Reviews????

A major turning point in the game was Holmes’ fumble in scoring position. While I agree that it was a fumble, I question whether or not that ruling “down by contact” can be reviewed? I am almost positive that it can’t be because in theory if the ref blows a whistle to say the play is over the team that fumbled the ball will stop their attempt to retrieve the ball. Come on Ireland it is time for you to retire…you have been screwing up calls for years.

Our review system is modelled after the NFL's system. In the NFL, 'down by contact' is not challengable.

However, it seems that there may be a difference in how the CFL deals with it. It would be helpful if the CFL would publish its 2006 rulebook online..

If you read this link:

[url=http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=newser&func=display&nid=9337]http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=news ... y&nid=9337[/url]

you'll see that a very similar situation occurred during an Edmonton/Calgary game this season, with the same results -- a turnover being ruled upon review.

I don't know what to say about it other than I believe down by contact should not be challengable because the whistle is blown in that case. The referees should not be making decisions regarding what happens after the whistle because it will lead to some pretty controversial decisions.

I don't know what to say about it other than I believe down by contact should not be challengable because the whistle is blown in that case. The referees should not be making decisions regarding what happens after the whistle because it will lead to some pretty controversial decisions.
You are correct, the CFL is bush league and a joke... you CANNOT assume what happened after the official called the play down.

CFL Replays = A Complete Joke

The Ticats = The biggest joke!

Troll elsewhere, theres enough threads dedicated to this team being inept.

There used to be an instant replay FAQ on cfl.ca, but I couldn't find it when I looked today.

Agreed that the play shouldn't be challengeable. In the NFL it wouldn't be. If the CFL made it challengeable it's a mistake because the play is supposed to be dead as soon as down by contact is ruled.

Come on Ireland it is time for you to retire...you have been screwing up calls for years.
That may be true however I do know that the offical McColeman #54 has been screwing us since the 1983 Eastern Final. It was McColeman that did not call pass interference when Brock Ralph was interferred with at the Toronto goal line in the 3rd. quarter.

If the CFL is such a joke we really do not need you to post here anymore. Goodbye

You know how bad CFL officiating is, these guys are not full time employees...

We've seen replay booths without audio, unreviewable plays overturned, reviewable plays blown, not enough camera angles, a challenge allowed inside of 3 minutes... etc etc etc etc.

Try presenting an argument instead of a one liner because you are upset we lost our 11th game.

Thats not the discussion.

Reviews are not the problem people...the problem is we can't make big plays to gain us yards...we just make big plays to turn the ball over...this is the first year of the replays and it has been good sometimes and has been bad other times...come on, im sure they CFL guys will take a look at everything after this year and make changes...

The way refs rationalized it was the ball was in Argo possession before the ref blew the whistle. Despite the fact the ref had ruled the player down by contact. Darren Flutie appeared to be in agreement.
Brutal that a slow whistle can determine whether a play is reviewable.

Apparently the play is reviewable according to CHMl and George Black. The NFL has changed their rule for the upcomeing season so that this play will be reviewable.

This is true.. with the turnovers, we pretty much sealed our own fate. I'm not trying to blame our loss solely on the challenge, it's just frustrating when the guys played well enough to win and you can pinpoint one thing.. one challenge, or one bad call or something.. that would've made the difference.

That's what it is.. frustrating. At least for this die-hard Cat fan.

Yeah, I heard that.
Doesn't make sense though.
What happens if the whistle blows after the fumble but before the recovery?

Source? I'm interested to see the reasoning behind the change

I think that was an OK review.

But on the other hand we got the screw.

Holding our D line with their sweater right up and in front of the Zebra.

Anyways.......

I agree with Crash the discussion was about reviews in general. Thinkdontpray and touchdowncats you may be correct in saying "that the cats need to make plays" and that it sounds like a "whine fest" but the fact is when it is the Grey Cup and and a team fumbles a ball on a last minute drive and ten of their guys have a chance to pick it up but don't because they hear a whistle..and the opposing team picks up the ball and a challenge is issued and are rewarded the ball..the CFL will have a major controversy. People are taught to play between the whistles..and this rule is going to change that theory as guys will be forced to dive on balls even though a whistle was blown. Not only could this create a controversy, but injuries as well.

Thank you Kerrigan, When i called the 5th Quarter... George Black said

"Well the NFL did it so it would look bad if we didnt get that rule in too"

Well... Look for the fair catch next season

yes and that is why I said that there may be some changes in the offseason, but in no way did the review affect the out come of this game...yes we lost the ball and lost but it was clearly a fumble and the officals made the right call after the review...