The Consolidated Bitchfest Thread

[Mr Dee]

Seriously, the season was doomed when the powers that be elected to use the ratio in a manner that weakened our defence beyond what was rational. Of course, I’m talking about filling the most important D position, MLB, with Sam Hurl, as an every play  player to satisfy the ratio needs.

There were many moans and ??? marks when they “settled” on this decision. But we hoped it could work. It didn’t. In a big way. That decision had a domino effect,  not a dominant effect. 

We have to do better with our ratio, and we have to end the Hurl experiment. 

Get a real MLB. It’ll solve a lot of our issues...

[17to85]

25 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

Seriously, the season was doomed when the powers that be elected to use the ratio in a manner that weakened our defence beyond what was rational. Of course, I’m talking about filling the most important D position, MLB, with Sam Hurl, as an every play  player to satisfy the ratio needs.

You know what? They didn't go into the year thinking Hurl was the MLB if you ask me. To me they were planning on using Thomas/Ekakitie but Johnson showed so much they had to get him into the lineup and none of the american linebackers really did much to grab that mlb spot so they felt the defense was better served with Johnson and Hurl rather than Thomas and american mlb. 

 

So who do we blame for Hurl starting? Poop that's who.

[Mr Dee]

34 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

You know what? They didn't go into the year thinking Hurl was the MLB if you ask me. To me they were planning on using Thomas/Ekakitie but Johnson showed so much they had to get him into the lineup and none of the american linebackers really did much to grab that mlb spot so they felt the defense was better served with Johnson and Hurl rather than Thomas and american mlb. 

 

So who do we blame for Hurl starting? Poop that's who.

I don’t disagree with what you’re saying. It was a side trip they decided to embark on. Doesn’t matter. It was still a flawed decision. It was still early enough bring in other candidates, and flow with a NI dB. Other teams have done this with NIs, and although it weakened them in some capacity, it isn’t the same as weakening the core with an inferior MLB. 

For me, that’s the #1 recruit/signing this year. All else will flow from there.

[JCon]

2 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

CFL officiating is a pile of steaming turds pretty much every game; neither semi-final was an exception. And it doesn't seem to be getting better. It's a damned shame the league continues to turn a seemingly blind eye at it. A focus on improving officiating should be a top priority going forward.

Agreed.

The CFL made a change to the challenge system in-year, IMO, to mask the problem of poor reffing and not necessarily to improve the game.

 

[Goalie]

Fixing the reffing should be a priority moving forward but i think figuring out the issues in Toronto BC and Montreal need to be top priority. 

[rebusrankin]

A team of blind monkeys could ref a better game than most of the current refs.

[Jacquie]

13 hours ago, Booch said:

this is true generally if the guy hops right back, but we have seen it called before too when ball isn't snapped, and it happened to Wpg in that fashion in the same game.

Lost in it all tho was the fact the D-lineman was in the neutral zone...then stood there at first and made no apparent attempt to get back originally and hence why it should have been called..Probably why Gossen never snapped it cause the guys was just standing in there...Blown call if you ask me

I wouldn't be surprised if on most of the plays where the ball wasn't snapped, someone on the o-line moved because of D player jumped.

The rule book says:

Quote

 

If a Team B player goes offside and contacts an opponent or breaks the plane of the line of scrimmage before the ball is snapped, the officials shall stop the play immediately and award the penalty, subject to the right of Team A to decline the yardage penalty and order the same down to be repeated as though a foul had not occurred. If the Team B player is within one yard of the line of scrimmage when the ball is snapped, the play shall continue, subject to the penalty against Team B.

If a Team B player enters the neutral zone within one yard of the line of scrimmage causing a Team A player in the immediate proximity to move before the ball is snapped, Team B shall be subject to a penalty for offside.

 

On that play the Eskimo did not cross the LOS or make contact with a Bomber player. As well, none of the Bombers' oline moved - they all stayed in their stance. The rule doesn't give a time limit on how long a player can be in the neutral zone. It was a weird play but I don't see how the officials could have called it any other way.

Edited November 16, 2017 by Jacquie

[Sard]

21 minutes ago, Jacquie said:

I wouldn't be surprised if on most of the plays where the ball wasn't snapped, someone on the o-line moved because of D player jumped.

The rule book says:

On that play the Eskimo did not cross the LOS or make contact with a Bomber player. As well, none of the Bombers' oline moved - they all stayed in their stance. The rule doesn't give a time limit on how long a player can be in the neutral zone. It was a weird play but I don't see how the officials could have called it any other way.

The part I really don't understand is why they blow the play dead sometimes and at other times they allow the offence to have a free play.  It seems to be extremely random.

Earlier in the game, one of the Bombers jumped offside (and didn't touch the OL), and the play was called dead right away.  Though the ball ended up being snapped, the flags flew and whistles blew before it was snapped, which I think is why the Bombers (and fans in the stands) were so upset that there was no flag in the 3rd quarter.

[Jacquie]

Just now, Sard said:

The part I really don't understand is why they blow the play dead sometimes and at other times they allow the offence to have a free play.  It seems to be extremely random.

Earlier in the game, one of the Bombers jumped offside (and didn't touch the OL), and the play was called dead right away.  Though the ball ended up being snapped, the flags flew and whistles blew before it was snapped, which I think is why the Bombers (and fans in the stands) were so upset that there was no flag in the 3rd quarter.

The rule book says that if the defensive player makes contact with an offensive player or crosses the LOS then the play is blown down immediately. If the defensive player is in the neutral zone then the play continues.

[Booch]

8 hours ago, Jacquie said:

The rule book says that if the defensive player makes contact with an offensive player or crosses the LOS then the play is blown down immediately. If the defensive player is in the neutral zone then the play continues.

Yeah we know and no disputing what the rules "say"  but the fact is that it is, it is not always adhered to that way and an example was in the same game itself.

As a former player I can tell you first time multiple times it's called dead regardless of contact and or a snap, and multiple times it is not. The fact tho that the guy just stood in the neutral zone and accepted the fact that he was caught and going to be penalized just makes it more bizarre and should have been whistled in my opinion. 

[TBURGESS]

I think the Refs should follow the rule book and never call it, unless contact is made or the ball is snapped. The mistakes are the ones where the Refs call it early.

[Sard]

1 hour ago, Booch said:

Yeah we know and no disputing what the rules "say"  but the fact is that it is, it is not always adhered to that way and an example was in the same game itself.

As a former player I can tell you first time multiple times it's called dead regardless of contact and or a snap, and multiple times it is not. The fact tho that the guy just stood in the neutral zone and accepted the fact that he was caught and going to be penalized just makes it more bizarre and should have been whistled in my opinion. 

 

17 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

I think the Refs should follow the rule book and never call it, unless contact is made or the ball is snapped. The mistakes are the ones where the Refs call it early.

To both of these points, I agree, and at the end of the day all I'm looking for is consistency... especially within the same game.  If they are going to call it dead (counter to what the rules say), I'm fine with that as long as they do it every time.

[Fatty Liver]

1 hour ago, Booch said:

Yeah we know and no disputing what the rules "say"  but the fact is that it is, it is not always adhered to that way and an example was in the same game itself.

As a former player I can tell you first time multiple times it's called dead regardless of contact and or a snap, and multiple times it is not. The fact tho that the guy just stood in the neutral zone and accepted the fact that he was caught and going to be penalized just makes it more bizarre and should have been whistled in my opinion. 

Question is why did Goosen not snap the ball, was it because Nichols left his post and was off pursuing the ref?

[Noeller]

12 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Question is why did Goosen not snap the ball, was it because Nichols left his post and was off pursuing the ref?

...this...because as much as we want to ***** at the refs, it's on Goosen for not snapping it. Even if he snaps it and it's a fumble, it woulda been whistled down for the offsides...

[bearpants]

On 11/15/2017 at 11:39 AM, 17to85 said:

You know what? They didn't go into the year thinking Hurl was the MLB if you ask me. To me they were planning on using Thomas/Ekakitie but Johnson showed so much they had to get him into the lineup and none of the american linebackers really did much to grab that mlb spot so they felt the defense was better served with Johnson and Hurl rather than Thomas and american mlb. 

 

So who do we blame for Hurl starting? Poop that's who.

Funny I actually said this at the beginning of the season... I suggested that the coaches felt the "sum of parts" was better with Nevis, Poop, and Hurl starting... rather than Thomas, Nevis and Import MLB... 

[bearpants]

3 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

I think the Refs should follow the rule book and never call it, unless contact is made or the ball is snapped. The mistakes are the ones where the Refs call it early.

I don't think anyone disagrees with this... problem is consistency... we saw that penalty called earlier in the game (I can't remember the play but I remember saying to my friend I'm surprised they didn't give them a free play)... at that point the precedent is set... so it needs to be called that way going forward...

[BigBlue]

On 2017-11-13 at 6:41 PM, SpeedFlex27 said:

 

What did the Bombers do? Stood pat. Really didn't bring in a lot of players especially at receiver & defensive back to challenge the guys we had. We decided to go with "the guys that brung us here", so to speak & management never really challenged the roster to get better. Which really hurt us when the injuries started. Was that a mistake? I'd have liked us to have been more aggressive but do we have the scouting staff with the connections John Murphy has? At times I wonder. I think you sign players, evaluate & add them as needed if they are better than the players we already have. That's what I think. We were very passive with personnel issues. It cost us yesterday.

So here we are a year later and what has changed .... does our team just need aging like a bottle of wine ... or are we going way beyond standing pat .... I am seeing a couple of defensive changes ... MLB and DE (sort of) and upgrading two or three positions at DB/REC ... lost two key pieces in Bond & Westerman, got one back in Bowman

So what will take us over the top?

1) Scouting,

2) Coaching,

3) Maturing,

4) Luck

5) Something else

[Tracker]

I am hoping that Bowman will still have most of his mojo, but will wait and see. The defence under Hall is still a big question mark for me as is MLB.

[voodoochylde]

Last post in this thread was 6 months ago before today?  I’d say it’s stale. 

/end