This needs its own thread. This is going to cause a lot of chatter throughout the league this week.
The Ford phantom DPI call is at 3Q2:10:
Rider fans forum fully agrees that it was completely bogus. Read the page I link and the next page too. When Riderfans (and one BC fan) are completely in agreement with WPG fans, you know the call was wrong. Us 2 fan bases are the 2 most knowledgeable bases in the CFL (well, add HAM to that as well).
https://www.riderfans.com/forum/forum/main-forum/1137921-gdt-winnipeg-saskatchewan/page39
Other problems with the DPI on Ford:
1. The R didn't have the ball tracked, never saw it until it was over his head.
2. Totally uncatchable thrown too far and untracked, if Ford doesn't touch him the ball is still uncaught.
3. The ref throws his flag before the ball hits the ground! Like half a second before! In fact, once you factor in the thinking time and reaching time, I think he started the process even before the alleged DPI occurred. Watch it in the live shot. The alleged DPI bump happens when the ball is directly over the pair's heads. Doesn't he have to wait until the ball goes past them to determine if it was catchable?
4. Ford was looking back at the same time. He's allowed to lightly bump & stay in the pocket of the R like that and play the ball too. They do it all the time.
5. Ford knows it was fake & bogus. For a minute after the play he has that look of "fake" on his face.
The league has to step in this week. This requires an apology. SSK was off the field at a critical time in the game before this garbage. If it was one bad call, fans let it slide, but 2+ horrific calls, almost certainly from the same ref (I'll check soon) -- it cannot go unpunished.
The ref throwing the flag appears to be #22 Murray Clarke, who has been a ref forever it seems. He was standing in earshot of Mace who was cool as a cucumber moments before the play. Mace was standing next to this ref all night, probably whispering sweet nothings to him like MOS likes to chirp to his side guy.
Now for the tin foil, and think about it: It's 2nd & 2. You probably can't sneak on 3rd after an incompletion. You snap in the gun, clearly not trying to sneak. Who calls a pass here? They do a weak fake to Oullette, and WPG only brings 4. Isn't that when you give it to Oullette? Ya, so they never intended to run, it was a deep pass the whole time. So here's my question: was there an arrangement to throw there knowing #22 would give them a flag. Why else do you throw it 30Y downfield on 2nd & 2? Who doesn't run it there? Oullette wasn't great, but he was getting 1-2Y most carries. They only need 1 to setup the 3rd down sneak.
Even without any tin foil, even if it's just sheer incompetence, this type of officiating cannot be permitted. It ruins the game for everyone. Even SSK fans lose because then WPG can point to the big asterisk when they get the W. Who knows how the close game turns out (with 2 very bad O's) if SSK doesn't get those 2 critical DPIs.
Ref #22
https://www.cfl.ca/2018/11/05/oleary-official-murray-clarke-celebrates-500th-game-hamilton/
Holm phantom DPI call is 4Q10:57:
This one is actually more plausible than the Ford DPI, because Holm actually does give him a little bump which makes the R move slightly toward the LoS. But it's still extremely weak. Holm in no way impedes the R from his route laterally towards the ball. Holm is allowed to run along the route with the R and maintain his own ground. He's not jamming, he's not impeding: he's in the hip pocket making contact with his body, as all DBs do when they are in good positions.
1. The feet don't intermingle, Holm is not responsible for the R going down after his jump. If anything, it's Holm that ends up down because of the contact.
2. Holm doesn't lay hands on the R at all! Nothing! It's all just body contact.
3. The ball is likely uncatchable, as it would have to be a spectacular one-hander.
4. The flag is very late (according to Suits and all the DBs' reactions, and the crowd cheer timing).
5. In both the Ford & Holm cases the DPI was on 20-30Y passes (mid-deep passes) while SSK is backed up in their own end. This is also (tin foil) suspicious.
6. I confirmed from later plays in the same Q that refs #22 and #83 were working the near-side.
7. You can tell from Patterson's face/eye angle when he celebrates the DPI that he is looking at the flag/ref stationed in the same spot: #22 again. It's the same ref. It appears refs do not change which sideline they patrol when the quarters change.
8. Holm almost never commits DPI. Someone run the stat, I bet he's done maybe 1 DPI in the past 9 games.
(Tin foil) Later I will see if there's any pattern to Patterson preferring to throw to area of ref #22, especially in the 2nd H when all of this happened... I'm really curious now.
I want to be clear: if a team were to challenge these phantom DPIs, they would be overturned. Based on everything I've seen command center do in recent seasons, they would not consider either of these DPI. They would not set the precedent that such nothing contact should be considered DPI.
But of course, MOS didn't have his challenge flag anymore...
Maybe tin hat stuff but I was wondering if he rankled any officials by his challenge last week. The one that was just to make a point. People hate it when you point out their mistakes on national tv. So I ask, retaliation?
Sure, this deserves its own thread, but all you have to say is they were both bad calls.
Quote from: TecnoGenius on July 20, 2024, 08:03:24 AMRef #22
https://www.cfl.ca/2018/11/05/oleary-official-murray-clarke-celebrates-500th-game-hamilton/
His picture is in the dictionary next to "inept". Quite a few years ago he was a referee but I believe he was demoted.
It sure this needs its own thread but the calls were very bad calls.
I am hoping the league reviews this and admits there are officiating deficiencies and allows command centre to over rule egregiously bad calls as this impacts the integrity of both the game and the league product. At the end of the day, you just want to get it right, and if command centre has to step in and correct things so be it. On plays that involve big chunks of yardage , you got to make sure you're getting things right, and clearly last night,they were far from right.
Both calls were terrible. That is all.
Didn't see the first half, did O'Shea have a challenge or was it already used? Bad call but not the reason the Bombers lost. Didn't Zac just throw a pick a few plays earlier throwing the ball back towards the centre of the field? Demski fumbles not protecting the ball which is now the 3rd time he has fumbled the ball this season the exact same way. Veteran players who are now past their better days. Bighill looks absolutely awful and slower than molasses, Sasks MLB Thurman runs down Demski and saves a would be TD, Bighill would have been 10 yards behind if it went the other way. The team is old, slow, and weaker than the past 5 years.
Bighill should not be covering receivers normally i think anyway. Maybe if running back comes out the backfield. You have your two outside linebackers with more speed to do that job usually.
Overall I think the officiating has been decent this year, but this game was poorly officiated and those were of couple of really bad calls.
Conspiracy? Goes under the category of anything's possible I guess, but hard no on that.
So, Techno, I'm curious. What's your answer to your "tinfoil" questions/suspicions? Do you believe a ref or refs conspired to deliberately cheat the Winnipeg Blue Bombers with phantom (or whatever you want to call them) calls? Yes or No is all I'm asking. If you'd rather not answer, that's cool, no problem.
There's no conspiracy, just coincidence. They're playing in mosaic stadium and the riders get the calls, it's been that way since the turn of time
Terrible calls but we scored three field goals.
Quote from: bomb squad on July 20, 2024, 07:41:22 PMOverall I think the officiating has been decent this year, but this game was poorly officiated and those were of couple of really bad calls.
Conspiracy? Goes under the category of anything's possible I guess, but hard no on that.
So, Techno, I'm curious. What's your answer to your "tinfoil" questions/suspicions? Do you believe a ref or refs conspired to deliberately cheat the Winnipeg Blue Bombers with phantom (or whatever you want to call them) calls? Yes or No is all I'm asking. If you'd rather not answer, that's cool, no problem.
Yes.
Quote from: bomb squad on July 20, 2024, 07:41:22 PMOverall I think the officiating has been decent this year, but this game was poorly officiated and those were of couple of really bad calls.
Conspiracy? Goes under the category of anything's possible I guess, but hard no on that.
So, Techno, I'm curious. What's your answer to your "tinfoil" questions/suspicions? Do you believe a ref or refs conspired to deliberately cheat the Winnipeg Blue Bombers with phantom (or whatever you want to call them) calls? Yes or No is all I'm asking. If you'd rather not answer, that's cool, no problem.
The officials were prolly upset Oshea threw the meaningless challenge least week just to prove a point.
Quote from: gobombersgo on July 21, 2024, 12:10:26 AMThe officials were prolly upset Oshea threw the meaningless challenge least week just to prove a point.
O'Shea admitted to being angry at the time he threw that flag. Yes he pointed them out. They needed to be pointed out. They are not bigger than the game. That they'd retaliate in the Sask game points to the problem being even worse than feared. These people need to be reined in big time if this league is to be taken seriously.
Quote from: TBURGESS on July 20, 2024, 03:09:35 PMBoth calls were terrible. That is all.
You know they were bad if tburgss says so
Quote from: Stretch on July 20, 2024, 01:39:52 PMSure, this deserves its own thread, but all you have to say is they were both bad calls.
That just wouldn't be Tecno!
Quote from: bomb squad on July 20, 2024, 07:41:22 PMOverall I think the officiating has been decent this year, but this game was poorly officiated and those were of couple of really bad calls.
Yes, refs have been pretty good this season. Maybe one weak call a week. But nothing this insane.
I'm the type of guy that would get worked up if
any team got reamed by penalties like this. I want cleanly officiated football. It's the fake no-recourse garbage in the NFL that really turns me off to that league. I've always loved how our league seems to have pretty "honest" refs.
Quote from: bomb squad on July 20, 2024, 07:41:22 PMSo, Techno, I'm curious. What's your answer to your "tinfoil" questions/suspicions? Do you believe a ref or refs conspired to deliberately cheat the Winnipeg Blue Bombers with phantom (or whatever you want to call them) calls? Yes or No is all I'm asking. If you'd rather not answer, that's cool, no problem.
I'll answer anything! One bad call (Ford) gets me worked up, but doesn't mean conspiracy. The second bad call (Holm) got my "rigged" radar (rigdar?) pinging. Then I started noticing things were always happening on that near-side. Then I saw the early flag throw. Then I noticed it was always #22. Then I started studying what Mace & Patterson's faces were doing before and after these plays.
Then
MOS says in his post-game that he won't speak to the penalties because he'd "get fined". That's everything we need to know on his feelings (on the flag legitimacy, not anything conspiratorial!).
It doesn't have to be conspiracy or bribery or gambling either (but it could be!), it could just be #22 is from SSK (does anyone know?) and wants to screw us over, just like that no-end ref in CGY (which is irrefutable
proof it can happen).
So my answer right now is "I don't know, but I have my suspicions". So what I'm going to do next is go back and check every penalty called against us and check where ref #22 was at the time. If all those rare DH calls, and others, were predominantly #22, then you can probably guess what my answer will become.
The beauty of the situation is that WFC will get the all-24 film for every play and someone there can definitively answer these questions better than I can with the limited TSN coverage. If my hunches are right, this could really blow up for the CFL. I hope someone @WFC is on the case. I'll do what I can to help / get the ball rolling.
Quote from: bluengold204 on July 21, 2024, 01:35:58 AMYou know they were bad if tburgss says so
You know it's bad when
everyone says so... even all the fans on other team forums!
Especially the team we were facing
that directly gains from the bad call!
Quote from: Waffler on July 20, 2024, 01:36:15 PMMaybe tin hat stuff but I was wondering if he rankled any officials by his challenge last week. The one that was just to make a point. People hate it when you point out their mistakes on national tv. So I ask, retaliation?
Does anyone know where I can find a list of what officials reffed each game? The game-tracker doesn't seem to have it.
Regardless, from me re-checking a few plays in the CGY@WPG game, I don't think #22 was in the game. Would make sense anyhow that Valesi has a different crew from Proulx.
So this would have to be ref X getting miffed and then telling ref Y (#22) to screw us over next week. That seems unlikely. You'd have to be pretty darn mad to bother with that. Unless it's like some clique ref secret society where you piss off one, you piss off all! Possible, but not probable.
Quote from: TecnoGenius on July 21, 2024, 09:39:43 AMDoes anyone know where I can find a list of what officials reffed each game? The game-tracker doesn't seem to have it.
Regardless, from me re-checking a few plays in the CGY@WPG game, I don't think #22 was in the game. Would make sense anyhow that Valesi has a different crew from Proulx.
So this would have to be ref X getting miffed and then telling ref Y (#22) to screw us over next week. That seems unlikely. You'd have to be pretty darn mad to bother with that. Unless it's like some clique ref secret society where you piss off one, you piss off all! Possible, but not probable.
I'm not ready to buy in to conspiracy theories just yet, but this is the least conspiracy sounding part. Really - refs all work together, know each other, and do the same job. If one gets embarrassed by a coach - pretty easy to see how others would hold some ill will against said coach. Even unconsciously having a dislike or axe to grind, it can affect one's judgment.
I suspect our coach embarrassed the officials last game and he got put in his place this game. The officials have become bigger than the game and that's not good. O'Shea and the WFC have to go to the league about this for the sake of all teams. It's not right and is the kind of cancer that will destroy our league.
Quote from: J5V on July 21, 2024, 02:03:11 PMI suspect our coach embarrassed the officials last game and he got put in his place this game. The officials have become bigger than the game and that's not good. O'Shea and the WFC have to go to the league about this for the sake of all teams. It's not right and is the kind of cancer that will destroy our league.
This is one conspiracy theory that I can get behind. It's really just believing in the human element that refs are a close unit and get defensive when people challenge them.
Quote from: Jesse on July 21, 2024, 02:45:15 PMThis is one conspiracy theory that I can get behind. It's really just believing in the human element that refs are a close unit and get defensive when people challenge them.
For sure and as much as I love the CFL we can't be naive about these things. It's happened in all kinds of professional sports leagues before and will happen again unless the leagues investigate it and disciplines the guilty parties. This isn't the first time Murray Clark has pulled this crap. I can't believe the league allows him to continue to pull these shenanigans.
Quote from: J5V on July 21, 2024, 02:03:11 PMI suspect our coach embarrassed the officials last game and he got put in his place this game. The officials have become bigger than the game and that's not good. O'Shea and the WFC have to go to the league about this for the sake of all teams. It's not right and is the kind of cancer that will destroy our league.
Maybe you're on to something here, can we find evidence Murray Clarke was the official that threw the flag on the Demski catch that was declared incomplete in the previous game? Could be a lot of animosity against O'Shea if the league reprimanded the official for the mistake made in that game.
Don't want to disparage the official if it wasn't Murray Clarke, here is an article on him.
https://www.cfl.ca/2018/11/05/oleary-official-murray-clarke-celebrates-500th-game-hamilton/
Simplest rule, don't do stuff that can be called a penalty. And save your challenge for OBVIOUS issues that are game changing, and never in the first half unless egregious.
I really do think that the phantom calls affected our DB's and made them play off the ball a smidge. Conscious or subconscious, it had to affect them. And that's not right.
Not in any way were those two call pass I. I suspect those two refs go back to high school.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on July 21, 2024, 03:02:03 PMMaybe you're on to something here, can we find evidence Murray Clarke was the official that threw the flag on the Demski catch that was declared incomplete in the previous game? Could be a lot of animosity against O'Shea if the league reprimanded the official for the mistake made in that game.
Check out my earlier posts in the thread. I already put out there I'm nearly positive #22 was not the ref in the CGY game. If someone can find the official ref list for each completed game (I know the info exists), you'll probably see #22 wasn't in that game at all.
Quote from: theaardvark on July 21, 2024, 05:24:48 PMSimplest rule, don't do stuff that can be called a penalty. And save your challenge for OBVIOUS issues that are game changing, and never in the first half unless egregious.
As everyone has said, neither Ford nor Holm didn't "do stuff that can be called a penalty". No ref would have ever flagged those. Especially the Ford one: literally nothing happened. What the refs are saying here is that as a DB you can't be in a R's hip pocket. Completely absurd.
If those DPIs hadn't been called, and SSK challenges, they would lose those challenges. No question.
If MOS had his challenge flag, and challenges those plays, both get overturned by command and that "ref" would have been exposed as a dunce for all to see.
To me all of the above adds up to the CFL needing to step in. Such "rigging" cannot become part of our game.
Quote from: TecnoGenius on July 22, 2024, 06:15:07 AMAs everyone has said, neither Ford nor Holm didn't "do stuff that can be called a penalty". No ref would have ever flagged those. Especially the Ford one: literally nothing happened. What the refs are saying here is that as a DB you can't be in a R's hip pocket. Completely absurd.
If those DPIs hadn't been called, and SSK challenges, they would lose those challenges. No question.
If MOS had his challenge flag, and challenges those plays, both get overturned by command and that "ref" would have been exposed as a dunce for all to see.
To me all of the above adds up to the CFL needing to step in. Such "rigging" cannot become part of our game.
Harsh, but true, and needed to be said.
Wasn't there a ref that, from the field, led the fans in Mosaic stadium in a cheer?
When Glen Suitor opines that a call favouring his Riders was questionable (highly so), you know it's a really, really bad call.
Friday was the worst officiated game in recent memory.
What is the thinking behind no criticism of refs?
And Whoever called those phantom p.i. Penalties should not ref another game in the CFL.
There is no explanation or excuse that is acceptable.
Full stop.
The biggest issue is NEITHER were overturned by the eye in teh sky.
We had no challenge left, sure. But EITS HAS TO fix these obvious bad calls.
I think it is on Foxcroft. Proulx is not in a position to see it, and has no replay.
Its all on Toronto.
Quote from: theaardvark on July 22, 2024, 07:54:23 PMThe biggest issue is NEITHER were overturned by the eye in teh sky.
We had no challenge left, sure. But EITS HAS TO fix these obvious bad calls.
I think it is on Foxcroft. Proulx is not in a position to see it, and has no replay.
Its all on Toronto.
The EITS isn't for fixing everything. That would be like giving the coaches unlimited challenges whether they win them or not. The current win the challenge, keep a challenge is way better because it makes the coaches think before they throw the flag.
A lot of hand in the body calls. In the past the rule read that. A hand in the body to feel for relevant position was legal. As long as the hand in the body didn't cause or lose and advantage it was legal.
Up until this year, everyone played by that knowledge. The idiot refs that called that should go away. There was no harm, contact was incidental or irrelevant and some discretion is to be applied. No advantage was gained, so there should have been zero interference.
Horrible protocol, supreme ignorance. A couple teams were fleeced this past weekend.
Quote from: theaardvark on July 22, 2024, 07:54:23 PMThe biggest issue is NEITHER were overturned by the eye in teh sky.
We had no challenge left, sure. But EITS HAS TO fix these obvious bad calls.
EITS can't overturn DPI/DH. The rulebook lays out what can be automatically reviewed and it specifically states that many of the coach-challengeable penalties are not auto-reviewed.
(The rule might be slightly different after the 3 min warning.)
Nope, you need to keep your challenge to
keep the refs honest. We've seen enough shenanigans against MOS & The Bombers over the years to prove that we should always hold the flag until the 4th. The only exception is if
on video you can be absolutely certain you will win. Not based on what you saw personally, not based on what the players saw,
only based on the video. Which is very hard to do in a timely manner.
Quote from: markf on July 22, 2024, 12:42:15 PMWasn't there a ref that, from the field, led the fans in Mosaic stadium in a cheer?
Not sure I remember that... give us a year to jog our memory?
The only guy who did anything cheer-like I can remember is "First Down" Foxcroft, who, if announcing a first down for the
home team (only), would also say "fiiiiiiirrst down" like a WWF announcer. Sucking up to the crowd. I always hated that. But he's gone now, eh?
Quote from: TecnoGenius on July 23, 2024, 04:43:26 AMNot sure I remember that... give us a year to jog our memory?
The only guy who did anything cheer-like I can remember is "First Down" Foxcroft, who, if announcing a first down for the home team (only), would also say "fiiiiiiirrst down" like a WWF announcer. Sucking up to the crowd. I always hated that. But he's gone now, eh?
Not sure.