Simultaneous possession

I dealt with that.
It is my biggest beef with the call.
According to the rule, if “possession is simultaneous” the ball shall be rekicked.
They ruled it simultaneous and gave the ball to the Bombers.
It should have been a re-kick–at the very least.
Jake Ireland has never read a rulebook in his long (unfortunately) career.

Well that is simply neither what happened, nor was it the ruling by the so-called ref.
The ruling was, “simultaneous first touch”.
And as both players were well within the field of play, nobody, not even Jake the Snake could have missed that fact.
And if I can read lips correctly, the reaction of Kornegay on the sidelines, when the ref made his call was, “that’s funny”…

If the Riders had been within 8 points, I’d actually be pissed off.
As it is, I am just sad…

schooner11
No they didnt rule the touch was out of bounds. they ruled it was touched and then went out of bounds

I have to admit not recalling the explanation provided by the ref after the replay review. But this is how the play was listed on the Purolator live play by play summary
"J. BOREHAM Kickoff (13 yds)
simulataneous touch - no possession on play - ruled kick out of bounds"

here ya go

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c335/ro1313/th_anounce.jpg

I cannot watch this again tonight, or I’ll need a new monitor…and picture window…

Stupid **778&7&878&88&&&&778 refs!!!

Thanks Ro. Quick on the draw with that one. Based on his explanation, you are obviously correct.
Thanks.

I called it while I was sitting down watching the game, something along the lines of “Somehow the Bombers are going to end up with the ball here too”.

In the grand scheme of things it’s rather insignificant because at that point the game was most likely out of reach barring a miracle, but I hate when officials just make up rules.

It looks like it hit Stegals head after he touched it, it the riders helmet went of there and hit Stegals helmet. But to tell you the truth this was the right call at this time of the game.

It wasn’t the right call because he made it up. He probably got the Simultaneous catch part right, even then there’s hardly conclusive evidence to support it. With the way he ruled it, the Riders should have kicked off again, not given the ball directly to the Bombers.

Ok Dust what happens when a receiver and a DB catch the ball and both have a firm grip to it. Who gets the ball?

This was different because nobody caught it or had a firm grip on it, it was ruled they both touched it and it landed out of bounds. Ro1313 quoted the rule, and it stated when this happens on a kickoff it is to be kicked again, but Jake Ireland made up a new rule altogether, and awarded the ball to Winnipeg.

During an offensive play?
The ball, if caught simultaneously by a receiver and a DB, goes to the receiver.
Different rule, different situation.

This is the rule in play:

(e) If the kicked ball is simultaneously recovered by players of both teams or is simultaneously touched by players of both teams before going Out of Bounds, the kickoff shall be repeated.

The refs screwed up...It was a great attempt by the Riders. Looked like a perfect rugby play. Awesome!

I agree that the ref blew the call by saying it was the Pegs ball based on the simultaneous catch.

But actually, they blew the call earlier, take a look as the Rider player runs down to the ball, he actually stepped out of bounds befor he even got to the ball, so he was ineligible!

So in the end, the Bombers should have gotten the ball, but not based on how the refs ruled.

I just watched ro1313 original clip he posted and I can’t see Kornegay clearly step out of bounds, he was definately real close though.

In the game between the Winnipeg Blue Bombers and the Saskatchewan Roughriders played on Sunday, September 9, the referee conducted an instant replay review of a fourth quarter kickoff by Saskatchewan. It was ruled that the ball was knocked out of bounds simultaneously by players from Winnipeg and Saskatchewan and the ball was subsequently awarded to Winnipeg as the receiving team. It has been determined that the applicable rule was incorrectly applied and that this play should have resulted in a re-kick by Saskatchewan.
'Nuff said.

Where is this rule? :lol: :lol:

In the rulebook?

http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=page&id=7

They’ve apologized for the Nowacki “no-catch” as well.

In the game between the Edmonton Eskimos and Calgary Stampeders played on Friday, September 7, the on-field officials ruled that a second quarter pass made to Edmonton receiver Andrew Nowacki was a completion. Upon instant replay review by Calgary, this decision was overturned by the referee. It has been determined that this play should have been upheld and ruled as a completed pass.
[url=http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=newser&func=display&topicnum=&nid=19608&writer=0]http://www.cfl.ca/index.php?module=news ... 8&writer=0[/url]