During the Rider/Lions game, near the end Jamie Boreham punted and BC took a roughing the kicker penalty, when the punt was recieved Sask took a no yards penalty. Then Sask was forced to re-do 3rd down. Shouldnt the roughing the kicker penalty be an automatic first down and negate the no yards penalty??? Could someone clear this up for me...
Wasn't it a contacting the kicker penalty? If it was, then I don't believe it's an automatic first down.....
Yes contacting the kicker is 10 yards and not an automatic first down whereas roughing the kicker is 15 yards and an automatic first down.
And if there is no yards called on the kicking team following this, both penalties are applied and sort of cancel each other out and the down is replayed. This is why Saskatchewan did not get a first down.
I dont mean to nit-pick here, It was a 10 yard contacting the kicker and a 5 yard no-yards so they replayed the down 5 yards up in SSK’s favor. Had it been 3rd and 5 or less, it would have been a first down.
It amazing some of the calls the referees have been making this year. Have they all collectively forgotten the rules? Expect the unexpected on any call by refs this year.
This was applied correctly. Most fans, me included do not know all the rules.
Yeah, our refs sometimes seem to not know what the hell their doing. Like the pass interferance they called on the riders, or when they first ruled the ball that Johnson "caught" a pick when it wasn't. Or when they didn't call pass interference on my riders in the red zone thank god. Or the roughing the kicker, which I thought should have been roughing and not contact. But hey it's the CFL. I'll live with it.
"Judgement" is not all the same by officials, fans, coaches, players, and commentators etc. Replay got the Johnson "incomplete" right. Biases get in the way of judgement.
thanks for clearin this up for me guys