Blue Bombers Forum
December 13, 2017, 02:08:23 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7  All
  Print  
Author Topic: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly - A Little Humility Edition  (Read 4208 times)
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 25534


"There's always next year."


« Reply #60 on: October 10, 2017, 06:30:37 PM »

Bottom line:

We got caught in a trap game. Happens to all good teams eventually.

Yep, pretty much. Just gotta learn from it and move on to the next game.

I think it's always in the original. And Gwendoline wins most often at the Moose games.  Wink

Wasn't it in the dark roast on Friday?
Logged

Blue & Gold 'til I'm dead & cold.

Go Jets Go!

You can't fix stupid.
Realist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 346


« Reply #61 on: October 10, 2017, 06:34:13 PM »

Yep, pretty much. Just gotta learn from it and move on to the next game.

Wasn't it in the dark roast on Friday?

Don't know, wasn't there. Someone else in my seats Friday. Ever since my partner brought it to my attention about both promotions, she has been right. ****, I've been looking for a sample of her being wrong for years...
Logged
TecnoGenius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 757


« Reply #62 on: October 11, 2017, 05:45:07 AM »

I think it's always in the original. And Gwendoline wins most often at the Moose games.  Wink

This year they always chose original, and always won... except the HAM game when the guy chose dark roast (I think) and it had the donut!  I think it's just a ploy to get people to watch the advertisement.  Every cup is a winner.  Has anyone ever seen someone lose the donut game?
Logged
The Zipp
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 10721


Who gives a flying Buck...


« Reply #63 on: October 11, 2017, 01:50:56 PM »

on the topic of the coffee cup contest - we are getting gypped out of the prizes, same contest at BC Place, winner gets a tim's pack plus a BC Lions jersey..(I suspect the Lions add that in as their contribution)

Logged
TrueBlue75
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2357


« Reply #64 on: October 13, 2017, 12:31:42 AM »

I thought the ball placement a few times was atrocious and the quick whistle on Lankford was pure crap. I haven't seen them blow the whistle that quickly on forward progress all season. In fact it has seemed like they have been giving more time for offences to push for yardage. Unbelievable. I really wish O'Shea had challenged for roughing the passer on the first Nichol's fumble. Clear hand to the head and hit to the chin should have kept the ball for the Bombers. All that and the defence made it a garbage night for the fans. Gross. I'm sure hoping we get some help this weekend to keep the hounds at bay....it's been nice dreaming of a home playoff game. Undecided

As per the CFL twitter, Tracy was fined for spearing Nichols. Was it this ⬆️ fumble or a different play? I erased the game from my PVR already.,,
Logged
dd
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5448


« Reply #65 on: October 13, 2017, 01:32:07 AM »

This was the fumble, he lead with his head and made contact on Nichols's chest just below his chin....this is what MOS was arguing with the official about. So riddle me this....why is it the player is fined for an offense, but the bozo's in stripes, nor the command centre catch the foul?? This is a major foul committed on the Qb, this is not like a hold by the O line, this is inexcuseable, 1 it was missed, and 2 it was a turnover and pivotal part in the game, and a fineable offense was committed and missed by our awesome CFL officiating crew. They should increase the challenges to at LEAST 2 per quarter just like timeouts, so things like this aren't missed, they are at least challenged.
Logged
TecnoGenius
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 757


« Reply #66 on: October 13, 2017, 03:44:26 AM »

As per the CFL twitter, Tracy was fined for spearing Nichols. Was it this ⬆️ fumble or a different play? I erased the game from my PVR already.,,

I just rewatched and it is Tracy spearing Nichols, though there's no H2H contact.  However, as MOS said in the coach show, he was chirping about the Kanneh slap to the head, not the spear.  This fine (i.e. "we got things wrong") by the CFL just makes things worse... not only did they not call the hard slap to the head (not incidental) but they didn't call a spear they thought was bad enough to warrant a fine!

I'll stand by what I said: MOS should have challenged, two potential RTPs, and if he doesn't get them, CFL has to come back grovelling to BB during the week.  (We never used our challenge anyhow.)
Logged
3rdand1.5
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2710


« Reply #67 on: October 13, 2017, 09:39:29 AM »

No, please do not increase the challenges. Coaches figured out a way to abuse it quickly and it really became a hinderance to the flow of the game.

Instead invest in better training for reff's
Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 24292



« Reply #68 on: October 13, 2017, 12:18:04 PM »

No, please do not increase the challenges. Coaches figured out a way to abuse it quickly and it really became a hinderance to the flow of the game.

Instead invest in better training for reff's

There is a middle ground between abuse of the challenge and getting screwed on calls.  Either give a 30 seconf challenge where the CC has 30 seconds to overturn (for egregious misses), or allow the team to maintain the ability to challenge a second time if they win the first.  Or make it a delay of game for the second challenge if it is lost. 

There has to be an opportunity for a second challenge.  Right now, coaches are not challenging egregious calls because they need to save the challenge for later.  And that's not right.
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 19096



« Reply #69 on: October 13, 2017, 12:27:52 PM »

There is a middle ground between abuse of the challenge and getting screwed on calls.  Either give a 30 seconf challenge where the CC has 30 seconds to overturn (for egregious misses), or allow the team to maintain the ability to challenge a second time if they win the first.  Or make it a delay of game for the second challenge if it is lost. 

There has to be an opportunity for a second challenge.  Right now, coaches are not challenging egregious calls because they need to save the challenge for later.  And that's not right.

There will always be mistakes. Even the command centre makes mistakes. That's football and it tends to balance out at the end of the year. The way it is now is fine and way better than earlier in the year.
Logged
bluebeard
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1122


« Reply #70 on: October 13, 2017, 01:43:28 PM »

No, please do not increase the challenges. Coaches figured out a way to abuse it quickly and it really became a hinderance to the flow of the game.

Instead invest in better training for reff's
I agree.  I even turned off football games because of the slowing of games by these challenges.  It was getting too much and ruining the game for me
Logged
TBURGESS
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5997



« Reply #71 on: October 13, 2017, 01:57:45 PM »

It's a hard no to extra challenges for me and an extra challenge wouldn't have done anything for this situation anyway as we never used the one we have.
Logged

Being right never gets old.
Lincoln Locomotive
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1739



« Reply #72 on: October 13, 2017, 02:07:49 PM »

There will always be mistakes. Even the command centre makes mistakes. That's football and it tends to balance out at the end of the year. The way it is now is fine and way better than earlier in the year.
Agreed....the delays were intolerable....remember Jason Maas?
Logged

" Leo Lewis was the best player I ever coached, on either side of the border"!

Bud Grant, when asked who was the best player he ever coached
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 24292



« Reply #73 on: October 13, 2017, 02:12:34 PM »

Hence the 30 second review.  If the call is too close to reverse in 30 seconds, back to the game.  For egregious calls only. 

You could even add in two of these, a total of a one minute delay.  But add a 10 yard delay of game penalty if it is not reversed.  This would make sure that it has to be a black and white, cut and dried dumb call for the coach to challenge.  And they don't waste their actual challenge to reverse something that is completely wrong.
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
bowlerdude
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3899


« Reply #74 on: October 13, 2017, 02:46:02 PM »

Hence the 30 second review.  If the call is too close to reverse in 30 seconds, back to the game.  For egregious calls only. 

You could even add in two of these, a total of a one minute delay.  But add a 10 yard delay of game penalty if it is not reversed.  This would make sure that it has to be a black and white, cut and dried dumb call for the coach to challenge.  And they don't waste their actual challenge to reverse something that is completely wrong.

That's basically all it ever was. A 30 second review, plus time to talk to the coach and figure out the challenge, get the call, etc. There was the odd long review, but the delays with a challenge are hardly the time spent reviewing. Every 30 second review adds like 3 minutes to the game, and the games aren't really more than a few minutes shorter now anyway. The difference is they flow better, not that they're cutting some huge amount of time off the game.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!