How do we decide which calls change the outcome of the game??? Why be selective about this??? How do we know if a bad call made earlier in the game isn't pivotal ???
Answering these questions will no doubt be influenced by bias as is so clearly demonstrated by this game once again. We got rider fans claiming once again that this happened Saturday .
They focus on two calls that supposedly were such calls , but ignore what happened earlier in the game. There is no mention of the stuff they got away with earlier. Lions get called for clipping on a return, Riders on two returns after this , spring their return man with a clip but get away with it . Kenton Keith gets sprung for a big run with a blatant jersey stretching hold by their o-lineman and get away with that also. Do Rider fans complain about the reffing there ??? Nope. They complain that one of their drives is snuffed out because their center moves the ball ahead.( blame your center for that one!!!) When BC has a drive killed by penalty did rider fans consider this as bad reffing ??? Nope , just doing their job there. But as soon as they get called, it becomes the worst reffing job they've ever seen and changed the outcome of a game even if the infraction was actually commited because they should just have ignored it this time.
The game is 60 minutes and what happens earlier is just as important and can be pivotal also. It's a load of hogwash that the game was badly officiated, it was about average , with some calls favouring both teams.
The riders aren't picked out by the refs for bad reffing , get over it. It happens to all teams, including the Lions , if some of the whiners weren't so biased they'd be able to see that.
excelent points
I agree too!!!! LOL
As a Rider fan I have every right to say "Give them hell"...the more ways that Sask can here about how crappy they are playing the better.
As for the subject matter, 'Jeremy' had it right, the article was not an official game summary.
On a different note, I can't wait until they bench Greene and start Crandell, the sad thing about it though, Crandall is not the answer either. Sask needs a QB that is championship material, a guy who would be willing to come and play in Regina...oh yeah, I forgot, they could of had Burris for a few extra thousand but let him go. The idea of officially telling Greene that he would not be the number one guy was too much for Barratt...well Barratt are you happy...in fact, keep giving the ball to Greene Barratt - it is important that you are happy with your freindship with Greene. After all, it doesn't matter what the fans want, or to admit what the rest of the country already knows...Greene is not the answer - Sask needs to bring in a proven starter. ...I digress
I have one word for you all…its called TURNOVER…turnovers can POSSIBLY change the outcome of some games…
.Like I said before, we will never know whether it would or not… and thats my point, as fate would have it BC continued there drive rather than losing the football & scored a touchdown, even if they made the right call and the Riders stalled it would have been at least 40 more secs off the clock and punting deep into BC territory…would there have been enough time for BC to get 2 majors? Did the so stated missed calls result in A a turnover or B a touchdown?
There are missed calls in every game…but its the ones that actually make an impact on the final outcome that everyone agrees has to be addressed.
Thats how you select which calls to belly ache or not (or the Coaches call for Instant Replay) and believe me EVERY team has had these type of calls made against them…solution? CFL needs to impliment Instant Replay.
Blaming officiating is soley not a reason for losing, but instant replay like in the NFL would help to remove any doubt.
I think we can all agree on that
I rather have bad reffing than,the instant replay.It slows down the game to much.Refs try to do their best.I don’t have any complaints about the refs.Then again,I’m not a rider fan!!!
I really don't get why so many of you say that instant replay would slow down the game.
Honestly. In the course of a football game, the game is often interrupted for the only reason that there's an ad on TV. There's nothing going on in the stadium while viewers get a freakin' "Ranch tooth" Wendy's ad for the 24th time. Doesn't ads slow down the game already? Yes. But we live with it because we know that no ads would mean no football on TV.
So if there were instant replays available, the TV networks could just roll the "Ranch tooth" Wendy's ad while the refs are checking back the play. We, as viewers, would not miss anything more than if the replay wasn't available. And the game wouldn't be any longer nor stopped more often, because game interruptions are already there.
And, anyways, I'd prefer to wait 30 seconds to have a call checked than to see my Als lose the ball on a fumble that wasn't one.
Hey Turd,
RANCH!!!LOL
It seems when I watch a NFL game,the instant replay takes to long.Then again,the Nfl is much slower.
It is more fun to let the plays go.There has been times when the refs have blown calls,and I just shake my head.Just leave the CFL the way it is.
Well maybe get the punting out of bounds a 30 yard penalty.
Ranch!
Yes 1 minute turns into 2 minutes turns into 5 minutes
Ranch
A lot of those NFL challenges last far too long. DO you actually think the TV broadcasters will go to commercial? Not
Ranch
They'll show the view from their 4 angles 20 times
Ranch
I agree with Saskargo. Let the refs do their thing...it all balances out in the wash, and don't make a 3 hour game take 4 hours.
Ranch