Riders at TiCats GDT

[M.O.A.B.]

How on earth did we lose to hamilton??! They are awful

Sometimes we need the loss so our players be reminded how awful that feeling is.

[TecnoGenius]

It was worth it just to hear Andre make that call.   Pure gold !!

That 1st half ending was FUBAR'd by Proulx, Ham did touch the ball after the Sask kicked it, the Sask kicker does not have to give 5 yards but the other Sask players do, which they did not. It should have been Ham ball and they would have kicked a FG.

This play is going to need some major dissection by our forum over the next few days.  It even took all the refs and command many minutes to consult the rule book.  That's what I love about the CFL: each week we get another weird thing we've (almost) never seen that requires a deep dive into the rule book.

I think the key issue on this play, and Andre said it, was the kicker dribbled the ball (kicked it) as his first touch on it.  He's onside team A so I think the halo doesn't come into play, and since he dribbled it it becomes a free-for-all with no halo rules.  If any HAM touched it, it was after the dribble, that's why there's no no-yards.  However, I will have to hit the book to confirm this.

Why did we ticats challenge that as it was so obvious it was in the end zone and a safety. Massive gaff by steinhauer, cost him 2 points and the ball

Yes, this game had another wacky deep-dive rule book play: the not-safety.  I was thinking as I watched that Cody might have dodged the safety by having his arm over the goal line.  Seems kind of unfair to HAM: as the penalty was applied as going back 0 yards.  But SSK did lose the down.

[TecnoGenius]

I liked watching the game, and was pretty nervous for most of it.  SSK actually played better than HAM on both sides for nearly 3 quarters.  They were moving the ball and keeping up with ToP.  Their D was limiting what Evans could do.  I was getting worried SSK was going to pull off a win, as for a long while a couple of big plays and a FG would have given them the lead; then the chances for a TD drive with plenty of time.

It's ironic that in the end it was the SSK D that lost the game by allowing a, what, 9 minute drive to drain the 4th Q.  Their much vaunted D!  (Precisely what HAM did to us, BTW.)  Then Cody/Maas come out and crap the bed.  Ignore the run, which was just starting to work a bit.  Maas starts making Cody throw balls he can't do, and their WR/SBs suck donkey parts.

Cody never did dial in the longer ball (even when just a wide-out) with the wind.  Every single one sailed on him with the wind.  He needed to adjust, and he didn't.

A team with heart might have gotten that last drive TD.  But I knew SSK was a deflated, defeated team after watching them vs us 3 times.  They feel about themselves exactly what the fans are saying.  It's really too bad as they really had a chance to drive the field with the wind at the end for the win.

Following the Riders forum the whole time was fun.  It's interesting that they gave up on their team way too early, like in the 3rd Q, when SSK was still doing ok.

Like I said last week, SSK won't win another meaningful game and HAM gets the playoff spot with 2 wins vs free-spot OTT.  The funny thing was neither team really played like they cared to win tonight.  Doesn't matter, neither is/was going anywhere in the playoffs.  And those 4th Q misconduct penalties on HAM were completely inexcusable.  Almost gave SSK the game.

I guess my dream now is a threepeat of HAM vs WPG in the GC!  We would eat 'em raw.

[BlueInCgy]

Yes, this game had another wacky deep-dive rule book play: the not-safety.  I was thinking as I watched that Cody might have dodged the safety by having his arm over the goal line.  Seems kind of unfair to HAM: as the penalty was applied as going back 0 yards.  But SSK did lose the down.

In a larger game view, I really wish they?d address this in the next set of rule changes.  If you can?t move the ball back on penalties, move the markers.  Don?t reward teams with free plays because of poor field position.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

I honestly think Ottawa may beat the Ti-Cats, neither team deserved to win that game but Evans was unable to capitalize so many times, I was hoping they'd put in Schiltz who's pretty good coming off the bench.

[TecnoGenius]

In a larger game view, I really wish they?d address this in the next set of rule changes.  If you can?t move the ball back on penalties, move the markers.  Don?t reward teams with free plays because of poor field position.

That's a great idea!  Not sure how you'd tweak it to be fully fair and sensible.  But in this case moving the yards-to-go up, say, half the penalty yardage would make more sense than moving the sticks back 0 yards.  That said, we rarely see a penalty that gets reduced to 0 yards, because teams don't often start at their 1 

[TecnoGenius]

I honestly think Ottawa may beat the Ti-Cats, neither team deserved to win that game but Evans was unable to capitalize so many times, I was hoping they'd put in Schiltz who's pretty good coming off the bench.

Evans joins the hot & cold QB club (with VAJ & MBT)!  11-24 for 214y and 0 TD, 2 INTs!!  Holy cow that's horrifically bad.  Cody looked like Flutie out there compared to Evans stats.

Then again, Evans has almost no one left to throw to.  T.White was the only legit option and SSK clearly double-covered him all night.

But there's no way OTT can beat HAM when they're trying.  HAM can just give it to Hills every down.  What's OTT going to do?  Cry?

[BlueInCgy]

That's a great idea!  Not sure how you'd tweak it to be fully fair and sensible.  But in this case moving the yards-to-go up, say, half the penalty yardage would make more sense than moving the sticks back 0 yards.  That said, we rarely see a penalty that gets reduced to 0 yards, because teams don't often start at their 1 

It?s the same principle for half the distance back.  Team A is on their own 8, take a holding call on first down that isn?t declined.  Now it?s first and 14 after the penalty when it should be first and 20.  I get the rationale that you can?t penalize a play into either the offensive or defensive end zone, but it ends up being a quasi down over. 

[DM83]

Did lol! I was thinking the same thing near the end of the game.

[Horseman]

In a larger game view, I really wish they?d address this in the next set of rule changes.  If you can?t move the ball back on penalties, move the markers.  Don?t reward teams with free plays because of poor field position.

This is a great idea, it makes perfect sense.

[Blue In BC]

This play is going to need some major dissection by our forum over the next few days.  It even took all the refs and command many minutes to consult the rule book.  That's what I love about the CFL: each week we get another weird thing we've (almost) never seen that requires a deep dive into the rule book.

I think the key issue on this play, and Andre said it, was the kicker dribbled the ball (kicked it) as his first touch on it.  He's onside team A so I think the halo doesn't come into play, and since he dribbled it it becomes a free-for-all with no halo rules.  If any HAM touched it, it was after the dribble, that's why there's no no-yards.  However, I will have to hit the book to confirm this.

Yes, this game had another wacky deep-dive rule book play: the not-safety.  I was thinking as I watched that Cody might have dodged the safety by having his arm over the goal line.  Seems kind of unfair to HAM: as the penalty was applied as going back 0 yards.  But SSK did lose the down.

You're right about the dribble. It effectively becomes a fumble and a free for all after the kicker touched it first.

The non safety was the correct call IMO as well. This is the same as a player scoring a TD in that it's where the ball is ( forward ) when the knee touches down.

[3rdand1.5]

I almost feel bad for Fajardo, man was he best up yesterday. Every single blocker on that team should be embarrassed.

How did Dane put up those yards and TD's on us...He was terrible again. I don't think Hammy will go far with him moving forward, he is just way to inconsistent.

If nothing else this makes the final playoff spot really interesting. If I read it correct, they both play Cal in must-win games.....if so they both will play as hard as the can knowing their back are against the wall, while I don't wish injuries, I hope they both beat up physically on Cal.

[theaardvark]

Does Dickenson retain his job if he cuts Maas loose?  Maybe replace him with Lapo?  Lapo brings in "Hut HUT" to coach up the Oline so Fajardo does not get eaten alive?

[Blue In BC]

How did the Ti Cats manage to sack Fajardo 7 times while the Bombers didn't manage to do it once in the last game?

[bwiser]

Does Dickenson retain his job if he cuts Maas loose?  Maybe replace him with Lapo?  Lapo brings in "Hut HUT" to coach up the Oline so Fajardo does not get eaten alive?

The Riders are going to clean house when the season is over. I think Dickenson and Maas lose their job no matter if the Riders make the playoffs or not.