Elks at Riders GDT

[theaardvark]

SSK getting that late TD was a gift, but the call was correct.  It bobbled and Picton ended up with possession.


Make for an interesting LDC / Banjo bowl, for sure.

[TecnoGenius]

What the heck is Mace seeing? Both feet were in the air. Inconclusive.

That was closer than I first thought - great attempt at a catch by Ajou

His feet were still grazing the tips of the turf when the ball was in his hands. But can you definitively say he "had possession" while still in contact?

Honestly though, if all he has to do is touch the turf, it probably was a catch.

It was an amazing catch, no doubt about it.

I did my computer-fu on the catch/no-catch and it was a catch.  It was a catch by 2 frames, or .066 second.  I can pinpoint the 1 or 2 frames you can for sure say he had firm possession (no ball movement after that point, both hands firm grip), and I can prove the toe(s) are still touching the ground by a frame after showing the marbles being spit up.

100% a catch if you go by frame by frame.  Zero doubt in my mind.

But ya, it wasn't "egregious" when you judge it live-time.  So this brings me to the big question of what exactly is the standard command is using to decide these things.  Sometimes they seem to do it to the frame level, sometimes they ignore evidence to the frame level.  Which is it, command??  I wish they would put out a statement or rule change that outlines exactly what granularity they are working with on what type of play.

Just saying "egregious" or "obvious" doesn't help us fans when we can also determine to the frame-level ourselves.  I have seen calls be overturned based on .1s granularity, and I've seen others upheld on the same.

I think SSK was robbed here.  Final note: this also goes against the "more O" mantra of the league.  They give them that catch and you have a super highlight reel play to plaster all over SC that night, as well as a top-50 play come year end.

[TecnoGenius]

Leake !!!!

Go home rider fans and cry in your soup

They let Leake leak out one too many times.

What SSK was doing is quite unconscionable, and they kept doing it over and over again: they'd line up almost the entire D along the line, with only one guy remotely hanging back, and then he'd guess the wrong side and all Leake had to do was have hoggies make a hole in the line for one cut-back and then there is nothing stopping him to the GL.

With a speedster returner like Leake, you need layers of fast DBs to catch him when he escapes.  You can't just put your whole D on the line and hope you don't give up a hole!

And they did it again, and again, and again.

I thought Mace was supposed to be a D genius??

[TecnoGenius]

Look at the holding Riders get away with seemingly on every play. Unbelievable. I don't think they got a single holding flag today.

Riders are famous for having every player hold on every play.  OL does it all game.  ST does it all game.  They've been this way since at least 2018.  I think their plan is to overwhelm the refs with potential calls that they just don't call any of them.

[J5V]

I did my computer-fu on the catch/no-catch and it was a catch.  It was a catch by 2 frames, or .066 second.  I can pinpoint the 1 or 2 frames you can for sure say he had firm possession (no ball movement after that point, both hands firm grip), and I can prove the toe(s) are still touching the ground by a frame after showing the marbles being spit up.

100% a catch if you go by frame by frame.  Zero doubt in my mind.

But ya, it wasn't "egregious" when you judge it live-time.  So this brings me to the big question of what exactly is the standard command is using to decide these things.  Sometimes they seem to do it to the frame level, sometimes they ignore evidence to the frame level.  Which is it, command??  I wish they would put out a statement or rule change that outlines exactly what granularity they are working with on what type of play.

Just saying "egregious" or "obvious" doesn't help us fans when we can also determine to the frame-level ourselves.  I have seen calls be overturned based on .1s granularity, and I've seen others upheld on the same.

I think SSK was robbed here.  Final note: this also goes against the "more O" mantra of the league.  They give them that catch and you have a super highlight reel play to plaster all over SC that night, as well as a top-50 play come year end.

I did my computer-fu on the catch/no-catch and it was a catch.  It was a catch by 2 frames, or .066 second.  I can pinpoint the 1 or 2 frames you can for sure say he had firm possession (no ball movement after that point, both hands firm grip), and I can prove the toe(s) are still touching the ground by a frame after showing the marbles being spit up.

100% a catch if you go by frame by frame.  Zero doubt in my mind.

But ya, it wasn't "egregious" when you judge it live-time.  So this brings me to the big question of what exactly is the standard command is using to decide these things.  Sometimes they seem to do it to the frame level, sometimes they ignore evidence to the frame level.  Which is it, command??  I wish they would put out a statement or rule change that outlines exactly what granularity they are working with on what type of play.

Just saying "egregious" or "obvious" doesn't help us fans when we can also determine to the frame-level ourselves.  I have seen calls be overturned based on .1s granularity, and I've seen others upheld on the same.

I think SSK was robbed here.  Final note: this also goes against the "more O" mantra of the league.  They give them that catch and you have a super highlight reel play to plaster all over SC that night, as well as a top-50 play come year end.

Great work, Techno. Incredible catch and should have counted. I would think getting the call right would be the overriding factor in making a ruling NOT supporting the (wrong) call on the field by the official. Ambrosie needs to tell Johnson exactly that!