...don't know if it was used in the Argo/TiCat tilt but near the end of the Montreal Calgary game they went to it to determine if Hank coughed the ball up or not on an errant pass play...seemed to work quite fine, not the call of course :lol: , but the whole procedure seemed to take WAY less time than the old ref-at-the-covered-video-game thing we had before... :thup: so far on this procedure...
It was also used the in the Toronto/Hamilton game and I couldn't agree more, the new process is quite a bit faster. It's almost like the war room as made a decision before the umpire even makes it over to the phone. Nice to see!
There was one review in the Ti-Cats / Argos game that I remember. Hamilton challenged a catch and it was ruled incomplete ( overturned the ruling on the field ). It was also a really quick, easy call.
I'm surprised that Montreal didn't challenge the spot on the 3rd and 1 ( for I believe the first Stamp 1st down ). That would have been a more difficult call to make.
Overall, it helped to speed things up and resulted in the right calls being made.
Yes, preliminary indication is much better than the old way of doing it.
It was used during both games and it was real fast.
Another good improvement for the league.
I notice that the CFL still schedules 3 hours between double-headers. I thought they (CFL and TSN, of course) should have separated them by an extra half hour and use the time in between first for overruns of the first game (which happened almost every game last year) and, second, for a little pre-game talk for the 2nd game - I think RO had this same thought last year. However, if they can keep games to 3 hours, then that would be fine as I understand that airtime is valuable.
I know that the first game ran over the three hours (not by much, but the first possession, IIRC, was missed). For the second game, I didn’t take note myself but did anyone notice if it finished within the 3 hours alotted to it?
Awesome application of technology. They showed the booth "command central" where Tom Higgin's reviews the plays in HD frame by frame. This is a significant improvement to the under the hood deal we had last year. Much quicker and should be a heck of a lot more accurate.
If I remember correctly (I did have a few beers), it finished around 1:15 am.
This was definitely a good move. I'm not sure how accurate this is, but I was surprised when the announcers said the quality of the video booths the officials used last season depended on the stadium. I always just assumed the quality was the same no matter what. So this is definitely a great improvement.
No bought adoubt, MUCH faster. I was really surprised how fast the calls came in. I can't imagine how it couldn't be more accurate given high def and multiple angles, etc..
Certainly surprised me how quickly the calls were reversed/upheld. Great implementation by the CFL.
it seems to me that they refs in TO are going over each play as it finishes just in case someone challenges, that way they have the answer right away if its needed.
Amazing that even with the replay, Jake Ireland could screw up the call. On the Morris Mann touchdown which should have been, had he said the play was dead because the whistle had blown, there would be no arguement. Instead he says that Mann was downed by contact when the replays clearly showed he still hasn’t been touched.
The whistle blew. The right call was made on the challenge.
The refs blew it twice on that play, but it wasn't on the result of the challenge. The early whistle (it was pretty obvious he wasn't touched) was a bad one, and the fact that they let the Eskimos challenge that play.
Down by contact? Not a chance.
Referee blew the whistle too soon? Yep.
I didn't think it sped things up at all in the game tonight though. Especially on the Edwards catch-fumble-turnover play. They took a VERY long time to review it. Granted, it was not an easy call to make...but it still took a long, long time.
I like the idea of a central video review panel, but I don't know if they are bound by the same rules that the referees were in the past. Do they still have an allotted amount of time within which to make their decision, or do they have an unlimited amount of time?
They really have to stop letting the coaches challenge plays that are blown dead. If the whistle blows -- the play is dead. Anything that happens after is not challengable.
I think from a time spent perspective, the new system is far better. Now that they got that fixed, it seems they should concentrate on getting the correct ruling made - they seem to get it wrong far more often than they get it right.
That's funny, it seems the exact opposite to me.
The aspect that was being challenged was complete/incomplete which is fine.
I do not think he was touched either, but a touchdown cannot be awarded because the play was ended by the whistle.
I do think that the new format is great........about time they moved forward in the reffing area....
No it was not, the call and result of the challenge was that Mann was downed on contact, which was the wrong call. It may be splitting hairs but the correct call would have been that he was not downed by contact but the whistle was blown in error.
Bottom line is that it was a blown call but there should not have been a challenge because the whistle had blown, making it moot.