Only in the CFL...
I've used my PVR at 1/15th speed to go back and check several plays over the last couple of years that looked like the receiver was obviously offside, and in almost 100% of the cases they were not.
The reason they look offside is that by the time your eyes notice the snap of the ball, especially on a shotgun snap, which is almost every snap in today's football, the receivers are over the line of scrimmage. But at the instant that the centre actually started the snap motion, the receiver was still onside, if just barely.
There's a split second in there where the receiver can get a yard or two over the line that makes them look offside, but they're not. With the line judge/head linesman looking straight down the line of scrimmage at the ball, they can see whether the receiver passes by them before the ball moves better than we can, and are right a lot more than it looks like.
Finally someone who realizes it! :thup:
This is true on almost every play! And the ref can clearly see the ball, and if the receiver jumps in front of him without him seeing the ball start to move, its a flag, but most of the time the ball has started to move at the exact time the player is crossing the line.
And some people just don't realize that even though at times it doesn't look like it, the offences actually do practice their timing. That's why they're able to cut it so close to make it look offside when it isn't.
Exactly. There are two officials, one on each side of the field, watching for offsides. And that's their only job at that point of the play. I'm guessing that they stare at the ball, watching for it to move backwards, and use their peripheral vision to watch for players crossing the line between them and the ball. Maybe not - they may have a better way, but I think that method would be quite effective.
And I just did the frame-by-frame on the Williams offside, and it's hard to tell as his feet are out of frame at the snap. But from what I could see, it's likely he was offside. And having done the frame-by-frame many times before, I always trust the officials on this call.
On the Chip Cox interception, the Als' left end was clearly offside but there was no flag on the play. That play cost us 3 points and we lost by 2 points. Now, I'm no mathematician but ....... .
Pat Lynch (the old guy who still remembers Paul Dojack) :x
While watching at full speed, it looks like the DE is offside, when I watched that play frame-by frame, he actually isn't. He lunged forward before the snap, but never touched his hand to the ground. He then pulled back, and lunged again just before first movement of the ball. While his helmet and hands are in the neutral zone at that point - which is allowed, from what I can gather from the rule book - his feet are still onside.
As I have said before, Offside is the one call that I don't usually question the officials on anymore.
Thanks for clearing things up. It sure looks like constant offside, but I’ve never slowed playback to 1/15th speed.
I just wonder, is it worth the risk of being offside, just to gain an extra 1/15th of a second? Many might say yes, but I don’t think so.
I don't think this is true.
I can't find anything in the rule book that differentiates feet vs. hands and/or helmet as far as being lined up offside. And I'm almost positive I've seen players called offside for having their helmet in the neutral zone.
It does stat that "Team A" (offence) players can have their heads, arms and hands across the line of scrimmage, which seems really odd. But it doesn't say anything similar about "Team B" (defence). As it doesn't specify anything for the defence, I assumed that the same rule would apply to them. I could very easily be wrong.
Actually it states that only for the centre:
Team A players must be completely behind the line of scrimmage, except that the
head, arms and hands of the centre may be in advance of the line of scrimmage.
How did I miss that? D'oh!
I'm convinced. He was offside.
I know in High School a team mate of mine was called offside for his helmet being offside, I am not sure if that was a correct call or not, but it happened in High school a lot to our team for some reason.
The more I see and hear of this Montreal game the more deep anger sets in.The negated Grant touchdown,Williams touchdown and the 2 point conversion screen interferance adds up to 16 points we lost and most of it to random
officiating.I hope this is the last of this tripe I see because year in and year out our team like a few others gets shafted by
by bad officiating.Bring in video replay A.S.P and get some officials that have the guts to make calls,stop being a crowd pleaser and call a fair game because if we want to see fake sports where we already know the outcome we can watch wrestling or something similar instead.