Why is command upholding horrible calls?

[TecnoGenius]

I've maybe identified a method to the command madness after the bad calls and bad command reviews of the past couple of weeks:

Command is really hesitating to overturn the calls on the field.  That's the one commonality to many of the recent calls: when challenged they are loathe to overturn.

For a few years they've been tightening up on the mantra that "it must be clear and obvious" to overturn.  If they've shifted even further towards that stance -- taken it to the extreme -- that could explain what we've been seeing.

Take the Demski non-DPI whiff/INT/TD in TOR: in past seasons that is DPI every day of the week.  We all instinctively know it's DPI because of all the precedent.  You twist while draped on the R, it's DPI.

However, the call on the field was no DPI, so if command wants it 100% clear and obvious, well sure, you could uphold the call.  Are we 100% sure the tugger twisted Demski?  No, because you never can be that sure.  Maybe Demski tapped his toe and turned himself, right Bradbury?

Likewise, if the on-field ref had called DPI, no way command would overturn because there'd be no "clear and obvious" there wasn't DPI.

Thus, we are left in this command limbo where a lot more power is given to the on-field refs.  Thus when you get a blind or (even slightly) biased one (looking at you 22) your day can really be ruined.

And this tells us that before we bother challenging in the future we need to not just be sure of what we know the real call should be: we need to be sure the camera angles show we are correct in a clear and obvious way.

I think this makes command basically useless for subjective, "judgement calls" like DPI.  They will imagine unseen slights or non-slights to justify whatever the field ref says.  I have a feeling if we (could have) challenged the Ford DPI vs SSK, we would have lost that too because command would imagine Ford was doing something nefarious with his hands on the non-camera side that no one can prove or disprove.

They've changed the standard, and the dynamic, too much; to the point of absurdity.  But they've set the precedent.  To go against it now would be to admit failure, and almost certainly require a public announcement / acknowledgement.  Don't hold your breath.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I don't think it was a "horrible" call. It didn't go our way. DPI across the league is a bit of a moving target. But it wasn't egregious. I'm more inclined to let the players play. Just wish it was a little more consistent that way.

[theaardvark]

A play lke that should always be called on the field, and let the CC try to overturn it.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

I've maybe identified a method to the command madness after the bad calls and bad command reviews of the past couple of weeks:

Command is really hesitating to overturn the calls on the field.  That's the one commonality to many of the recent calls: when challenged they are loathe to overturn.

For a few years they've been tightening up on the mantra that "it must be clear and obvious" to overturn.  If they've shifted even further towards that stance -- taken it to the extreme -- that could explain what we've been seeing.

Take the Demski non-DPI whiff/INT/TD in TOR: in past seasons that is DPI every day of the week.  We all instinctively know it's DPI because of all the precedent.  You twist while draped on the R, it's DPI.

However, the call on the field was no DPI, so if command wants it 100% clear and obvious, well sure, you could uphold the call.  Are we 100% sure the tugger twisted Demski?  No, because you never can be that sure.  Maybe Demski tapped his toe and turned himself, right Bradbury?

Likewise, if the on-field ref had called DPI, no way command would overturn because there'd be no "clear and obvious" there wasn't DPI.

Thus, we are left in this command limbo where a lot more power is given to the on-field refs.  Thus when you get a blind or (even slightly) biased one (looking at you 22) your day can really be ruined.

And this tells us that before we bother challenging in the future we need to not just be sure of what we know the real call should be: we need to be sure the camera angles show we are correct in a clear and obvious way.

I think this makes command basically useless for subjective, "judgement calls" like DPI.  They will imagine unseen slights or non-slights to justify whatever the field ref says.  I have a feeling if we (could have) challenged the Ford DPI vs SSK, we would have lost that too because command would imagine Ford was doing something nefarious with his hands on the non-camera side that no one can prove or disprove.

They've changed the standard, and the dynamic, too much; to the point of absurdity.  But they've set the precedent.  To go against it now would be to admit failure, and almost certainly require a public announcement / acknowledgement.  Don't hold your breath.

I'd like CC to take a non-biased review of the play regardless of what the call on the field was, as it is the call on the field that is usually being challenged, not the play.

[theaardvark]

There should be a jar in the CC, and every time they blow a call, they put a coin in that teams jar.  If there is a play that is a toss up, it goes to the team with the fullest jar.

Just saying.  NHL refs have pocket marbles, EITS needs a levelling agent.

[jdrattops]

O'Shea shouldn't have showed up the officials vs Calgary, then admit to doing it.  Two wrong and horrible calls in the two games following, expect this to continue this week until the Bombers are on their bye week.

[LXTSN]

I would like the challenge booth to throw away the current call, watch the play and make the call.

In a perfect world, you'd lock someone in the room that isn't watching the game. He would only get the clip of the play from all angles. With no idea of what was called on the field, he would make a judgement.

If it's completely 50-50 and there is no decision, then he could resort to the call on the field.

[dd]

It has to be evidence that is completely obvious to overturn the call made on the field. If there isn't something irrefutable then they'll stay with the call  made on the field.

I don't think MOS's challenge vs Calgary had anything to do with the bogus calls made in Regina or Toronto. Just coincidence. Refs make bad calls all the time, we've just had some doozies go against us. The one on Demski was close, it wasn't overly bad, just the call didn't go our way and they scored a TD on the play which makes it sting all the more.

[Nic16]

There is 3 key points I like take into account on PI...
1.Does the Receiver have clear position on the DB.
2.Prior to the ball arriving (a freeze frame shot) is it clear to see contact was made by the DB.
3.Without the contact/restraining, is the ball clearly catchable.

If all 3 points are clearly made...it's PI.

*note: The previous week Kyrie Wilson was flagged for PI for briefly (& very lightly) grasping a receivers forearm before an uncatchable pass was even thrown.

[RebusRankin]

CC is just incompetent, no explanation and its getting worse.
Reffing is also incompetent and its getting worse too.

As for the Demski play, Amos is there early, he's holding the arm and essentially trying to run through Demski, any of those is a clear PI.

[gobombersgo]

A play lke that should always be called on the field, and let the CC try to overturn it.

The problem is the Command Centre is reluctant to reverse calls. The officials need to have the mindset that there is no Command Centre to bail them out.

[Nic16]

The problem is the Command Centre is reluctant to reverse calls. The officials need to have the mindset that there is no Command Centre to bail them out.

The officials (& CC) need to be far more consistent with PI calls, and call the play as the rule states and as they see it on the field or replay - no matter who is right or wrong.

I'd rather see some semblance of consistency vs what we are seeing now from week to week or game to game.

[bwiser]

As a coach, I would be reluctant to throw the challenge flag knowing there is a real good chance the command booth will get it wrong. I don't think I would challenge unless it resulted in a scoring play like the pass interference  on Demski.

[gobombersgo]

The officials (& CC) need to be far more consistent with PI calls, and call the play as the rule states and as they see it on the field or replay - no matter who is right or wrong.

I'd rather see some semblance of consistency vs what we are seeing now from week to week or game to game.

Yup, consistency is a big issue. In last night's game they let some hand fighting go but last week in Regina the Bombers were flagged for just being too close to the receiver.

Maybe the officials need to advise the coaches prior to games how they are going to call penalties.

[J5V]

They've changed the standard, and the dynamic, too much; to the point of absurdity.  But they've set the precedent.  To go against it now would be to admit failure, and almost certainly require a public announcement / acknowledgement.  Don't hold your breath.

You're hypothesis springs a leak when you look at teams not named the BB. The CC seems to be able to get it right and overturn calls for them. Even Hammy and the Elks haven't been treated like us.