Some Stampeders whining about officiating...

Anderson, Browner and Lewis call the waaaa-mbulance:

[url=] ... clip378536[/url]

Dwight Anderson isn't known for his maturity and class. He and Browner made a nice donation to the league with their comments. Their Secondary got away with murder in the regular season so it was good to see some calls go against them yesterday.

That wasn't my favourite officating crew doing the game. The taunting call on Bryant after his thirty six yard reception was bush league. Jake shouldn't need five minutes to review a play. Had the old two minute limit been in effect that play would have stood as called - fumble - and Riders don't score the go ahead touchdown.

I was glad to see Browner getting called for his obvious interference, its about time the league cracked down on his cheap style of play.


This officiating crew has had a rough season (assuming they stick together all season & playoffs). There were a couple of calls which were questionable but calgary needs to face the facts. They had an 11 point lead and Sask got themselves back in the game. in about 2.5 qtrs won't win you a CFL football game. Let's hope Sask gets it done against Montreal.

That’s what they get for wearing their black uniforms. (The Ticats might want to go back to the all gold uniform based on this study.)

But it was good to finally see Browner get flagged, at least a couple of times, for doing what he’s been getting away with all year.

If that's true then why didn't Wayne Gretzky get a penalty for high sticking Doug Gilmour?

Waadittywaa they have been getting away with it all year so it's hard for me to feel sorry for them now.

'Cause it was GWG? And maybe because it was Dougie.... :expressionless:

The Stamps DBs have been getting away with it all year. Too bad for them it caught up with them at the worst time. The only thing they should complain about is the fact that the refs were not consistent as during the year all the clutches and grabs and shielding wasn't being called. They would not have won in Hamilton if the DBs were called for some of the fouls they were making that day.

The Riders won this game because they scored a TD into the wind in the third quarter, and it helped that they had the wind in the fourth, which made it difficult for Calgary to come back. I'm a little shocked that the TSN panel didn't talk more about this. Why did the Riders storm back in the second quarter, because they had the wind.

I hope TiCats management noticed that the teams that won on Sunday both had very balanced attacks. You can't win with a one dimensional team this time of the year.


Because any call that goes against toronto (or non-call against toronto's opponent) is always correct. :cowboy: 8)


100% insightful and accurate.

The Argos also realized that yesterday ... oddly enough, none of their "dimensions" showed up.

Looks especially good on that "pantload" Belli.

As far as the Stamps DB's are concerned, they are right with one observation ... TSN certainly brought it to everyone's attention in their pre-game offering.

I disagree.

Bryant didn't celebrate his long reception where he was tackled. He ran at least 10 to 15 yards to get in front of the DB he just beat and then celebrated. If this isn't taunting I'm not sure what qualifies. And then Suitor says he thought it was a bad call. :roll:

And that right there is how you know it was a bad call. Suitor slurps the Riders like it's going out of style, so if the call benefited them and he still thought it was bad, it was bad.

It warranted a warning, but not a flag. Officials are not suppose to determine outcomes. They enforce the rules but the players are the ones who play the game. In a championship game, minus twenty, an arm flex is not worth the bother.

:thup: Blogskee Wee Wee

Not really worth starting a thread over this, but I thought it was funny enough to mention.

This article from last Saturday discusses Henry Burris' final, ill-fated playoff run as a Roughrider in 2004 before he defected (voluntarily) to the Stamps.

Burris can’t help but wonder what could have been if he had stayed with the group of Riders in 2004.

“In Saskatchewan, had we kept that team together, we would have a number of Grey Cups right now,? Burris said. “There were people in the front office who had different ideas. They made the decisions and guys like me had to move on to find a place where they would get a chance to play.

The Stampeders have been to one Grey Cup with Burris at the helm, while the Riders are about to play in their third in the past 4 years. I wonder if anyone in the Rider organization is regretting their decisions?

Even though he may drink at their well, I still think that Suitor was wrong. Here is a definition of taunting found on the Oxford English Dictionary website:

a remark made in order to anger, wound, or provoke someone.

[url=] ... 846550.002[/url]

While it can be argued that Bryant didn't make a remark (although without hearing the sounds on the field it is impossible to know for sure) he had the obvious intent to anger, wound or provoke someone.

While I tend to agree that officials are not supposed to determine outcomes, players are responsible for their behaviour and must expect to have illegal activities penalized.

I know not everyone may agree with my point of view, and I would be surprised in fact if they did, I still think I make a valid point. Is there anyone out there who does agree?

If that was taunting, where was the flag on Ricky Foley in EDSF when he mocked Arland Bruce? He did practically the same thing that Bryant did. This is the problem with the officiating in the CFL. There is no consistency across games. If one was taunting, so was the other. There are countless other instances that one could bring up, but if there was no flag on Foley there shouldn't have been a flag on Bryant.

Then by your definition there is ‘taunting’ on every play.

This is professional football, not Oprah’s couch.

If you want a sport where no one says a naughty word I suggest figure skating or checkers.