Will someone explain what happened?

During the Rider/Ticat game today, The Rider QB runs and at the end of the play may have or may not have fumbled. He is ruled down and the Riders are awared a first down. They attempt to get a play off but are penalized for a "time count" violation. The Ticats then throw a challenge flag for the QB run/fumble. Regardless of the outcome of the challenge (which stated the correct call was made on the field), the play clock had been whistled in, the Riders were assesed a penalty and the penalty was applied before Hamilton challenged. How can this be? I thought that you had to challenge before the next play. If Hamilton was said that they cahllenged before the next play, why were the Riders still penalized? Did the penalty happen or not? Is a penalty counted as a play? What if the penalty had been holding? Either way it was not the first paly after the fumble or it could not have been 1st & 15.
How can it be both ways?

it thought it was crap also , but they got a time count violation and were then able to challlenge as the play never happened, i don't agree with the call myself

My understanding is that the play can be challenged any time before the snap of the ball, not before the next play is called in. Because, by definition, a time count violation is not a snap of the ball, the opportunity to challenge is still open.

what about the 8 seconds run off the clock by the Sask timekeeper in the last 35 seconds thaT became 27? thats time for one play and another 5 to ten yards off the kick? even r black said" 3 seconds left, now their down to one second remaining" The clock actually ran once for 5 seconds then again for 1 second then the last two seconds?? Whats that?

Thats because the clock on your TV screen is not the official time.... Often they let it run for a few seconds to allow it to catch up to the official time.....

Black was prob looking at the time on his moniter, then looked at the official clock.....and you also have to concider.....its Black

I agree its strange but as the rule is written, they have untill the next snap of the ball and because of the time count, they did not snap it....

IMO a time count should be considered as the next play.....

However I noticed something along the same lines in the Mtl Tor game.......
Mtl recovered a fumble, the ref signaled Mtl's ball and TSN went to commercial.
When they came back, Toronto still had not challenged the play but did a few moments later.
That commercial break gave them extra time to review the film and allowed them to challenge. An injury would accomplish the same thing......

At least the official made the correct calls on the challenges tonight, with efficiency too.

A team may challenge before there is a legal snap. A time count violation in this case does not constitute a legal snap. The challenge was valid.

Yeah the Rider timekeepers are horrible. At the game yesterday and at the Stamps game they let the clock run. Now correct me if I am wrong the clock is supposed to stop after a touchdown and not go until the end of the extra point. Also on kickoffs they start the clock at the kick-off, not at the reception of the kick.

Are you basing this on the clock on TV or at the game?

The clock runs during the convert outside the three minute mark of the second and fourth periods. The clock starts when the kickoff is touched.

The head ref has final say over the game clock, not the timekeepers.

Miller also used a challenge after the 3-minute warning (which also isn't allowed, it has to come from upstairs)

The challenge you are talking about occurred in the last three minutes of the SECOND quarter. After the three minute warning in the FOURTH quarter the challenges come from upstairs.

No its during the last 3 minutes of each half that it comes from upstairs......Mind you the play has to start after the 3 minute warning.....if the play started before it can be challenged

No, the challenge only comes from upstairs in the 4th quarter, not the 2nd.

Okay. You are wrong. Maybe before criticizing the timekeepers, you should be certain of your facts/rules.

My bad you are correct