HAM @ MTL Aug 20, 2022

[TecnoGenius]

No thread yet?

Shiltz actually completing passes?  Color me shocked.

Hey guess what?!  The air horns are vastly reduced in TSN volume!  The complaining worked.  You can still hear things, but they are more in the distance.  And they are the long-blow mouth horns, not the honk honk honk hand air horns.

[pjrocksmb]

Good game thus far

[TecnoGenius]

Why didn't MTL's D play this bad against us last week?  Sheesh.  Making Shiltz look like an all-star so far.

[TecnoGenius]

HAM White TD is a TD.  What an effort.

[buckzumhoff]

Montreal receiver ran offside but call against Hamilton.

[TecnoGenius]

I just searched around and see no word from Als about banning the air horns, but banned they must be because I don't hear any of the hand-horns today.

Funny how a fan uproar online led Ambrosie to lay down the law for the birdies.  But you'd think Als would announce the change rather than just confiscate at the gate.

I guess many, many TV fans threatening to turn the TV off set off alarm bells.

Well, I think I can hear one faint hand-horn in the distance, but it sounds like they are trying to hide / subdue it to not get caught by security.  Maybe someone at Molson can chime in on some forum.  Anyone speak French? 

[buckzumhoff]

Really watching the line. Flag happy ref.

[TecnoGenius]

Montreal receiver ran offside but call against Hamilton.

The slot at the top?  Nah, he was ok, pause before the snap, you'll see.  Even if he was OS, HAM was OS first, which counts for something when the flag goes up.

[TecnoGenius]

HAM an OS factory.  3 now?  They are going to have to clean that up.

MTL looks asleep.  Let's hope they can adjust.

HAM came to play physical, just like last week.  That D seems to do better when they know the game is on them (without their QB).  MTL needs to start plunging the daggers or HAM will hang around and win on morale alone.

[buckzumhoff]

Hamilton o line is good and they have a good  running back

[pjrocksmb]

Hamilton o line is good and they have a good  running back

Agree x2

[buckzumhoff]

Pretty bad miss almost as bad as leggios miss

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Seth Small misses a 43 yd. FG but kicks it through the endzone for 1 pt., easy as pie.

[pjrocksmb]

No need to pile on Leggs imo

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

No need to pile on Leggs imo

I'm commenting on the current game, mind your own business.

[buckzumhoff]

Lousy civerage. Wide open

[buckzumhoff]

.85 degrees outsude and player wears a balaclava. Its august

[pjrocksmb]

Nice drive good battle here

[buckzumhoff]

Late hit . way late

[Sir Blue and Gold]

.85 degrees outsude and player wears a balaclava. Its august

It's cold in Canada!

[pjrocksmb]

.85 degrees outsude and player wears a balaclava. Its august

To cover his mouth I believe

[buckzumhoff]

Should have had 7 points

[pjrocksmb]

Couple nice plays there for Montr?al offense

[pjrocksmb]

I knew woods was good but I didn't think he was leading the league

[buckzumhoff]

Nice pass. White is good receiver. Montreal special teams coach has to keep hud players in check

[pjrocksmb]

Nice pass. White is good receiver. Montreal special teams coach has to keep hud players in check

My stream quit and I missed that one.  Had to really fight the computer their but now got a solid ESPN feed.

[pjrocksmb]

Montreal with a chance here but gotta score this drive

[buckzumhoff]

Should have given up the 2 points.

[pjrocksmb]

Should have given up the 2 points.

Agree

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Marc-Antoine Dequoy is the best Natl. D-Back since Taylor Loffler.

[The Zipp]

Kickers are important...

[pjrocksmb]

Kickers are important...

Yup and ours has the right passport and a big leg and will continue to develop

[TecnoGenius]

Marc-Antoine Dequoy is the best Natl. D-Back since Taylor Loffler.

Where is Loffler?  Left the team and was in the tub for a year then... ??

[TecnoGenius]

That was not a horsecollar!  There needs to be clarification and the ability for command to review, especially in the last 3 mins.  A swish of the hand on the collar which doesn't tug the player or the jersey because the D recognizes the risk and lets go is not a horsecollar.

If you are grabbing and pulling, yes, it's HC.  But a swish / early let-go is not.

That play was bogus to allow HAM back in the game.  They were done for at that point.

Still, exciting finish, won't hurt TV viewership nor tickets sales at Molson.

White was the surprise fantasy pick for that game.

[The Zipp]

That was not a horsecollar!  There needs to be clarification and the ability for command to review, especially in the last 3 mins.  A swish of the hand on the collar which doesn't tug the player or the jersey because the D recognizes the risk and lets go is not a horsecollar.

If you are grabbing and pulling, yes, it's HC.  But a swish / early let-go is not.

That play was bogus to allow HAM back in the game.  They were done for at that point.

Still, exciting finish, won't hurt TV viewership nor tickets sales at Molson.

White was the surprise fantasy pick for that game.

Thought the same thing.  They didn't tackle, it was a horse collar touch not tackle.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

That was not a horsecollar!  There needs to be clarification and the ability for command to review, especially in the last 3 mins.  A swish of the hand on the collar which doesn't tug the player or the jersey because the D recognizes the risk and lets go is not a horsecollar.

If you are grabbing and pulling, yes, it's HC.  But a swish / early let-go is not.

That play was bogus to allow HAM back in the game.  They were done for at that point.

Still, exciting finish, won't hurt TV viewership nor tickets sales at Molson.

White was the surprise fantasy pick for that game.

If it wasn't for the Als stupid penalties the game would not have been close.

[dd]

For a horse collar tackle to be called there must be a change in direction on the ball carrier as a result of the tackle. No change in direction, no call

[Blue In BC]

For a horse collar tackle to be called there must be a change in direction on the ball carrier as a result of the tackle. No change in direction, no call

Incorrect.

What is the horse-collar tackle rule?
Rule Summary View Official Rule

ARTICLE 16. HORSE-COLLAR TACKLE. No player shall grab the inside collar of the back or the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, or grab the jersey at the name plate or above, and pull the runner toward the ground.

[buckzumhoff]

Mtl taking penalties is the way they play. They take chances blocking punts. Theres a chance at the block and a chance of taking a 15 yarder and a first down for the other team. They did it twice. ..most teams would beat a team tgat takes penalties like that.

[dd]

Incorrect.

What is the horse-collar tackle rule?
Rule Summary View Official Rule

ARTICLE 16. HORSE-COLLAR TACKLE. No player shall grab the inside collar of the back or the side of the shoulder pads or jersey, or grab the jersey at the name plate or above, and pull the runner toward the ground.

I have been to officiating clinics and this topic has been discussed. If there is no change in direction of the runner, there is no call. So if you grab the jersey inside the collar and fall to the ground and there is no ?yank? and change of direction, there is no flag. I?m the rule written above, the pulling the runner to the ground is the change in direction statement.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

I have been to officiating clinics and this topic has been discussed. If there is no change in direction of the runner, there is no call. So if you grab the jersey inside the collar and fall to the ground and there is no ?yank? and change of direction, there is no flag. I?m the rule written above, the pulling the runner to the ground is the change in direction statement.

There have been quite a few high tackles this season, I don't mind seeing them penalized if it improves player safety. I think the general rule should be no tackling above the arm pits, this way it would be more definitive and the neck would also be protected. 

The league should also crack down on loose helmets, too many players in the league wearing them loose and their popping off all the time.

[Blue In BC]

I have been to officiating clinics and this topic has been discussed. If there is no change in direction of the runner, there is no call. So if you grab the jersey inside the collar and fall to the ground and there is no ?yank? and change of direction, there is no flag. I?m the rule written above, the pulling the runner to the ground is the change in direction statement.

Semantics. It's not unusual to see a nameplate grabbed without a pull backwards. Obviously pulling a runner straight down is a change of direction. Even stopping his advance is a change of direction. A pull may move a player to the left, right, down, or even forward.

This weekend we saw several examples of horse collar tackles which did not include a backward pull.

I stand by my comment that you are incorrect based on the reality of what happens on the field when this penalty is called. The refs call it and the coaches don't challenge it based on your interpretation.

There is no basis to suggest the refs are incorrect often in making this call.

[Blue In BC]

There have been quite a few high tackles this season, I don't mind seeing them penalized if it improves player safety. I think the general rule should be no tackling above the arm pits, this way it would be more definitive and the neck would also be protected. 

The league should also crack down on loose helmets, too many players in the league wearing them loose and their popping off all the time.

Interesting point but it's a fast moving game. Players are falling, hurdling, jumping or straight arming a defender.  What a defender can reach is not always optimum. However, the league can make other determination about excessive contact whether that hit is high, low or late.

In fact a defender might grab the nameplate and not even slow the forward progress of the runner. He might then lose the grasp on the runner's jersey and ultimately not be the player that brings the runner down. It's still a penalty.


IE: Marino's hit on the OL on a play whistled dead. Late and excessive. How that wasn't called IDK.

[buckzumhoff]

Marionos hit is not really a penalty. He saw the ball moved he did his job. Is he supposed to know the centre js jhst adjusting the ball. He did the right thing. .if rge centre moves tge balk well hes resposible for the defence reacting

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Marionos hit is not really a penalty. He saw the ball moved he did his job. Is he supposed to know the centre js jhst adjusting the ball. He did the right thing. .if rge centre moves tge balk well hes resposible for the defence reacting

I thought they changed the rule to allow the Center to move or adjust the ball to get a better grip?  I know O'Shea caused a kerfuffle about it a few years ago, but I don't remember the final outcome.

[Blue In BC]

Marionos hit is not really a penalty. He saw the ball moved he did his job. Is he supposed to know the centre js jhst adjusting the ball. He did the right thing. .if rge centre moves tge balk well hes resposible for the defence reacting

I'd say yes he's supposed to know. The ball is adjusted by the center before snapping nearly every play to grasp the laces. Wouldn't surprise me if he gets fined this week for that incident. The opponent's head was still down and that would be a giant clue.

[theaardvark]

Marionos hit is not really a penalty. He saw the ball moved he did his job. Is he supposed to know the centre js jhst adjusting the ball. He did the right thing. .if rge centre moves tge balk well hes resposible for the defence reacting

The C was defenseless.  The whistle had blown.  It as a penalty, a misconduct and a fine.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Interesting point but it's a fast moving game. Players are falling, hurdling, jumping or straight arming a defender.  What a defender can reach is not always optimum. However, the league can make other determination about excessive contact whether that hit is high, low or late.

In fact a defender might grab the nameplate and not even slow the forward progress of the runner. He might then lose the grasp on the runner's jersey and ultimately not be the player that brings the runner down. It's still a penalty.

Well the CFL is always looking for ways to increase offence, so putting more restrictions on tackling might be one way to give the offence a boost. Can't tackle the ball carrier legally, too bad, penalty on you.  A couple of weeks back we had a spate of tackles up high around the facemask that were questionably allowed by the officials, another good reason high tackles should be disallowed.

[dd]

Semantics. It's not unusual to see a nameplate grabbed without a pull backwards. Obviously pulling a runner straight down is a change of direction. Even stopping his advance is a change of direction. A pull may move a player to the left, right, down, or even forward.

This weekend we saw several examples of horse collar tackles which did not include a backward pull.

I stand by my comment that you are incorrect based on the reality of what happens on the field when this penalty is called. The refs call it and the coaches don't challenge it based on your interpretation.

There is no basis to suggest the refs are incorrect often in making this call.

You believe what you want to believe, and I m going to call it as instructed by clinicians-no change in direction, no call. That?s the correct interpretation.

[Blue In BC]

Well the CFL is always looking for ways to increase offence, so putting more restrictions on tackling might be one way to give the offence a boost. Can't tackle the ball carrier legally, too bad, penalty on you.  A couple of weeks back we had a spate of tackles up high around the facemask that were questionably allowed by the officials, another good reason high tackles should be disallowed.

I'm open to revisions in the rules but it's a contact sport. I think bigger penalties / fines on illegal hits is a starting point but not an entire solution. Many changes to the rough play have been made and are helpful preventing injuries.

How / where does a 6'7" DE hit a 5'6" receiver that weighs 165 lbs?

So many variables. Tackles are not always made by both players entirely vertical.

It's a topic I think gets discussed every off season when they look at potential rule changes.

There is a discussion on the board about whether a horse collar tackle was in fact a horse collar tackle. That's part of problem where what the intent of the rule doesn't always match the practical situation during the game.

Another example would be the contacting the head of the QB. Some are incidental and others are face mask or severe blows. In each of these cases the situation leads to a penalty rightfully so.

Then we see some fans saying a certain line was not crossed and a penalty shouldn't have been called.

[Blue In BC]

You believe what you want to believe, and I m going to call it as instructed by clinicians-no change in direction, no call. That?s the correct interpretation.

You think the CFL refs don't go to ref school?  I believe in the professional refs that are accountable for the calls in the CFL that are making the calls you disagree with.

Which group do you think has more credibility? It's not just what I believe but it's the law of the land so to speak. Your clinicians aren't making the calls on the field.

[Waffler]

Marionos hit is not really a penalty. He saw the ball moved he did his job. Is he supposed to know the centre js jhst adjusting the ball. He did the right thing. .if rge centre moves tge balk well hes resposible for the defence reacting

Penalty all day long. What irked me further was that the center was not the guy across from him. He came at an angle on him. He was selected because his head was down and he was vulnerable. The whistle was long gone as already pointed out.

[dd]

You think the CFL refs don't go to ref school?  I believe in the professional refs that are accountable for the calls in the CFL that are making the calls you disagree with.

Which group do you think has more credibility? It's not just what I believe but it's the law of the land so to speak. Your clinicians aren't making the calls on the field.

Whatever, this is truly laughable.

[TecnoGenius]

Marionos hit is not really a penalty. He saw the ball moved he did his job. Is he supposed to know the centre js jhst adjusting the ball. He did the right thing. .if rge centre moves tge balk well hes resposible for the defence reacting

Rewatch the play live.  1Q12:57.  The C doesn't move the ball at all, at all, before the Marino hit.  The entire time the camera is on them, 4.19 seconds by my stopwatch, that ball doesn't move.  At all.  Period.

What does happen is Cottoy goes horribly offside, then LT, RG, RT all get up.  C and LG don't move.  At all.

Marino comes in and trucks the C.  It's horrific to watch and I've never seen anything like it in the CFL.  Marino clearly keyed off the other OL and thought "oh boy free hit on defenceless C".

The C was defenseless.  The whistle had blown.  It as a penalty, a misconduct and a fine.

As for the whistle... the whistle sounds just after the hit.  So at least Marino can say he didn't hear a whistle.

It's still a foul and should have been a penalty.

[TecnoGenius]

You believe what you want to believe, and I m going to call it as instructed by clinicians-no change in direction, no call. That?s the correct interpretation.

There is every possibility the CFL has tweaked the HC definition over the years.  Perhaps your clinic is not CFL-specific, and perhaps U sports or whatever plays by slightly different rules.  You really would have to check the specific rulebook being played by.

As per the post CFL rule, the phantom HC we are talking about was not a foul because the D did not "pull the runner toward the ground".  He had his hand over the HC area but let go before there was any pulling.  Of course your clinic would agree, but because of your "change in direction" interpretation.

If a D grabs that area, realizes immediately they have the collar and lets go before it impacts the carrier, that should not be a HC penalty (as per the CFL rules).

[buckzumhoff]

Cottoy should nkt go offside. The ref should have tbriwn the flag right away. Why do they get a chance to cheat and cross the line but an offensive ljneman cant even move an inch witbout getting called for procedure. That gives the offense a chance to see what the defense is doing. Just cross the line come back.  As long as tge time clock isnt zero

[dd]

There is every possibility the CFL has tweaked the HC definition over the years.  Perhaps your clinic is not CFL-specific, and perhaps U sports or whatever plays by slightly different rules.  You really would have to check the specific rulebook being played by.

As per the post CFL rule, the phantom HC we are talking about was not a foul because t,he D did not "pull the runner toward the ground".  He had his hand over the HC area but let go before there was any pulling.  Of course your clinic would agree, but because of your "change in direction" interpretation.

If a D grabs that area, realizes immediately they have the collar and lets go before it impacts the carrier, that should not be a HC penalty (as per the CFL rules).

Oh my god, this is ridiculous .I m telling you I have checked the rulebook , I have officialted for 20 years, and if the grab on the collar does not affect the runner, there is no call. End of story. It?s called horsecollar TACKLE, not horse collar grab. 

[TecnoGenius]

Oh my god, this is ridiculous .I m telling you I have checked the rulebook , I have officialted for 20 years, and if the grab on the collar does not affect the runner, there is no call. End of story. It?s called horsecollar TACKLE, not horse collar grab. 

Right, ok.  But you still have the issue of multiple refs calling these whiffy/swipey/brushy horsecollars all season long.  They'll continue to do so.