Time For The CFL To Levy Fines On The Refs For Tacky Calls

[Goalie]

There were 3 bad calls that I saw that could have made this game at least possibly winnable.

1) The skipped ball that was caught by Hamilton.  It's not the fact that they didn't have TSN feed, it's the fact that you're all watching the ball yet none of you saw it hit the field first.

2) The caught ball that was fumbled which could have been run back for a touchdown.

3) The roughing the kicker called where he barely touched the kicker yet he fell down as if he was tackled by a 300 pound DL.  Not only that, but he was bumped into him.

 

Yup. Not sure how they missed that. All were watching, totally flubbed it up again. Incompetence? has to be. I refuse to believe they do it on purpose but man at times it seems like it. 

[USABomberfan]

Incompetence, laziness, bias, all 3?  Take your pick.

 

Bottom line, lazy officiating is getting tolerated in this league and robbing fans of money.

 

Fire Glen Johnson!!!!! He is an overpaid bum who is doing nothing to fix this.

[Jpan85]

I don't if anyone else saw this but as the players were coming back on to the field after half time Murphy and Austin got in to it pretty good. One of the officials had to pull Murphy away from Austin.

[rebusrankin]

On the "non-fumble", I watched the TSN feed when I got home. He catches the ball, takes a step and is taking step 2 when he fumbles. How is that not a catch and fumble?

[Jacquie]

There were 3 bad calls that I saw that could have made this game at least possibly winnable.

1) The skipped ball that was caught by Hamilton.  It's not the fact that they didn't have TSN feed, it's the fact that you're all watching the ball yet none of you saw it hit the field first.

2) The caught ball that was fumbled which could have been run back for a touchdown.

1) How did that play affect the outcome of the game?

2) I bet if it had been a Bomber receiver, people would be saying it was the correct call. Even Irving and Currier thought the correct call was made.

[RagingIce]

 

2) I bet if it had been a Bomber receiver, people would be saying it was the correct call. Even Irving and Currier thought the correct call was made.

 

I believe the standard is that the receiver has control of the ball (i.e. there's no fixed number of steps). The ball didn't even wobble once he caught it. That should have been ruled a fumble IMO.

[USABomberfan]

Jacquie, on 28 Sept 2014 - 12:31 AM, said:

 

Logan007, on 27 Sept 2014 - 11:46 PM, said:

There were 3 bad calls that I saw that could have made this game at least possibly winnable.

1) The skipped ball that was caught by Hamilton.  It's not the fact that they didn't have TSN feed, it's the fact that you're all watching the ball yet none of you saw it hit the field first.

2) The caught ball that was fumbled which could have been run back for a touchdown.

1) How did that play affect the outcome of the game?

2) I bet if it had been a Bomber receiver, people would be saying it was the correct call. Even Irving and Currier thought the correct call was made.

 

 

And I'm quite sure that call that was made against TJ Harris 3 years ago when we lost that game to Calgary was the exact same thing.  Bang bang play, and it has been called against us all the time.

 

Fumble hands down, and Greg Peach got robbed of his touchdown.

[SPuDS]

Jacquie, on 28 Sept 2014 - 12:31 AM, said:

Logan007, on 27 Sept 2014 - 11:46 PM, said:

There were 3 bad calls that I saw that could have made this game at least possibly winnable.

1) The skipped ball that was caught by Hamilton. It's not the fact that they didn't have TSN feed, it's the fact that you're all watching the ball yet none of you saw it hit the field first.

2) The caught ball that was fumbled which could have been run back for a touchdown.

1) How did that play affect the outcome of the game?

2) I bet if it had been a Bomber receiver, people would be saying it was the correct call. Even Irving and Currier thought the correct call was made.

And I'm quite sure that call that was made against TJ Harris 3 years ago when we lost that game to Calgary was the exact same thing. Bang bang play, and it has been called against us all the time.

Fumble hands down, and Greg Peach got robbed of his touchdown.

I agree.. He took a full step, ball was secured and then second step sherman lit his man up and seperated receiver and ball.. How they reviewed that call and STILL got it wrong (all too commom occurance already) blows my mind..

[JuranBoldenRules]

Ellingson had the ball and pivoted to turn upfield, survived initial contact and then fumbled.  There's no way that's an incomplete pass.  Blown call on the field cost us 7 points, blown call on review cost us 3.

[SmokinBlue]

Yup, just pathetic that nobody had the balls to overturn that on the review.

[SmokinBlue]

 

 

2) I bet if it had been a Bomber receiver, people would be saying it was the correct call. Even Irving and Currier thought the correct call was made.

 

I believe the standard is that the receiver has control of the ball (i.e. there's no fixed number of steps). The ball didn't even wobble once he caught it. That should have been ruled a fumble IMO.

 

Yup, he clearly had full control and surived intial contact then turned up field and would of kept runnign if not for contact by the Bomber. The fact that they don't even know their own rules is incredible.

[Goalie]

Ellingson had the ball and pivoted to turn upfield, survived initial contact and then fumbled.  There's no way that's an incomplete pass.  Blown call on the field cost us 7 points, blown call on review cost us 3.

Jesus christ eh, in a way they did cost us the game then... if everything else is the same, and lets say we even kick a fg on that drive instead of Peach going in untouched for the TD, 16-14... last play we don't need a TD, we kick the easy FG to win 17-16. That sucks. 

[SmokinBlue]

They've cost us more than this1 game so far this year.

[Jacquie]

If they lose the feed and can't review that play, there should be no reviews for the rest of the game for starters. It's more bush league to play part of a game under one set of rules and the rest under another set than it is to not have review at all.

And if they had done that everyone would be bitching about O'Shea not being able to challenge the play where it was ruled on the field that Grigsby had fumbled which was overturned upon review.

[Captain Blue]

We got ripped off by the refs tonight. They are always awful and I think despite that I'm mad at them my biggest issue is how awful it makes the league look. This is our entertainment. This is what we give fans. You just feel ripped off because the refs blew a few calls and honestly, every team in the league has had a right to feel that way at some point this season too. THAT'S the big issue. It hurts the product on the field.

[captaincanuck12]

I'll chime in here. There was one situation a few years ago in the NFL game. I was watching a Chargers Broncos game in Denver. Rivers had thrown an "interception" . TV replays showed the ball hit the turf. San Diego challenged the play however the replay system wasn't working. As per NFL rules the ref Waited the allotted 2 mins and since the system still wasn't working Denver retained possession of the ball.

Yes it happens in the NFL too. Its annoying but it is part of the game.

I'm pissed that it happened. I'm pissed that the officiating is a joke. But WHY THE HELL CANT OUR OFFENCE SCORE SOME BLOODY TOUCHDOWNS!!!!! that burns my @$$ more than anything. Theses losses would be Wins if we could start putting majors on the board!

[Logan007]

 

There were 3 bad calls that I saw that could have made this game at least possibly winnable.

1) The skipped ball that was caught by Hamilton.  It's not the fact that they didn't have TSN feed, it's the fact that you're all watching the ball yet none of you saw it hit the field first.

2) The caught ball that was fumbled which could have been run back for a touchdown.

1) How did that play affect the outcome of the game?

2) I bet if it had been a Bomber receiver, people would be saying it was the correct call. Even Irving and Currier thought the correct call was made.

 

Because it gave them a first down when they should have kicked it away.  It kept their drive alive when it could have been our chance for another crack at some points before the half.  Then on our TD, we may not have needed to go for the 2 points, and instead of having to make the TD on the last drive we could have just went for 3.  It's all speculation on my part, but any of those 3 bad calls could have turned things around for us.

 

I didn't even mention the bad clock management that froze our offense right as we were skipping along on that last drive.

[robynjt]

I'll chime in here. There was one situation a few years ago in the NFL game. I was watching a Chargers Broncos game in Denver. Rivers had thrown an "interception" . TV replays showed the ball hit the turf. San Diego challenged the play however the replay system wasn't working. As per NFL rules the ref Waited the allotted 2 mins and since the system still wasn't working Denver retained possession of the ball.

Yes it happens in the NFL too. Its annoying but it is part of the game.

I'm pissed that it happened. I'm pissed that the officiating is a joke. But WHY THE HELL CANT OUR OFFENCE SCORE SOME BLOODY TOUCHDOWNS!!!!! that burns my @$$ more than anything. Theses losses would be Wins if we could start putting majors on the board!

This. Willy throwing it out the back of the end zone twice with three yards to go really grinds my gears.

[Tracker]

It may be just a coincidence, but Tom Higgins was director of CFL officiating last year, and while it was far from perfect, it was a heck of a lot better than it is this year. Maybe, if Higgins gets canned from Montreal , we could petition the CFL to take him back.

[DR. CFL]

People need to remember those of us that are critical of the contacting the kicker call have had the advantage of repeated slow motion views of the call. The official had to make the judgement of the play in "real time" with no review.

[17to85]

What I see from the refs and the review process is that they are playing it "safe" in their calls. They are not having the conviction to make calls on the field that can be reviewed trusting the review process to get it right for them. Which is bunk because the review doesn't always have good angles. It's like they're reffing afraid of making a mistake, which leads to a lot of mistakes. 

[JuranBoldenRules]

What I see from the refs and the review process is that they are playing it "safe" in their calls. They are not having the conviction to make calls on the field that can be reviewed trusting the review process to get it right for them. Which is bunk because the review doesn't always have good angles. It's like they're reffing afraid of making a mistake, which leads to a lot of mistakes. 

 

This is very true.  There have even been times when they haven't made calls on the field and solely relied on review.  One play in the Banjo Bowl comes to mind but I can't remember the specifics, I just remember wondering how they were going to decide the review given that they didn't actually make a call on the field.  I believe it was on a potential turnover.

 

They need to add a commonsense element to the reviews, prioritize getting the calls right over policy and process, or get rid of them entirely.

[17to85]

It's really gotten noticeable and I really hate it. Make the call on the field based on what you see, if they review it and it's over turned so be it, but I'd rather they make a call on the field than waiting for the review to do it. So many reviews come down to insufficient evidence that the call on the field actually matters. 

[Zontar]

What I see from the refs and the review process is that they are playing it "safe" in their calls. They are not having the conviction to make calls on the field that can be reviewed trusting the review process to get it right for them. Which is bunk because the review doesn't always have good angles. It's like they're reffing afraid of making a mistake, which leads to a lot of mistakes. 

re -playing it safe. It was bascially a gurantee that refs would always call it when a kicker fell down. But last week Murphy decided to play psycho-analyst and determined OTT kicker was faking. But then goes back to playing it safe last night on a far easier to see fake out.

[voodoochylde]

Ellingson had the ball and pivoted to turn upfield, survived initial contact and then fumbled. There's no way that's an incomplete pass. Blown call on the field cost us 7 points, blown call on review cost us 3.

Sherman lost his lid on the play. Play is over at that point.

About the only thing they could do is award the Bombers the ball .. there would be no ability to advance the ball.